Is the DM the most important person at the table

[hawkeyefan]

I just checked, and it was more like three, including the cabal's treasure hoard. These are notebook pages, and there's plenty of white space so I can find stuff, so maybe it's not as much as you think? Agree that it's more than, say, one list of bullet points.

Ah, okay....probably not all that much more at all, then. I usually wind up with a few lists of bullet points. I just type it up in MS Word, and if needed, I'll add a second column to I can maximize space on the sheet. This is mostly because I realized a while back how much of our game time is spent with the players looking at me as I flip pages. So I've tried to limit that by reducing my need. I don't rely on the Monster Manual itself for stats, and I try to keep everything on two clipboards so that I can easily track it all, and minimize the page flipping.

Other people probably don't struggle with that at all, but I think it was one of my weak points so I've tried to improve that.

Oh, I don't always prep this much. As I said, this had more in the way of names and motivations I wanted to have set (well, I wanted to have thought about them before the session, and I wrote them down so I'd remember them in the session). I've done prep where it wasn't clear where the party was going to go next (because they'd just finished a story thread, IIRC), so it was just a couple scanty paragraphs covering the most-likely threads for them to do next, and I improvised until I wasn't over my skis anymore then called an end to the session.

Yeah, after my session last night (I referenced it earlier in the thread; the PCs went into an asylum to find someone interred there who had information they need, there was a weird situation going on there with some of the other inmates and they had to deal with that), I'm not quite sure what they'll do next. We left off with them coming face to face with the person they had come for, so we'll start off with her sharing the information they were looking for.....and then I'm not quite sure what they'll decide to do with that.

What I'll likely do is prep a few short lists of possible routes forward and potential obstacles or encounters for each route.

Yeah. Blank areas are where the adventures (probably) are. I've had the party surprise me before in some kinda funny ways. It helps to be willing and able to write something off and/or improvise something.

I think that the ability to let go of prepped material when it makes sense to do so is a big part of successful GMing. It's also one that many people will push against. I have a friend who GMs regularly at a game store. Hes GMed for far, far more people than I ever have. Yet all he runs are published modules and adventure paths, and as soon as anyone starts to deviate from the available options presented in the book, he shoves them right back onto the expected path.

And honestly, for the most part, that's fine....adventure paths can be perfectly valid fun, and often they're dismissed as railroading and so on, and that's not the point I'm trying to make. Even in the most direct and straightforward adventure ever, the GM should allow for a little wandering from the path. Not abandoning the path, but just little detours or sidetreks here and there.

 

[GameOgre]

See, as a DM I would hate that. And as a player, I wouldn’t find it fun.

Most everyone would. There is a huge reason games like D&D are king and games like Dungeon World"a game I do like,just not as much as D&D" struggle to lift off.

 

[Lanefan]

If this occurs, often the notes the players took will be adequate, won't they? I mean, they're not going to try and leverage stuff they didn't know about or have forgotten about.

Sure they are - harking back to some half-remembered detail that for whatever reason has suddenly gained greater (potential) sgnificance is commonplace. And it's not at all unreasonable for them to expect that if they go back to it the information will be consistent with what they got the first time because the GM actually has something to reference beyond just her own memory.

If everyone's memory is a bit hazy (that happens sometimes at my table) then a collective conversation can hash out the details.

These play reports from your games that you post now and then - if you do those in that kind of detail for every session and post 'em where you and your players can read 'em, you're already in much better shape than most.

 

[GameOgre]

What did you spend your four hours doing? What kind of adventure did you craft? I don't think we can give specifics without understanding that.

More generally, I think a big part of this question can be in the world building stage. If the players have contributed prior to the start of play, and then continue to contribute during play, toward world building, then I think that can help a GM greatly. I wouldn't ever expect there to be a 1:1 ratio for the amount of prep between GM: Player, but it can definitely ease the burden.

If the players are helping to craft and populate the world, then the Gm doesn't have to do all of that. The players will have provided NPCs, Factions, Locations, and other elements that the GM can use to shape their adventures. The best part is that the players have literally said "This interests me" when they're adding these elements to the fiction. Depending on the nature of your game, you can go as big or as small as you need to with this....it can be an entire world that gets mapped out ahead of time, or a small town and it's nearby surroundings. Whatever works for the group.

If the players do this, then very likely their characters will also be as carefully crafted, and will be far more likely to feel as if they exist in this world that you've made. They will have existing connections....family, friends, co-workers, rivals....and existing goals and desires. These give the GM even more material to draw from in order to craft the adventures.

The players may even initiate the kind of adventure they'd like to go on. They may finish up one adventure, and then say "Hey, we got a lead on the fighter's missing brother.....let's look into that" and then the GM has an idea for what to do next, and the players feel more proactive about the game. They feel like they are actually driving the fiction because they're helping to determine what happens next instead of waiting for the next thing to come along.

None of this eliminates the need for the GM to have input. But it can certainly ease the burden greatly. It can also help focus play, and place clear goals and points of interest into the setting well ahead of time.

Again, this is general. If you can clarify how you spent your four hours, I might have some more specific advise for you.

I spent some time drawing locations. My group plays online so even when I use theater of the mind, I like to give the players at least a floorplan to look at. 5E tends to have more enemies on the board so for most battles I build a encounter map. Since I do not rail road players in general, I normally need to make multiple avenues fro them to pursue as well so some of that doesn't get used until later"I try and keep everything and sooner or later do end up happy that I did".

I also created nine npc's. Some of those will not see use but some will,no way to really know till the players do their thing.

Then I had to write a lose chart on what npc went where and did what. To help keep it all strait some game time and even long after to help with remembering it all even months later.

Then I created the actual encounters. Some took longer than others and will not get used now, but eventually they will. Then I made up two players maps to hand out to the players in game and out. I also made three handouts and loaded a ton of pictures to roll20 to use with npc's I really don't expect the party to fight.

Then I took out some paper and sketched some ideas out for if the party doesn't do anything I want/expect. If instead of working for the accused guardsman they just don't bite that idea and instead go to the docks and see if anyone is hiring. I made a at sea short adventure and reused npc's from another adventure like six months ago to fill out the crew. I didn't so much make all the encounters but got a general idea of how it might all work out. Since I don't expect the party to do this im not putting a lot of time into it but....better to have something to work with if I need it.

oh...then I went and reread the party backstories again and altered the game to reflect a couple of things in those backstories, one is likely to happen and one not. For kicks I changed the Captain npc for the what if adventure to one in a pc's backstory and had to make that npc.

After thinking about some of my treasure ideas a second time"i tend to either give too much treasure or not enough......I added to it a little and wrote down a couple of magic things I can throw in if the party doesn't do a great job at winning or discovering some of the other rewards.

I was tempted to take a second look at the encounters after I realized the main adventure total was so high but then figured why mess with it. The pc's are not likely to do it all but if they do hunt down every last bit of it ,,,why should I stand in there way. Will just lease it as is.

 

[prabe]

I spent some time drawing locations. My group plays online so even when I use theater of the mind, I like to give the players at least a floorplan to look at. 5E tends to have more enemies on the board so for most battles I build a encounter map. Since I do not rail road players in general, I normally need to make multiple avenues fro them to pursue as well so some of that doesn't get used until later"I try and keep everything and sooner or later do end up happy that I did".

I also created nine npc's. Some of those will not see use but some will,no way to really know till the players do their thing.

Then I had to write a lose chart on what npc went where and did what. To help keep it all strait some game time and even long after to help with remembering it all even months later.

Then I created the actual encounters. Some took longer than others and will not get used now, but eventually they will. Then I made up two players maps to hand out to the players in game and out. I also made three handouts and loaded a ton of pictures to roll20 to use with npc's I really don't expect the party to fight.

Then I took out some paper and sketched some ideas out for if the party doesn't do anything I want/expect. If instead of working for the accused guardsman they just don't bite that idea and instead go to the docks and see if anyone is hiring. I made a at sea short adventure and reused npc's from another adventure like six months ago to fill out the crew. I didn't so much make all the encounters but got a general idea of how it might all work out. Since I don't expect the party to do this im not putting a lot of time into it but....better to have something to work with if I need it.

oh...then I went and reread the party backstories again and altered the game to reflect a couple of things in those backstories, one is likely to happen and one not. For kicks I changed the Captain npc for the what if adventure to one in a pc's backstory and had to make that npc.

After thinking about some of my treasure ideas a second time"i tend to either give too much treasure or not enough......I added to it a little and wrote down a couple of magic things I can throw in if the party doesn't do a great job at winning or discovering some of the other rewards.

I was tempted to take a second look at the encounters after I realized the main adventure total was so high but then figured why mess with it. The pc's are not likely to do it all but if they do hunt down every last bit of it ,,,why should I stand in there way. Will just lease it as is.

I'm curious: How much difference to you think it made to your prep time, that you were preparing for Roll20 (if I'm reading right)? It's a more detailed sort of prep than I do, but my feeling is that GMs do the amount of prep they're comfortable with, so that's not a value judgment.

 

[Lanefan]

If you don't want to contribute to the game, why are you here?

My being here IS contributing to the game... oh, shut up, ego!

The difference between a DM and the players is this: player contributions to the game happen mostly during play and not often at any other time; DM contributions happen both during play and between sessions (e.g. prep).

If all you want to do is passively lap up whatever the DM is serving, passively sitting there, why are you playing an RPG? You can get a FAR better experience in a video game. It's objectively bad because as we see in this thread, passive players dominate the hobby and the notion of actually having to contribute more than being a warm blooded dice bot is horrific. I'm just so sick and tired of passive players who think that my function, as DM, is to provide for their entertainment.

As a player I see my function at the table is to provide entertainment for the DM and the other players present.

Take notes. Keep a wiki. Track what's going on session to session.

Recordkeeping and game logs are quite intentionally left to the DM, in order that they be neutral. Any player doing such things would inevitably let bias creep in no matter how hard they tried otherwise.

Provide material for the DM. Step up with goals, family, ties, enemies, and whatever else for the DM.

And then hope the DM uses any of it.

Yup, and that's the problem right there. The notion that there is a "most accurate account".

"In case of disagreement between this log and the DM's, the DM's is to be taken as correct."

There HAS to be a final point of arbitration.

The expectation that the DM is the one to do all the work introducing stuff. Why aren't you introducing things? Why aren't you triggering actions? Why aren't you the one driving the action in the game?

And now you're on solid ground, as all these are valid questions. But they've nothing to do with record-keeping, which is how you led into them.

 

[GameOgre]

I'm curious: How much difference to you think it made to your prep time, that you were preparing for Roll20 (if I'm reading right)? It's a more detailed sort of prep than I do, but my feeling is that GMs do the amount of prep they're comfortable with, so that's not a value judgment.

Double is my guess. It really does add a extra layer of work to running a game,you can't just show players anything unless you have scanned it,uploaded it,made it into a useable form for roll20 and then make sure its in a good spot to use it in game.

Heck there are times I can't even alter the encounter. If lag is a issue for you or your players or just roll20 in general is being laggy adding one kobold to a encounter can take like 5 min for it to get added to everyone's screen. So on roll20 it's ALWAYS better to over prepare than underprepared.

Also it makes running pure theater of the mind games so much more tempting.

 

[prabe]

Double is my guess. It really does add a extra layer of work to running a game,you can't just show players anything unless you have scanned it,uploaded it,made it into a useable form for roll20 and then make sure its in a good spot to use it in game.

So if it took you four hours for roll20, that's more like two hours for in-person, which isn't that far off what I spend. I blow some time hand-writing monsters onto index cards, of course, but we all work at least a little differently.

 

[Lanefan]

Exploratory play is hardly the only style of gaming in the world.

Last I checked, exploration is in theory still one of the three pillars of play.

Why on earth would you need to schedule time for prep? Good grief, you've never heard of email? A wiki? I'm not quite sure what you're envisioning, so, follow the link below and you'll see it better. As far as what they set up, of course they set up everything in their section. Why wouldn't they?

Because it spoils the mystery.

If I-as-player have designed a section of the dungeon the absolute last thing I'd want to do would be play through it. I already know what's coming, I already know the secrets, the monsters, and the traps, I already know what (and where!) the treasure is and the properties of the magic items - so what's the point of playing?

"Yeah, guys, you've just hit my section of the dungeon, so I'll tune out for the next few hours while you explore it. Have fun! >evil cackle<"

It's not like the game doesn't have guidelines for treasure placement. You'd almost think that we're performing magic. Making a dungeon crawl isn't exactly rocket science. Yes, they decide what monsters are there, what treasure is there, where and what traps are there. Of course.

But, yeah, I can see how some folks might see this as far too threatening to their authority.

It's nothing to do with threatening authority from the DM side, it's to do with ruining the game from the player side.

 

[Fenris-77]

The idea of a 'dungeon' is a real stumbling block when it comes to talking about D&D and other prep styles and play styles. Dungeons are traditionally the very model of prep-heavy it's-all-on-the-DM style prep work. The DM has to draw the map, populate the dungeon, balance encounters, and so on and so forth. I agree with @Lanefan that cooperative dungeon design would suck. My example from earlier was about cities or provinces where the players would be expected to have some significant prior knowledge. Dungeons though, they are the unknown, and they're fun because you never know what's coming.

The other thing dungeons don't have is any kind of support structure. No familiar locations or NPCs in between encounters with the unknown. No character area knowledge or other information, unless directly provided by the DM as a clue. The players don't know anything about the dungeon. This makes it hard to see how players could 'help' drive the narrative and the party relies on the DM for pretty much everything. The players can help, and there are people that run stuff like dungeons off the cuff, but it's hard compared to other adventuring environments, or at least it takes getting used to.

If you picture an urban environment like a dungeon, the idea of support starts to makes sense. The party still moves from encounter to encounter, each an new unknown. But the 'hallways' in between are all the familiar city where the players know people, locations, lore, politics, factions, secrets, and whatever. That gives the players a whole lot of handles to help drive the narrative in interesting ways and indeed add to it with character driven play.

The more plot arcs, up to a point, in play also adds to the ability of PCs to drive the narrative. If you have some sort of major crisis narrative, as is common for D&D, plus some character driven shorter arcs, and some goal oriented decision making, the players have a lot of decisions they can make about exactly what to next. In most cases it will be to follow one of the arcs in play, either the major crisis arc, or something else they have a personal stake in. Players investment takes a lot of the sting out of sandbox-y play because the players want to do X and Y.