Round-Robin DMing

[Sidereal Knight]

My group is considering starting a kind of "round-Robin" setup for DMing duties. In this case, we would have a "main" campaign with one DM. Other players would step in to run short arcs unrelated to the main campaign when the DM needs a break. We would use the same characters throughout.

We are still working out the details and ground rules, but the basics are:

• No using/killing off other DM villains/NPCs
• The DM's character is absent when s/he is running the game
• The DM's character gains experience at the same rate as the rest of the party

Has anyone else done this kind of thing? How did it go? What were your guidelines?

 

[der_kluge]

I have rules for a fast-paced, rotation-style "round-robin" GM'ing game, but it sounds like you're attempting something more long-term. My rules apply to one-shot style games, where each DM runs for a maximum of 30 minutes.

In those rules, a player's character becomes an NPC when he runs. You just can't apply favoritism to your character when you're running.

The only other thing I would suggest is that a secondary GM not run until the primary GM is finished with his story arc.

You need to make sure that the secondary GMs don't do things to destroy the verisimilitude of the campaign. Like, it might really annoy the primary GM if a secondary GM ends up taking the party to some remote island somewhere.

You also need to set ground rules for rewards. You wouldn't want a secondary GM handing out tons of XP, or game-breaking magic items like portable holes, or flying carpets.

Good luck!

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I don't recommend using the same characters in the same world, it will run into problems with the main dm's vision & alternate dm's creativity. There is also the problem of the dmpc deadweight which dragged me down & did hamper player freedom of decision-making choice. Instead I'd recommend using totally new characters in different worlds, it will slow down progression but it allows a dm to have a totally new style & the players get to explore new character concepts.

We've done both & currently we're doing the 2nd option; I'm the main dm & I totally enjoy the difference.

 

[Storyteller01]

We ran this style of game for a few years. We were in the military, so we had nothing but time. .

We ran it a bit differently though. First, no one had any long term plans. Couldn't plan beyond two or three adventures (although we tried our hardest).
All we had character concepts. I consider myself lucky to have met a group that stuck with them.

Second, although you could play your character while GM'ing, you couldn't show favoritism. It gave the GM a means of nudging the group in the right direction. This usually worked as a disadvantage to begin with. We ave extra exp for creativity, unusual solutions, comedy, etc. Can't be creative if you alrteady know all the answers.

don't include another players character if they aren't there (learned this the hard way).

Don't use another DM's BBEG. NPC's were another story though. Players used their contacts regardless as to who was GMing at the time.

Let a DM finish their story before you begin yours.

If something comes up that another DM started, let them give some advice as to how to handle it before you make a rulling. If they aren't there, make a judgement call. You can sort it out later.

Be flexible. Another DM or player may add something unexpected during your 'off time'. Find a way to use it to your advantage.

Example: I accidentally used 'Find Familiar' on a critter that a previous DM hid within the party (it was the closest creature). It was a living critter that looked like a dagger at rest. He intended to use it to slowly attack the party [horror idea]. He had more fun with my character this way this way... I had just made a familiar of a critter that required living sentient blood to survive. Not fun.

 

[talien]

My group is considering starting a kind of "round-Robin" setup for DMing duties. In this case, we would have a "main" campaign with one DM. Other players would step in to run short arcs unrelated to the main campaign when the DM needs a break. We would use the same characters throughout.

We are still working out the details and ground rules, but the basics are:

• No using/killing off other DM villains/NPCs
• The DM's character is absent when s/he is running the game
• The DM's character gains experience at the same rate as the rest of the party

Has anyone else done this kind of thing? How did it go? What were your guidelines?

Yes, doing this now in our Story Hour: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=103252&page=3

In total now we've had three DMs, including me. Beause we're playing in an established campaign (Arcanis) and playing tournament adventures, it keeps us all consistent.

We don't really have to deal with your first rule because the adventures aren't structured that way. Each DM has his own character (Quintus, in my case), and just as you indicated, the character is absent when we're running the game.

We don't have characters gain exp if it's a three-level spread, because it's not that big a deal to us so long as everyone is within three levels of each other. Because our group in total is nine people, we can't always get everyone together (in fact, we don't really WANT everyone together, it gets too crazy). There's an inevitable level spread, at this point from 3rd to 5th level, and that's fine with us.

I think the two concerns for round-robin DMing are: 1) ensuring that there's some sort of campaign consistency. The DMs have to either use an established campaign or agree ahead of time as to the ground rules. 2) the DMs must be mature enough to be able to feel that there will not be any weird one-upmanship, giving out treasure that they hope their character gets, etc. In other words, they shouldn't act like a player who happens to be a DM (I've seen this with a lot of really bad gaming groups).

Instead, it should be "Team DM." I was a DM-helper anyway by handling character sheets for the players. We're part of a team and neither DM will get upset because "his character didn't get the good stuff."

 

[Gilladian]

I recently dropped out of a game that was run this way. Dropping out had little to do with the game situation; it was life in general.

We played for about 4 years, with various people coming and going. Our first campaign was the most successful; in it, each person had a world that was "theirs" that was connected to the "home world" by a gate. The whole game consisted of chasing a halfling theif who had stolen a "gate cube" and created all the gates. We needed to get the cube back and seal the gates so the evil armies coming from several of the new worlds could be stopped.

It was loads of fun. We finally ended the campaign at 12th level, because it was too hard to create good, short adventures at that level (we rotated DM's about every 3-4 weeks and only played 3 hour sessions).

Since then, we have done two other campaigns; one lasted from 1st to about 8th level and then died when several people left the group; we started over and had gotten to 3rd level when I had to leave. In that game, we had taken over a pirate ship and were sailing from island to island seeking a place to establish ourselves.

It seems to me there was one other game before the long campaign, which was going on when I joined the group, and lasted to about 8th level - we were doing forge of fury when I came in, and then went on to another module; the idea there was that it was a game to teach new dm's how to run - we'd be assigned a section of the module to read and run, trying to blend in with the other dm's style and method.

It worked, but really only because the "head gm" put in a lot of work; he wanted enough decent GM's to run games at his shop - so he trained them himself.

Gilladian

 

[JoeBlank]

My experience is similar to that of talien and Gilladian. We have a core set of house rules on which everyone agreed. We started at first level and divided the campaign world into areas, each of which was under the control of a different DM. The main DM has control of the city which is the home base of the campaign, and the area around the city. When someone else wants to DM, and there is a break between the main DM's adventures, we speak up and get our turn.

With permission, we can borrow NPCs, and of course that sometimes comes with conditions. But usually we try not to have too much overlap.

This has worked for us in a slow-leveling game that started shortly after 3.0 came out. We play on line, and once per month at best, which contributes to how slow the PCs level. Plus, we have had a couple of-near TPKs, and started over at low level. However, the PCs are getting into mid to high level, one just made 10th, and we are starting to need other ways to divide up the campaign world. I've introduced a series of mirrors that transport the PCs to distant lands, and may even draw them into another campaign setting soon (Oathbound).

We also have an unspoken rule against DMPCs. While we have had the DM's PC follow the group for short period of time, we always find and excuse to ditch them as soon as possible.

Good luck with this idea. We have had fun with it, and as long as your DMs cooperate I think you will too.

 

[yennico]

I don't recommend using the same characters in the same world, it will run into problems with the main dm's vision & alternate dm's creativity. There is also the problem of the dmpc deadweight which dragged me down & did hamper player freedom of decision-making choice. Instead I'd recommend using totally new characters in different worlds, it will slow down progression but it allows a dm to have a totally new style & the players get to explore new character concepts.

We've done both & currently we're doing the 2nd option; I'm the main dm & I totally enjoy the difference.

I totally agree.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Heck, when our group ran adventures on Neverwinter Nights, we'd have 3 or more GMs at the same time. We round-robined who was the plot GM sometimes, and sometimes we sat in as a player. Sometimes it was different areas of the world, sometimes the same area.

It's fine as long as your communication and trust level is good. I'd say your guidelines are good for a start, but keep the option open to adjust them if any problems surface. Sometimes that'll mean that the GM who's currently playing knows a bit of what's coming, but if you trust each other enough to alternate GMing, avoiding exploiting any privileged information is easy.

 

[sfedi]

I don't like two DMs running the same world/characters.

Never saw it work.