How have you grown and/or changed as a GM over the years?

[Ralif Redhammer]

Same.

But as far as my DMing/GMing, I like to think I've gotten better. I've gone from pretty straightforward quests and dungeons to more improv and leaving the door wide-open for player direction and contribution. My adventures, while they grew less linear as time went on, still had very specific directions that the adventure as supposed to go. Now, a lot of the time, I leave big blanks with "the PCs have to figure it out" instead.

One thing that's not changed is that my maps are still awful. Dungeon or wilderness, it's all looks terrible. Even a simple square chamber is more likely to look like a failed pancake instead.

I have less hair.

 

[pemerton]

When I startd GMing I was influenced by GMing advice from Gygax and Lewis Pulsipher advocating GM neutrality and a strict separation between prep (GM is active) and adjudication (GM is reactive).

It took me a long time to work out that, in order to run the sort of game I really wanted to run, I had to ignore that advice.

The initial change was to become far less neutral in prep, establishing situations that were ready for the PCs (and their playeas) to be pushed and pulled in relation to their interests and commitments. This accompanied a move to significantly more social dynamics and social resolution in my games. But engaging with the players in the course of resolution still tended to be done in a surface-neutral, Im-playing-my-NPCs-and-my-interaction-with-the-players-is-mediated-through-NPC-voices fashion.

It was playing in a convention game that I first experienced the technique of a GM talking directly to the players about the ingame situation - Doesn't that make you angry? Look what Barry's doing! Is he really worthy? etc. Since then, my changes have been steady, and in the direction of reducing the importance of prep and neutrality and increasing the degree of responsiveness and engagement as a GM.

I've also learned not to hoard ideas: always lead with your best stuff.

 

[CleverNickName]

I've started calling on my players to help with descriptions and narrative, instead of giving hours of monologue every night. Like, for example: when I'm rolling up a treasure, I place things like weapon +1 or "gem worth 50gp." Then later, when the party discovers the loot, I handle it like this:

"You raise the lid of the chest. You see a gem and a weapon, sitting atop a pile of copper and silver coins! Willori, you were the first to look inside--what does the weapon look like? and what kind of gem did you find?"​

I've also stopped saying "no" as often. Maybe it's because I'm getting more laid-back in my old age? Maybe it's because there isn't a huge saturation of questionably balanced third-party material for 5E as there was for 3.X and Pathfinder? Whatever the reason, whenever my players bring something non-Core to the table and ask if they can use it for their character, I almost always say Yes. Fifteen or so years ago, I would have almost always said No.

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[pogre]

It took me a while to realize much of the effort I put into world building was generally not cared about by my players. In fact, most of my players don't even care if the history, geography, and politics of the world makes sense.
This led me to work small on the campaign area and try to keep things consistent locally. I also focus entirely on the adventure and try to work towards a positive player experience. I'm still a high-prep DM, but I try to create interesting encounters mostly.

 

[pemerton]

I'm still a high-prep DM, but I try to create interesting encounters mostly.

Am I right in thinking that quite a bit of your prep is minis/terrain set-up?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

It took me a while to realize much of the effort I put into world building was generally not cared about by my players. In fact, most of my players don't even care if the history, geography, and politics of the world makes sense.
This led me to work small on the campaign area and try to keep things consistent locally. I also focus entirely on the adventure and try to work towards a positive player experience. I'm still a high-prep DM, but I try to create interesting encounters mostly.

I know what you mean. I try to add in bits of Greyhawk lore, different human ethnic groups, cultures, etc. F's giving by my players....zero. My table loves playing D&D but they aren't trying to be actors or examine some idea. They want to tell bad jokes, drink some whiskey, kick in doors, kill stuff, and walk out with the treasure pile. Then tell more terrible jokes and movie references...

Why are there 12 trolls with a jug of alchemy in this room? Who cares! Kill those trolls!!!

 

[pogre]

Am I right in thinking that quite a bit of your prep is minis/terrain set-up?

Well, if I included that time I would be an insane level prep DM!

I mean high prep in the sense that I have several contingencies written down, a few encounter tables, all of the stat blocks, complete maps, complete player handouts, etc. My game master notes are not quite in publishable form but you could run a very similar adventure using them.

I am actually pretty good at improvising and riffing off of players, but for me, taking the time to write things out usually results in more unusual, fun situations, For the most part, it is work I enjoy.

 

[delphonso]

I really stopped rolling so much. Most of my games have moved further from mechanics and more on RP/Improv. The best games to me are session where no one rolls.

 

[pogre]

I really stopped rolling so much. Most of my games have moved further from mechanics and more on RP/Improv. The best games to me are session where no one rolls.

See, that is excellent. You really know your players and it works for you.

My group would consider such a session a huge failure for the most part. Our combat pillar is the height of the One World Trade Center and our social pillar is the height of a molehill.