I recently ran Swords Without Master for my home group (first time running; I'd played once before at a con).

I recently ran Swords Without Master for my home group (first time running; I'd played once before at a con). It went pretty well overall, though I had a few too many players (which is a pretty good problem to have) and allowed the game to get a little too bogged down in building the mythology of the world. But mostly it was incredibly fun.

I let the players choose their eidolons from the art cards from Everway, which seemed to suitably inspire the players. It may have worked too well, in my case, as I kept looking through the cards and imagining new rogues I wanted to play. Now it's unlikely that any of my players will want to GM (OP?) Swords any time soon. Not until I run it a few more times, at least. And I don't currently have the technical capability to get in on some of those exciting Hangouts games. Which brings me to my question: Has anyone ever tried running Swords without an Overplayer?

It seems like it wouldn't require too much hacking to work. Slightly tweak how to end the phases when passing dice, require the player it is passed to at the end of a phase bring the Thunder and choose the next phase. In the perilous phase, rogues without the dice show their rogue slipping and struggling but also have the responsibility to increase pressure on the rogue with the dice in some way. Maybe some rules about how other players have to describe your named foes or the dangers to your other named stuff. A little tweaking of the Discovery Phase (whoever you ask your loaded question of gets to describe something they know or discover and ask a loaded question of someone else next?). And so on, like that.

So my questions: has anyone tried this? If so, how did it go? Whether you have or not, do you see any potential pitfalls or problems? Any other ways you would tweak the rules, subtly or broadly?