Are DMs better players?

[AFGNCAAP]

I'd have to say it's a mixed bag. Ultimately, it depends on the person rather than their roles in past & current games.

Some have strong opinions on how things should be done, & they'll stick to their guns doing it. Some will try to hijack a campaign, going along with their focus & interests instead of the options provided before them. Some will consider themselves overly familiar with how a game works, thus not fully paying attention to a game session (& miss out in some info & clues).

OTOH, some will understand what a DM has to put up with, & be a bit more helpful/respectful. Some will have a "do unto others" attitude, displaying the type of player behavior that they'd like to see during their own campaigns. Some will offer helpful criticism, not trying to defy DM authority, but provide additional info to supplement a DM's call.

While the "DMs = good players" assessment may be valid in some cases, it loses veracity when applied over a broader base.

 

[Belen]

It's possible. I think that GMs tend to be more dedicated to gaming in general. If you're willing to run the game, then chances are, you are far mor "into" it than people who just show up and play. There may be more enthusiasm for the game.

This does not necessarily make them a better player, but it's possible.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

This, too, is generally my experience. It's not so much from a rules standpoint or anything else, but rather understanding that a GM has to worry about the other 4-5 folks at the table besides you. Some players unwittingly hog the spotlight and don't understand when you try to let someone else onto center stage.

It can go the opposite way as well. One of the worst prima dona players I've dealt with was also a DM. (on the other hand, he was a prima dona DM too, always with one or more DMPCs and an iron control over the plot your characters were swept up in.) On the other hand he was considered a good player in terms of always showing up and being into the game.

I think the "into the game" thing might be the main point. If you like the game enough to DM regularly as well as play, you are likely to be a very active, involved player when you aren't Dming. With some personalities that activity may go overboard (not being able to let go of the spotlight) but overall it can be a good thing.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Ottergame]

I've played with 4 people I can recall who almost always DM over playing. However, of those 4, 3 made some of the worst players I had ever seen, and the 4th was nothing special. The first three were all pretty similar, they figured they knew the rules better than their DM, tried to hog the spot light, and fell out of character much more often. They did, however, remember a lot more detail and paid attention more. Rotten players, good note takers and map makers.

Edit: They were all pretty competent DMs though. They didn't last long as players. They'd pretty quickly get shunted back to where they belong.

Being a good player takes time and practice, just like being a good DM.

 

[dren]

Bad DMs = terrible players.
Good DMs usually = better players.

But it depends on why they are playing. If they are playing because the group wants a change, I find they can be a pain in the ass. If they want to be a player, yeah, they are usually amazing because they can role play.

For a long time I would never game as a player...I was too critical. Now, I'm the opposite. I find it incredibly fun to play just one character and be totally ignorant of the monster rules. I'll either help or shut up depending upon what they want.

Of course, other DMs I know are a pain in the ass to run a game for. I refuse even to have them at the gaming table.

 

[EricNoah]

I don't know if DMing makes me a better player, but the reverse is certainly true.

 

[Shemeska]

Well, good DM's can make better players, but not always. I've seen some good DM's find themselves unable to adjust to not having creative control over the game when they were playing.

Personally I don't think I'm as a good a player, I have a slight issue of being really jazzed up for my own plots, but typically sleep deprived on the weekends when I'm playing. And that can get unintentionally bad when I'm playing and not running.

DM's tend in my experience to have a lot of good ideas, but I think there's a totally different mindset when you're running behind the screen versus when you're playing. I tend have to think about things more when I'm playing versus having an authoritative drive when running that makes similar things easy and instinctual.

 

[Cor Azer]

I think it depends. I like to think of myself as a good player, and the few other players in my group who have DMed are decent-to-good players, but I have witnessed some decent players who are bad DMs, and some good DMs who are bad players - 'bad' being defined as lazy, sloppy, uninteresting, inattentive, etc...

 

[pawsplay]

I have a friend who is a very entertaining DM. He spinds elaborate, epic plots, includes many memorable characters, and always keeps the action moving. He's a problem player. His characters are usually very twinked, and are often specialized. His love of a good villain tends to come out in the form of wanting to play sociopathic antiheroes. He gets flabbergasted when he doesnt get his way and says, "Well, you're the GM." He assumes years of his and his friends favorite house rules automatically apply in my games. He metagames, and makes aloud statements about "following the NPC" or "This must have been included for a reason" (sometimes resulting in painful sidetracks, since I always include lots of random detail in case I have to wing it). He tends to lose interest in games and silently drop out if he doesn't think the plot is fascinating enough. He rarely speaks to other PC's except to perform the necessary introductions or to discuss strategy. Since he has written his own homebrew, he is constantly critical of other systems.

The result being, we are friends, we don't game so much together. We usually admire each other's games from afar, and sometimes pop in if one of us is short a player. Fun guy. Just too smart for his own good, sometimes.

But I consider him the exception rather than the rule. For the most part, DMs, when they play, are more likely to do funny voices; are grateful someone is running a game at all; are team players; are knowledgeable of the rules but flexible with other styles; play interesting characters; and are willing to accept that however much they like their tricked out PC, it may be a problem for the GM and are willing to go with their second choice.

EDIT: It just occured to me to hypothesize that some of the worst DMs are one who started DMing young, with little experience as a player, then bringing their tunnel-vision to the player when they finally become players.

 

[Augurian]

EDIT: It just occured to me to hypothesize that some of the worst DMs are one who started DMing young, with little experience as a player, then bringing their tunnel-vision to the player when they finally become players.

This is especially the case in one of my friends' younger brother...
After having played for over a year, I started my own group with my best friend, but after 2 sessions of playing his younger brother said to have gained such insight into the game that he started his own (homebrew) campaign
I wasn't really sure about it, but I played with him for a while... and it really sucked... now, after 2 years of playing with me as a DM, all his (former) players have walked over to me, and vastly prefer me as a DM.

He was/is a powergamer, and he's a powerDM too... it's not fun to play...
And I have to say that his brother isn't that much better at that point, he isn't that good a DM, but he's a very good player.

It really depends on the person, and the attitude they have towards the game in general.
I strongly appreciate feedback from my players, and try to accomodate to their wishes (and explain to them the various houserules I use in my games).
I think that too is an ability which makes a DM 'better.'