Is the DM the most important person at the table

[Shiroiken]

In general, yes the GM is the most important person for any game. That doesn't mean that the players are not important, but individually they contribute less to the game. A crappy GM will likely find himself with few/no players, so they can't be a tyrant.

I always liked the term "referee" better -- it implies neutrality and doesn't have importance overly tied to it, as "Dungeon Master" and "Game Master" do. Yes, they run the scenario, but the best referees let the chips fall where they may without trying to influence proceedings.

The GM wears 3 hats: author, storyteller, and judge. When designing the adventure, they are working as an author, trying to design the best plot and challenges they can. During the game, they start and end with storyteller, describing the setup and epilogue. During the game, they should allow the players to react to the premise/challenge, and determine the results fairly. Sometimes that last part gets lost in the desire to force a campaign to continue (or by a tyrant who lords it over his players).

 

[Fanaelialae]

Yeah, it's more "ought to be", I think. Silly comparison in a way, but my father once told me that if people waited until they were ready to be parents to have kids, no one would have kids. Same thing here....you have to do it to learn it. And others have to be willing to let you learn it, and try and help with that.

I'm not saying that my suggestions would work for everyone....there will always be exceptions. But I just think that the more we treat DMing as this difficult job that only few are suited for, the more likely that will be exactly what it is.

They are good suggestions overall. I expect a table that successfully implemented them would function like a well oiled machine.

But I do think that they're more in the 'nice to have' category. While it makes running the game easier at the table, lots of those things can be handled by the DM without significant mental overhead.

For example, when I DM I keep my notes brief and to the point. One or two sentences per scene. Just the facts. Similarly, when I do initiative I just use a sheet of paper and write down the order vertically on it, leaving lots of space between entries (this way I can jot initiatives down as they are declared, rather than needing to do any mental sorting beyond basic greater than or less than).

My point being that there are lots of little tricks the DM can use to reduce their workload without offloading onto the players. Although a new DM isn't necessarily going to know about them. The same is true for offloading work onto your players.

You can't generally offload the primary workload however. Prepping and running the game is work, and not everyone wants to do it.

When new GMs ask me about advice for running their own game, one of the first things I tell them is something to the effect of:

"That's great! Try not to stress about it or overwork yourself with too much preparation. Just do your best to run a fun game. It probably won't be perfect your first time, so don't waste time worrying about making it perfect. The more you work at this the better you'll be."

I certainly don't focus on the fact that GMing can be a considerable amount of work. Most players grok that it's work even if not all comprehend the amount of work involved, so if someone chooses to try GMing that tells me that they aren't put off by a little work, which is a good thing for a GM. I'm not sugar coating it either though. I think it's important to manage expectations by pointing out that it is a skill. I've known more than one GM who had potential but gave up on it because their first game wasn't the idealized vision of perfection they'd imagined it would be.

 

[hawkeyefan]

What you consider choices are what other people consider inherent elements of playing an RPG. If I take copious notes as a DM, it’s because I want/need those notes. Eliminating them from the game will reduce my enjoyment of the game, not make it easier. A lot of people play RPGs because the can ‘turn their brains off,’ ask them to do a lot of work and it stops being fun and turns into a chore.

You keep insisting that DMing is easy and that more people would do it, if only we changed how we play games. But we play games the way we do because it’s enjoyable this way. Change all that and the game becomes less enjoyable.

The reason the DM is the most important person at the table is because not everyone likes DMing. Some people find the work involved enjoyable, others do not. Some people get a kick out of running a game, others do not. Even if you reduced the workload, you wouldn’t see much of an uptick in DMs, because most players just don’t want to DM.

But they are all choices. Taking notes or doing massive amounts of prep are choices that a DM makes. If these are enjoyable to the DM, then I wouldn’t suggest changing it for that DM.

I’m not as concerned about decreasing the workload of experienced DMs as I am with letting potential new DMs know that it doesn’t have to be as complex as many claim.

I also think that a DM asking a player to do initiative (or whatever task) isn’t asking a lot. It’s asking the player to take over one task of many that the DM typically handles. Some players may not be suited for a given task...that’s fine. But I’d be surprised if there wasn’t one player present that wouldn’t mind doing it.

Bottom line, I don’t think that the perception that DMing is significantly more difficult than playing is very helpful. I do think more people would try it. I’m not saying it’s for everyone....some folks simply won’t like it, and that’s fine.

But if you polled players on reasons why they don’t DM, I’m reasonably sure that “I think it’s too hard” or “I’m afraid I won’t do a good job” would be pretty common answers.

 

[bloodtide]

Yes, the DM is the most important person at the table, as far as the role in the game. The players are most often just there to have a good time, and very little else. The DM bears the burden of running the whole game. And while it is true some players can sometimes help the game along, most often they will simply choose not too.

More then anything else, running the game is the thing the DM does that is most important. This really comes down to what makes a good DM. And by running the game, this is often taking the roll of babysitter. Still, that is very important when one or more players act immature.

 

[MGibster]

I mean, is the GM a highly placed government official? An influential celebrity? A time traveler from the future, here to save humanity, apparently by way of a tabletop role playing game? No? Okay then - so the folks at your table are.. just folks.

You don't know my table! I'm third in the Line of Ascension of the Consortium from what you would call the year 10,432.

And, if your GM is sitting down to run a game, and anywhere near the front of their mind is, "Ah! I am the most important person in the room!" they are probably going to do a crummy job running the game, and see how important they feel when the players go... "Dude, it isn't all about you. This isn't fun. We're going to go bowling."

I would argue that the DM is the single most important participant only because there would be no game without them. But the DM shouldn't have a big head and act like nobody else matters. When I run a campaign I tend to view it as "ours" rather than mine.

 

[prabe]

I would argue that the DM is the single most important participant only because there would be no game without them. But the DM shouldn't have a big head and act like nobody else matters. When I run a campaign I tend to view it as "ours" rather than mine.

I agree with this, though in common usage "mine" seems to show up more than "ours." Probably because while there is overlap in the player groups, they are not identical. And because the world is mostly coming out of my head.

 

[Bagpuss]

Is the DM the most important person at the table

That depends, am I the one DM'ing in this instance?

 

[Son of the Serpent]

of course the dm is the most important person at the table (in the context of the game). stop beating around the bush people. its nothing personal and they may not be the most important person IRL but to say otherwise is a little ridiculous. if the dm ISN'T the most important person to maintaining the fun you are currently having than almost ASSUREDLY the big head a lot of people are worried about someone having in this thread is certainly being had by a party member somewhere in the group. for everyone to have fun the dm is going to be doing dm things. he has the biggest job. the job of ensuring everyone is provided for. others can contribute to that but the dm's role implicitly involves it. they keep the game going at all times as opposed to being simply a player. bad dm? get a new dm. bad player? just get rid of the player and replace them when you can. very big difference to how important the roles here are.

 

[pemerton]

players should help the DM and play PCs that are part of the campaign that the DM is making. Nobody wants to play with the player that is trying to disrupt the game and derail the plot..

I am "the" GM of my group. Very occasionally I play in a Burning Wheel game GMed by another member of the group.

Every game we play I have initiated. We have several different games ongoing (Classic Traveller, Prince Valiant, a few MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic, Burning Wheel, quite-a-while-on-hiatus 4e D&D) and also play the odd one-shot. When we meet for a session sometimes I initiate a particular game (eg if I've prepped for something in particular). Sometimes we take a vote. Sometimes the host (very rarely me) makes a call.

When you talk about helping the DM and not derailing the plot, it sounds like you're saying the players should go along with the GM's railroad. That's not how any of our games work.

Good players respect the efforts of the DM and work within the DM's world and don't try to overturn the apple cart by forcing their own ideas into the game world.

I generally expect that players to inject their own ideas into the gameworld. To me that's a pretty basic part of RPGing. It's a shared, collectively-created fiction.

 

[pemerton]

The GM wears 3 hats: author, storyteller, and judge. When designing the adventure, they are working as an author, trying to design the best plot and challenges they can.

How does this fit RPG systems and approaches that don't have a "the adventure" or "the plot" established in advance?