How have you improved as a DM?

I've been enjoying the discussions on the "worst thing a DM can do" and what has made you walk away from the table. But it does all start feeling pretty negative and makes me a bit anxious about getting behind the screen the next game.

I'd like to think that I've improved as a DM over time and most DMs do the same. Reading about how we've improved our game may help others improve theirs. So, please share how you have improved your DMing over the years.

I'll start.

1. Learning that D&D is not the game to get hung up over verisimilitude.

When I was in high school I got really into homebrewing travel and encumbrance rules based on my experiences working for the Student Conservation Association and having had real experience living and working out of backpacks and traveling on foot over mountains for weeks at a time. This was in the 80s and with 1e when that sort of play was more the norm, but even then my players revolted.

Where I still need to improve: I've gotten pretty darn good in 5e to stick with RAW and not get my undies in a bundle over some of the unrealistic results. But I'm still a bastard about torches. You would think a torch killed my kids I hate them so much. Torches are crap light sources that will quickly foul up the air in enclosed places with poor ventilation and I play 'em that way.

2. Running a game is not the place to show off your writing

I like to write. I like to create worlds. I like to write adventures. I've even published some. I've had to learn to cut down on the descriptions and NPC monologs. I've learned to cut things down to the basic plot lines and I spend more time on maps and aids for creating plausible NPCs and locations on the fly. I've found with only a few exceptions, that is is best to let the party build the story together.

Where I still need to improve: I need to improve my improv skills. Over-preparation and writing still become a crutch because I'm not great at coming up with NPC dialog on the fly. Also, I would like to run a campaign where the players help create the world. I've read about systems where session zero is a world-building session. I like that idea but haven't tried it yet.

3. Good prep is more about having aids and shortcuts then reading and memorizing copious amounts of content

I used to try to write down and memorize every detail of a session, often spending 2-3 times in prep what I enjoyed in play. Over time, I've gotten better at outlining the main plot elements and having ways to quickly look up lore, new location or new NPC info, and rules. Most importantly, I've gotten better at developing systems for filling in details on the fly. I still put in a lot of time on overall world-building, but I don't try to map a large city down to every building.

Where I still need to improve: I'm always working on this. There are so many resources out there now that I'm still finding game-changing suggestions and tools. Most recently, from a post to a thread here in EnWorld I learned about Vornheim: The Complete City Kit which has revolutionized how to approach filling in the details of urban areas during a session.

There are far more areas where I've improved and continue to work on improving but these three came to mind first.

What about you?

I've been at this over 25 years now and I can say that there is always room for improvement. I am constantly going back to revisit the fundamentals of the game I'm currently playing the most (D&D 5e) which is no doubt why I'm on the forums harping on the same three things all the time. Because if one can get the fundamentals of the game system down, the rest is so much easier. I didn't always know that though. It's often so easy to get focused on all the details that don't really matter all that much in the long run or don't otherwise impact the play experience a great deal. But the fundamentals? That goes right to the heart of the game, to how smoothly it runs, and what kind of time everyone has as a result. So I would say that a big improvement in how I DM came from this realization and my subsequent focus on it.

I'm also forever tinkering with the pacing of the game, structures and processes for making my role as DM easier, ways to increase the replayability of my one-shots so that outcomes vary more widely, and methods for presenting more and more meaningful choices to the players. As a result of this tinkering and to hard-won lessons along the way, my games get better over the years.

But there's still more I can learn...

I'm learning to take my time in setting the scene, too often I'd rush through atmospheric description (focusing just on what they see, not what they feel, hear and smell). Adding those senses (when appropriate) has really helped enhance the immersion.

I've also tried to improve my description of creatures too, where before I was rushing into the encounter without fully filling in the picture.

Watching Critical Role and seeing Mercer really paint a picture helped a lot in seeing that, as long as the information is interesting and relevant, the players will listen and absorb without getting bored.

I've also relaxed more and only occasionally get the deer in the headlights feeling when the players do something unexpected. Though there was a session not long ago when I realized halfway through that I'd used up my prepped material and was going to have to wing it for ~90 minutes. That was interesting. My players though seemed blissfully unaware thank goodness!

Good question. I've become better at creating creative consequences for dice rolls, especially failed dice rolls.

Currently, I'm teaching myself how to run random encounters in a way that's engaging and feels meaningful (rather than a time-sink).

Over the years I've learned a few things from other people I've played with, watching their GMing styles:

1) I've learned how to throw myself more into an NPC's role to make them more interesting for the players to interact with. A few gestures or quirks or even a voice can help with this a lot.

2) I've learned about engaging more than just the visuals when describing a scene - sound, temperature, scent, and other senses coming into play are more evocative than just describing what things look like.

3) I've learned better pacing with respect to fights that are consequential vs inconsequential and narrating results when they reach a certain inconsequential stage.

This reminds me of the old joke. How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, Practice, Practice.

That's the most important way I've improved over the last 30 years or so.

As I practice, I've learned to do some of the following to make myself a better DM:

1) Keep the game moving and don't let it get bogged down with overly complicated tactics and rules disagreements.

2) Listen to the players and incorporate some of their ideas into the games on the fly or down the road. Players love to be right and they love when some of their expectations are met.

3) Focus on variety. Don't let the party predict patterns. Mix up exploration, interaction and combat and don't lead up to the Big Bad Evil dude every time.

4) Say "yes" and let things happen more often. Practice improvising.

5) I make an outline before each session and keep a few ideas on the sideboard so if the group gives me an opportunity, I can launch into some of the sideboard encounters and allow the party to go off the rails.

6) I've watched lots of others and played in lots of other games. As a DM, I am always learning.

How have I improved as a GM?

it was thru several plateaus, which seems to mimic my learning pattern in other areas.

When learning Go, I described it as "suddenly seeing a new board". At points in the advancement, i would suddenly see a completely new set of values and objectives right there alongside the old ones but on top of them. Fights for survival gave away to fights for territory/corners/tesuji and then they gave away to fights for moyo (frameworks) and those gave away to not so much fights at all but for moves that "won" whether fought or not and then recognizing the way to exploit the win.

Each new step came after i had sort of plateaued at advancing in the former one. When i sought to see more.

Same with GM.

Started with DND in 1980 and the games were mostly tactical with some story and structure workjed in to serve as connector between the fights. The setting for the battles grew more and more rich and detailed and utilized. The rules evolved as we moved to higher crunch and other systems and other genres (TRAVELLER, HERO, STRIKER Trav others) but it still resolved around how rich and tactical a finale I could create.

The "new board" came thru games like VampireTM (first and a lot) and Amber and Cyberpunk2020 and others starting about the point where crunch was hitting a peak. VtM for all its math woes was a "new board" and we spent quite a number of campaigns with it. Amber taught a better lesson in scenery use and deployment. All let me explore a great deal about the value in style, story and made me a better GM.

Probably the next "new board" was a number of games - Serenity/Cortex, Screentime, OtE, Fudge and quite a few indie games and variations of them which let me explore the less rigidly defined setting - one subject to alteration on the fly even by player authorship but also by on-the-fly authorship by the GM. They also showed me the value of and impact of GP gimmick points (plot points, hero points, story points, fate points) especially heavy volume plot points as currency style play. These were informative and i learned from them, even tho the GP lesson was "don't like them much at all" and led to me turning off those systems. (seen today in my dislike of mophi 2d20 and Cypher.)

Along the way my game planning became much more "derived from the PCs" than "derived from my plan.
Along the way my go to for "whats next" was a dirty dozen list of hooks from the PCs races, classes and backgrounds/stories.
Along the way my focus for resolution went from "prove it works" playerside to "why wouldn't that work?" GM side. Say yes, unless you have a compelling reason to say no. (AMBER iirc)
Along the way i began to value most highly consistency over crunch and to develop my own dividing line between needed detail and too much detail.
Along the way it became "our game" not "my game."

etc etc etc

My bet is, as happens in other learning pursuits, my path to today was not unique.

"How have I improved as a DM?" Wow. Short answer: in every way possible. I started out as jack-wagon teenager, often tormenting my fellow teenagers (called "players") with the specter of death, while giving away treasure like I was Monty Hall and using "female" NPCs that have no relationship with reality (considering that at the time, I didn't know reality). Now, I'd like to thing my plots (and style) are more mature, and while I don't hesitate to slaughter innocent PCs, I do try to give them a fair shake.

I'd say the biggest thing that I strive for, is that actions have consequences. Not necessarily rewards or punishments... just consequences. They should relate to the actions themselves as much as possible, so that players can see the results of their actions (both short and long term). In my youth I focused too much on rewarding "good" players and punishing "bad" ones, and so I try to avoid falling into that trap as much as possible.

Quickleaf said:

Currently, I'm teaching myself how to run random encounters in a way that's engaging and feels meaningful (rather than a time-sink).

Click to expand...

That's a good one!

Learning to run an open table multi-group megadungeon campaign (Stonehell Dungeon) has been exciting and has enabled me to do tons of gaming without burnout and with minimal prep time. I think players tend to enjoy it more than the linear Paizo Adventure Path stuff I was running, since there is much more player choice involved, and it's vastly easier on me. Used to be if I wanted to GM 4 times a week I was running 4 different campaigns; which is tons of investment. Now I can run the same campaign with 4 (mostly) different groups of players.