Multiple GMs

Talk about whatever topic you'd like, RPG related or not. (But please discuss things related to our software in the Tools section, below.)

Moderators: dorpond, trevor, Azhrei

Post Reply

Server termination

Any GM may terminate a server.
0
No votes
The server may only be terminated if the user is a GM and is the session creator.
3
23%
Only the server session creator gets to terminate it, regardless of role.
10
77%
Other options (please explain)
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 13

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Multiple GMs

Post by Lee »

I have never been in a session where there was more than one GM. MT, obviously, allows for multiple GMs to connect to a server, even allowing users to host a server even they're only under Player role (which is a nice thing).

I'd like to ask for your experiences on how the multiple GM dynamic works. On a side note, I put a poll to ask about server administration in general. Please feel free to add detail to your vote with a reply.

Thank you.

User avatar
Sol Invictus
Cave Troll
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:48 pm
Location: Jena/Thuringia/Germany

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by Sol Invictus »

I voted "Only the server session creator gets to terminate it, regardless of role."
It's the host's computer that has to be available for the whole session. I'd say it's a good thing to honour the host's obligation with the power over when and how long to make that commitment.

Also, problems arise when the host is not the GM and the GM(s) disconnect. So I think the only other alternative to only the host being able to terminate the server would be: the GM(s) and the session creator are able to terminate the server.
I only play with friends and sometimes we do have 2 GMs. I trust them not to terminate the session on a whim, so I don't have any problem with empowering more than 1 person to do that. And I think, even on a game where people meet that don't know each other that well, the GMs would know each other enough to trust each other on this.

User avatar
aliasmask
RPTools Team
Posts: 9024
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Bay Area

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by aliasmask »

I've played in games with multiple "GM"s, but one of the GMs just helped handle combat to speed things up.

One of the problems with multiple GMs in MT and when a GM tries to manipulate a PC token is loss of data. For example, if I run a macro that changes the PCs token and at the same time the Player moves the token, then the update may or may not be done, or is undone.

It would be nice if there was a true owner of the token where all updates are processed on that client computer. It would also be nice is there was another role other than PC, NPC that can be created with a set of permissions. These are more like suggestions for 1.4 though.

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by Lee »

@Sol Thanks for the insight. So it is the trust system in your case. It'll be interesting to see if this is the policy used by the majority or if a more restrictive policy is inplace. In A.M.s example, I then wonder at the map detail shared with the person handling combat; it can't be too detailed like having VBL else wouldn't the GM be giving away his surprises?

@A.M. Concurrency, it is indeed one of the more difficult issues to tackle in a mature project like 1.3. Would there be a (hopefully exhaustive) list of when concurrency issues arise somewhere? I saw a couple of locks but they were to prevent another player from picking up a token that's already been picked up elsewhere. Perhaps mechanisms with the same intent can be put in for 1.3 to lessen these occurrences.

Interesting idea for client-side token hosting. I believe this is how you try to mitigate the concurrency problem by assigning a lib:player token to each player? As for more roles and granularity in permissions, out of the box, perhaps 1.4 should divorce from the token-centric approach (at least some of it such as the script execution context). An alternate means of storing and managing information would certainly help as well and would be the better place to set access policies.

User avatar
aliasmask
RPTools Team
Posts: 9024
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Bay Area

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by aliasmask »

Lee wrote:I believe this is how you try to mitigate the concurrency problem by assigning a lib:player token to each player?
Yep and server related issues too. The lib:players token is only modified by the person running the server.

User avatar
Azhrei
Site Admin
Posts: 12086
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:20 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by Azhrei »

Note that transferring "ownership" of a session from one computer to another is problematic. If the machine hosting the server were to leave the network, then all clients would need to reconnect to the new server. There is currently no way in the MT network protocol to accomplish this.

There would also need to be a lot of internal state transferred to the new server from the old server before it shuts down. While all machines in a connected game have copies of the Campaign object, the Player object, and so on, only the server keeps track of all Player objects and the GM.

I didn't vote (because I didn't want to skew your poll) but option "3" is the only practical one currently.

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Re: Multiple GMs

Post by Lee »

Thanks Azhrei. I actually hadn't thought of that at all but it sounds pretty nifty. I polled this question on the idea of incorporating a server kill-switch. Would transferring server ownership be a feature that would see actual use? It probably wouldn't be too difficult to do with what's currently in the code, though small details like whether to generate the next server on the fly or have manually set connecting clients instantiate a listening server of their own JIC etc etc. could be discussion points; not that it'd be for 1.3, of course.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”