What's Your Biggest Failing as a DM

[hong]

I have that problem too. I sometimes switch to 3rd person to get around it. ("You talk to the Duke's grandson, and he strikes you as a slightly seedy type, but with a smooth manner about him. He questions your business in attempting to enter the keep at such a late hour.") The problem with doing that is that it's difficult for PCs to roleplay if you're doing that, and they have full rights to switch to 3rd person too, and reply, "We say that we're here on ducal business."

Apart from "be a better actor", I wonder if anyone has advice regarding this.

There's nothing wrong with this style of play. In fact, it has certain advantages, because it provides opportunities for using oft-neglected skills like Diplomacy, Intimidate, Innuendo, Sense Motive, etc. This in turn gives players an incentive to put skill points into these skills, which would otherwise languish unused.

 

[rounser]

There's nothing wrong with this style of play. In fact, it has certain advantages, because it provides opportunities for using oft-neglected skills like Diplomacy, Intimidate, Innuendo, Sense Motive, etc. This in turn gives players an incentive to put skill points into these skills, which would otherwise languish unused.

I hadn't thought of it that way, hong. Good points. Maybe an admixture between 3rd and 1st person is a good approach. Go to 3rd when explaining boring stuff, and to 1st where the specifics of what is being said matter, or would help define personality.

Hmm.

 

[Obese Squirrel]

I don't think there's anything wrong with railroading as long as it's "creative railroading". By that I mean that you make your story's generic enough that the PCs can take different plot hooks to get to a main goal. Also, putting people's past into the overall storyline definitely motivates the player ( if they're playing in character) to stay "on the railway tracks".

I find one of my problems is that when I describe something, I say it differently to how I imagine it my head. Sometimes it can get frustrating when you try to describe something which is pretty intricate.

Also if there a multiple NPCs communicating with the group and each other it can get annoying. Once, I've had 2 NPCs talking to each other, and I forget that one of them was an NPC and I was waiting for them to reply....I felt pretty stupid after that.

I've also favoured some characters too which I try not to.

 

[Darklone]

Well

I don't like railroading. I only use it when the players got no clue what to do. Which happens often. I build a lot of NPCs, many of them never to be used. I play them quite versatile and never exchange them. I have horrible large sized battles and my players nearly always survive. I give out too many magic items.

Those aren't problems.

I had played with friends for 15 years. I tried to keep them away from railroading and killing around. Worked fine some time. Then I killed two chars cause I didn't railroad them out of jail (though I tried). Those guys don't talk to me since then.
The other players suddenly came up with complaints that they didn't want to play since half a year.

All in all: I lost some friends. Since I am too proud to give in to some idiots who just came to a gaming session for more than one year to meet the others once in a week without wanting to play. I say, they should have said that earlier. I don't have to play, or I could have played with some of them (what we still do) and meet the others for a beer or two. Well. Adults should be able to talk. IMHO.

 

[Hattersai]

I laugh too much.
I have funny players and I laugh a lot.

When I am a player I make too many jokes.
Ironic.

 

[DMaple]

Easy to answer this one. Lack of preperation. I don't have the time as I'm have commitments 3 evenings a week (not including the evening I roleplay) and I'd like to spend some time with my wife, computer going out.

Also by the time I'm running a campaign I'm already bored of it and my mind is planning the next one.

 

[LostSoul]

Not so good at playing NPCs. Some of them I can do, others just get left by the wayside.

Sometimes I design adventures that the player's aren't too keen on playing. But that's typical, I guess.

 

[Jackfrost]

Hmmm....

Railroading is an ok way to guid a session. (Railroading means to tell your players what is were and when, or in other words, your describing them were to go when off track?)

But as a DM i have never railroaded my players. This is how my sessions start.

1)people make characters, to dragon lance theory, (half orcs not common, i requre a pretty damn good history if someone becomes one.)

2) tell them some things i want them to have in their history

3) ask for silence at the table and i just play along with them.

of course I don't just plot things into the game. At the beggining i start with a few goblins infesting the orchards or some hulagins are messin` with the party, but from that point on i just go with the players. Yes eventually i would make a wrong decission, (so far out of my 2 year experience i made 1 mistake, and it was not because i didn't plan ahead but i didn't know how a spell worked.)
but this way its way more interesting. Its mor elike life... and this way the characters interact with each other and actually use their history really well...

 

[The_lone_gunman]

I railroad, but the key to my railroading is to make it in such a way as the players don't know they are being railroaded. I do this by having the story be fluid, and change a bit here and there based on what the players do. Once I had a real short game, that was supposed to be quick, and some of the random treasure that dropped in there, the players assumed that it was important, so I made it important, and that spawned like 3 other games. I also inserted little parts here in there in those games to tie them into the story. Sometimes it works like that.

My big problem, at least in the last campaign (I like to think I have solved this now, we will have to see) was too broad of a background story. So much stuff was going on in the background, that the players had no clue as to what was happening. They also had to travel all over the place, which made it a bit less focused.

Now my campaign is centered around a single country/Area, and one main backstory that I try to tie all our games into whenever I can. Regardless of where the players decide to go that day, they usually end up where I need them to be.....although usually the new place is strikingly different from where I originally intended :0......

I am also to easy on my guys just like everyone else seems to be . I tend to hold back if it seems like I am going to kill them (although many still seem to die anyway .

TLG

 

[Fenes]

At some time I flatly demanded railroading from the DM. Everyone was playing a PC without "leadership qualities" or "planning ability", and in order to complete an adventure we would have to either switch PCs, or act out of character. At that point I asked the DM (aside from the game) to get a NPC going to lead our characters, and to do our planning for us, since no one took pleasure in cong up with plans. I also hate it if a DM thinks it is fun to present us with a puzzle or something, or to expect my dumb as a brick rogue to come up with a master strategy. I don't want to solve puzzles, or act out of character, so pretty please railroad me - show me the clue, give me a hint, present the general's plan so that I can disarm the trap, sneak into the enemy's camp or go off solve my personal problems.

In my Shadowrun campaign, I use an NPC as the "party leader", since all players are playing "followers", and letting them plan was not very fun. I sometimes offer alternatives, or ask the players what course of actions they'd prefer, but generally it is "We do what we are told. So, what are we told?" during the planning stage of the run. The PCs act out before, during and after the runs, go on sidetrips and mind their personal business and the players have much fun doing it, so I don't really see anything wrong in "railroading".

I see it as my job as the DM to present the players with options, to regularly ask them what they want in the game, what goals and ambitions theri PCs have, and act on that, not to let them wander aimlessly through the world when it is clear they would prefer an adventure. If no one wants to be a leader, then I'll get a leader for them, if needed.

My biggest failing as a DM is that I get too easily into discussion mode during a game instead of cutting a ranting or arguing player off and discuss it after the game.

Edit: Going too easy is also not a failing of me. I expect a fleshed out PC from my players and good roleplaying, and in exchange I will not kill a PC, especially not for staying in Character and walking in a trap. If you want to experience the thrill of danger and cannot roleplay it, better play with another DM.