What makes a good GM?

[jdrakeh]

Enough open-mindedness to try new things in actual play (including different games, new rules, etc) and willingness to work with the other players in order to create fun for everybody. Eveything else is just icing on the cake. Without those two qualities, I don't think that an individual should be behind the screen.

 

[Talmun]

One maxim that I heard somewhere is:

"Make sure that everyone at the table is having an enjoyable experience; that includes yourself."

Remember it's and game and you are playing too; a GM who can do everything else but isn't having fun while doing it is going to flare up and burn out fast.

 

[IcyCool]

For the most part?

Player Perception.

If the players think you are a good GM, then you are a good GM. If they think you are a bad GM, then you are a bad GM. Your actual skill with anything is mostly irrelevant.

 

[jollyninja]

what makes a good gm in my opinion is the ability to keep the players showing up every week for reasons other then "i like the other people there" if they are there for the loot, the rp, the story arc, whatever. a great dm is one who can keep a mixed group of gamer types all happy in the same game and keep himself happy with it in the process. if every single person at the table is having a good time, you're doing a good job.

my group for example needs at least two fights per 8 hour game night or a couple of em get bored and start whining. if there is a total of more then three hours dedicated to combat, another two get bored. another one gets testy if he can't dominate every encounter without getting hit once due to his uber items and class/feat combos. ie low magic game, gestalted monk/favored soul with the vow of poverty is what the guy comes up with. him i ignore and let whine as much as he wants, guess I'm not a great DM in my own opinion.

 

[CarlZog]

The ability to run a fair game that the players want run. And many times a DM has to be able to tell what the PCs want without them telling him.

Objectively, I think this is it at its core -- at least from the players' perspective. Specific characteristics and styles, objectives, etc. all stem from this primary principle: creating what the players want.

I'm not even sure fairness matters initially; I'm sure there are players out there who don't really care about fairness as long as they're getting the experience they want.

Carl

 

[Nightfall]

Uhm I think I make a good DM. Usually.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

"The ability to make every player at the table at some point in the game feel cool and special."

You sir win the Internets.

 

[Zhaleskra]

This isn't really an example of bad GMing, more of an annoying GM habit:

While playing Ironclaw (an anthro/furry RPG) at Morphicon (an anthro/furry convention), the GM kept refering to all sentient chracters as "furs" rather than calling them by their species. This was bad because I was well aware I was at a furry convention playing a furry game.

 

[bytor4232]

I've been thinking about this thread for a few days now, and have been trying to figure out a way to word my post.

I've pretty much come up with Balance. A good DM can balance creativity with fun, and do so on the fly. The most creative campaigns can be quite frankly boring, to any player. A good DM can pull it back, or push it forward, and knows when to throw in some fun monster bashing. But quite frankly, even that can be boring as well.

It all comes down to Balance.

 

[Odhanan]

I really think that good DMing comes with an ability for the DM to understand the ins and outs of RPGs. Not only the setting and rules, but what it is to run a RPG and what purpose it actually serves for the people who are involved around the game table.

Once the DM gets a good grasp on what a RPG is and isn't, he can understand things like different playstyles, tastes and needs of the players he might encounter around the table.

All this, of course, is useless if the DM then doesn't have any listening skills. By "listening skills", I don't mean the ability to "listen" per se, but more an empathy for other people, understand what they say and do not say, what they are searching for out of a game session, what they want their characters to do and become through the game, what type of thrill they want, what cultural level they want to be entertained with, all these things and more.

Using his empathy skills and his understanding of the ins and outs of RPG, a DM now has the basis of some good DMing.

To further develop your skills as a DM, you then try to master all the aspects of the game. Not just the playstyle you like, not just the game you like, but all kinds of playstyles and games. You develop your skills like an athlete develops his own: by acknowledging your weaknesses, working at them, overcoming them and changing them into advantages.

As a caveat, this means the DM will want to develop all kinds of different aspects of culture and practical knowledge about the stuff RPGs are talking about. How you make a sword. How you treat a horse when you ride for a whole day. Byzantine architecture. What happened to Sumer. How to play Chess. Whatever. The point is not to become a history, game, mathematics, whatever-y buff who's picky, rephrases and second-guesses what the players say constantly (this would be in contradiction with the required understanding of the nature of RPGs I was talking about above), but to fuel your imagination and inspiration and be able to come up with neat adventures, NPCs, tactical challenges etc etc - these "details" that may make all a difference in the world between a decent and a great game.

The last thing I think about right now, is that a good DM is someone that is humble and yet confident. S/he doesn't boss people around, but knows when to put the foot down. He is not afraid to come up with original stuff for the players, but doesn't do it for just his own satisfaction and in such a way as to alienate the other players at the game table. That kind of thing.

I'm sure we could find lots more to say about the topic. I'll just stop here for now.