D&D General A Rant: DMing is not hard.

[EzekielRaiden]

And I see the same with most TTRPGs - they do essentially the same things as any other TTRPG.

How?

There are GM-less TTRPGs. There are TTRPGs with no randomness at all. There are TTRPGs with no classes or races. There are TTRPGs which do not use numerical attributes. There are TTRPGs which aren't even about characters.

TTRPGs are at least as different as vans, trucks, and sports cars. I, personally, think they're significantly more different! But pretending that all TTRPGs are the same is like saying that all nonfiction books are the same: hilariously untrue.

Hey, that about sums up how we built the game system I use; and though it still ain't perfect (probably never will be) it does me more than well enough.

For the person who did all that work on it, it likely is the best car - because they've made it their own. Ditto a TTRPG system that someone has kitbashed the crap out of in order to make it their own: for that person, it's the best TTRPG system because it is their own.

Some people like to dabble in different things. Others find one thing that works and stay happy in that groove forever. I'm very much one of the latter.

And my point is that when someone like that says "this is the one and only system I need and you are just wrong that I don't have perspective", well, they're...just wrong. They simply don't have perspective.

I would never take seriously any person's opinion who says they've never eaten anything but hamburgers, so all other foods aren't worth eating. I would never take seriously any person's opinion about the quality of other cars if they've literally only driven one car in their entire life. I would never take seriously any person's opinion who says that classical music is the only music worth listening to if they've never once listened to any other kind of music.

There's a reverse side of the Latin phrase, de gustibus non disputandum est. "Of taste, there can be no dispute." That reverse side is that opinions that aren't taste can be subject to dispute...and the above three opinions are not taste. They are not saying "I like X". They are saying "X is superior to any other alternative." If you literally do not have any context for anything within the space except X, you don't have the necessary information to form any opinion, for, against, neutral, third-way, whatever.

"I will never even try anything else because I'm happy with what I have" is not expressing one's taste. It is valorizing ignorance under the excuse that, because you have enjoyed X, anything you say about X is a matter of taste. That is false.

 

[SableWyvern]

And my point is that when someone like that says "this is the one and only system I need and you are just wrong that I don't have perspective", well, they're...just wrong. They simply don't have perspective.

Who says that? If someone plays only one game, they aren't likely to say, "I play my one game, because I know I understand perfectly what all other games are like and don't need them." Instead, they say, "I play my one game, because I know I enjoy it. I have no need to establish some wider perspective."

I think that, most likely, these people simply care what you think of their perspective. They're busy enjoying themselves playing the game they like.

"I will never even try anything else because I'm happy with what I have" is not expressing one's taste. It is valorizing ignorance under the excuse that, because you have enjoyed X, anything you say about X is a matter of taste. That is false.

And there we are again. Someone is happily having fun with their friends, hurting no one. Yet, simply because they don't want to stop playing the game they like to try something else that you think they should try, you're calling them ignorant. What is to be gained by this?

 

[KYRON45]

Again: the rant was against grifters. But as the thread goes on, I find myself more and more opposed to the apparent multitudes of gatekeepers we have around here.

I wonder if anyone can see the irony in this statement?

 

[KYRON45]

This is another thing that a dedicated TTRPG advocacy group could help figure out. Is there a shortage of GMs? If so, with regards to what games? What demographics? Why? Etc.

Is starting a TTRPG advocacy group hard?

 

[AnotherGuy]

I have several games on my shelf and many more in electronic format which I have not made the effort to run or indeed do a decent read through. I purchased them because the intention was (and still is) to one day run them even as mini-campaigns or as a once-off.
My table is now heavily involved in high-level D&D play and for some players they are not as invested/committed if I run something else and so I do not until I end this campaign (which will be a while) or when we have small breaks when one player disappears for a while due to travel.

Everyone is invested in the campaign we have currently so any exploration of other games have to be quick 1-3 session games. Available time and willingness are an issue - we play in person. I just do not have the capacity to take on another game currently.

As it is the party is split so I essentially have two high-level games I'm running.
I do marvel at other posters who participate in several games a week.

 

[Reynard]

I mean, isn't that Baldur's Gate 3?

(We're way off topic, but this was a rant thread anyway, so who cares)
No, BG3 is a video game. it is a cool video game, but like all video games, any sense of agency is an illusion. What makes a TTRPG a TTRPG is player agency, what someone on these boards (IIRC) has called "tactical infinity" or similar. I think you could get some of the chat bots to allow for that (even if it wasn't very good at it) and that would be a AI GM. Again, I don't think it would be a great GM, but for some groups of casual players, it would be fine.

 

[Reynard]

Is starting a TTRPG advocacy group hard?

Maybe? I don't have the first idea of how one would go about it, what kind of financial investment it would require, or how you would make the contacts in the industry in order to help get the data you would be looking to collect, report and share.

it sounds hard.

 

[Reynard]

I wonder if anyone can see the irony in this statement?

So who precisely am I gatekeeping? Please do be specific and bring receipts.

 

[KYRON45]

So who precisely am I gatekeeping? Please do be specific and bring receipts.

That sounds hard.

Nothing is hard unless it is. Nothing is easy unless it is.
What someone think is easy or hard is only relevant to themselves.

 

[Scott Christian]

Your expectations are too high, and your language fits directly into the discouraging, negative attitude I wish would go away.

That "sub par" GM is very likely going to get better as that year long campaign progresses, simply by virtue of practice and -- if the players are not jerks about it -- enthusiasm.

Exclusionary, elitist attitudes are more dangerous to people trying out GMing than rule book intimidation.

Expectations are in-line with the eight DMs I have played with over the past 20 years, myself included. And the language I use is not discouraging. I specifically started my statement with:

I am not talking about beginners running a game and not having fun.

But if we go there. New DMs are sub-par compared to experienced DMs who have taken the time to make sure their players have fun. That is the point of gaining experience. The middle school soccer team is sub par compared to the high school team, and compared to the college team, they are awful. It does not mean they are not having fun. It does not mean they are not growing.

If we are talking about beginner DMs, then @Cadence said it best:

I would guess that a "year long campaign" is likely not the best thing for a lot (most? almost all?) DMs in training who have never run before.

I believe Collville did an entire video on this:

Colville - How Long Should an Adventure Be

Now all that said, do you walk up to a group of teenagers and say: "You guys are sub-par." No. You encourage them, the same way you would encourage a middle school soccer team. But to not tell them: "Hey, look at how difficult this really is when you get to X level," and therefore hide the reality, that seems wrong. They should be able to watch great players and DMs alike, and say, "Wow, I wish my game ran that smoothly," or "I wish I knew the rules as well as that person," or "I wish I would have thought of that." Good DMs I know still do this. Why? Because it is a growing process - and to grow - you must put in the work. Hence, it is hard.