There is a certain style to gamemastering a game, and it differs from gamemaster to gamemaster. My particular style has been influenced, for good or ill, by the gamemasters with whom I have played. In one sentence, I'd say that my gamemastering vision is "a dramatically appropriate universe that focuses on the characters as pivotal to their local area". I'll try to explain that.

Eric, who is our most versatile and frequent gamemaster, tries to run a realistic campaign. In his campaigns, if the characters are not present, you have the feeling that the world would go on just fine. We stumble across plots and situations, they don't seem set up for us. And this may be just how brilliant he is at disguising what he does to subtly manipulate us and the universe.

But because of his particular style, I've tried to flavor my campaign in a different style. The challenges are appropriate for the characters, there is rarely something too easy or too hard. Eric will let us go up against a challenge we have no hope in defeating or one that is ridiculously easy. I don't do that. My adventures tend to adapt on the fly. If the going has been too easy or too hard I adjust, and the key skill I have to develop is being able to adjust the adventure without making it look too obvious.

My philosophy is that characters should win 95% of the time given good but not necessarily stellar play. The only reason they should lose is if they play their hands really badly. Degree of victory is where I make distinctions. Just winning gives them some amount of rewards, with the exceptional rewards coming from exceptional play. Within those bounds, I try to keep things challenging. Gauge the players' reactions and adjust accordingly, if they feel the danger or the difficulty then you've done your job, otherwise make it a little harder.

Another point is that I don't try to focus on every character. At best the subplots for the night are only for one or two characters, rarely for everyone. And in general the campaign's main plot thread centers around a character or two. This gives me a way to tie the adventures together without the burden of developing lots of little threads for everyone.

Things tend to happen for a reason in my campaign. Significant events are introduced so I can make a point. "Dramatically appro- priate" means that your jumpship breaks down right at the time you need it most or because I'm trying to keep you there, rather than on some random roll during a routine transfer. Making the characters "pivotal to their local area" means that the characters' actions do affect the universe around them, but only to a certain extent. I want the players to be able to say "I saved the ship" or "I stopped a war", but not "I saved the Federation" or "I saved the Universe". They should be significant but not legendary, that's about the level that I feel comfortable with.

As I've written, the key skill is to make it all seem like it's the players' actions that make the difference. If they feel like you're manipulating the universe to make it easier or harder, it tends to leave a sour taste. And that's a skill I'll have to keep in mind when I'm running, because I do tend to blab too much about why I'm doing something.