Are DMs better players?

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

While generally true that DMs make good players, at the very least then tend to be cool about the rules, there is a lot of variety and they do have one horrible flaw:

DMs are way more susceptable to behaving badly in the face of role-playing style conflicts.

We see that with DMs complaining about players, but it's much more frustrating when it's DMs as players complaining about other players or about the DM's style.

I think they get so used to ordering things, even if they order them in a flexible fashion, that they have a hard time appreciating the joys of switching around modes.

Whereas anyone who plays without DMing has no choice but to appreciate that level of variety.

 

[Ssyleia]

I have made the experience that DM's are the worst players around. That does include myself.

A lot of the DM'ing art is to interpret the rules. DM's have a lot of experience at this. As a DM play with another DM and it won't take a single game session to become disappointed, because you would have ruled otherwise...

Also, DM's tend to be overactive during a game session. This can ruin the game for other players. A game where a DM DM's a DM (I love that sentence ) can easily evolve into a dialoge instead of a free-for all.

Additionally, most DM's have had to put up with several rules lawyers during their DM tradition. This makes DM's probably the most competent rules lawyer players. On my first attempt at playing (back in 2nd Edition, after 15 years as a DM only) I built a character that could (legally) deal 1,700 damage a round. Naturally, no other player had a particular lot of fun with that character around...

 

[Creamsteak]

I'm a player first, DM second. I prefer to play, but it's become more rare as I've gamed more often. I have, however, corrected other DMs on rules way more than I probably should. Mostly on things like Attacks of Opportunity when 3.0 was first released, and later on things like gaze attacks. Of course, the DM was very happy when I explained how a Medusa's gaze attack affected combat... everyone else, including myself, was not.

 

[Qualir]

As a DM who plays whenever possible, I would like to think that I am a great player. I happen to be honest enough with myself to realize, though, that my long terms behind the screen have increased my knowledge of D&D (suggested traps, monster stats, general module format) to a point where it is easy to become a bad rules master gamer. I find myself constantly having to stop myself from asking other players how exactly did they possibly achieve their goal (we DMs tend to know when players lie about the dice) and correcting those players who skim the rules to see what they want while totaly misreading, ignoring, the way the mechanic actually works. Face it, as a DM, I know the mechanics of a game and fall back on them whenever there is a disagreement between myself and a player. Its in the job description, and it helps reduce a certain amount of bias. In a player, this comes off as very bad and "Know-it-all."

On the other hand, I find that a couple of sessions behind the screen does often help in reining in out of control players. Once they have to put up with their own play style (generally out of control power gaming rules raping) ruining hours worth of their preperation, they tend to become more conciensious of the DM and cut back some on the power gaming destroy the game world type of behavior, for at least a couple of sessions. I don't mind the players having as much fun as possible, as long as they don't try to destroy my fun in the process.

 

[Altalazar]

You know - this is the kind of question that could only really even be started on an answer with an empirical study.

There are so many subjective factors as well to consider.

I think the only safe thing you can say is that a good player makes a good player and a good DM makes a good DM, and any other conclusions are based on rather insufficient data.

I think I am a decent player and DM, but I have my off days - especially when distracted by life's little curve balls.

I have had many players enjoy my games. I've enjoyed playing as a player in many games. I've generally had no problems with either, besides the occasional burnout. But I would not draw larger conclusions based on my own limited experience.

 

[James Heard]

Yes I've seen dm's make good players. Sometimes too good players, who always seem to have a way to solve a problem without being in danger. But creativity is not a bad trait in a player.

I have that problem. It's pretty easy to manipulate players from either side of the screen sometimes and 'run' the party. Also, that occassionally leads to conflicts with other GM players who're doing the same thing or the rare player who actively looks for it. I've noticed a tendency to metagame when I play, but instead of OOC'ing about it I'm more prone to try to find a reason to follow plot hooks because they look interesting rather than report that they're occuring when I see them. It's more challenging that way.

I think my worst fault as a player is that it's not very hard to notice poorly prepared or railroading GMs, or worst GMs who can't manage to do absolutely necessary things like speak clearly and concisely and manage to keep some sort of order on the group.

I've been known to forgive an occassional railroad or "I had a date last night so sorry if I might be making some of this up on the fly" silliness, but if I'm the one that's having to keep everyone interested in someone's game because the GM can't be understood and can't muster enough charisma or interest...I play games so I can rest, not to do the exhausting work of being center stage and holding everyone's attention all the time. It's nice to be able to shut up and eat pizza sometimes while the rest of the party is making attack rolls.

Some of the worst GMs in my group still make excellent players though, and my favorite GMs other than myself are usually the first players I call when trying to get a group together. Not only do I know that they'll bring players with them normally, I know that they're usually better players too. As a side effect, as long as you can avoid those nasty personality conflicts between player-GMs, your players unconsciously have all the leadership they're normally used to readily available. Heck, occassionally those nasty personality conflicts make for great game sessions too - as long as you everyone can take the time to take two steps back and remember that they're not in character. We usually resolve them by calling a break and having everyone explain everything OOC, sometimes when two characters are following unspoken conflicting metagame reasonings everything can be resolved with "Oh. Well let's do both things and try to find a reason both characters would go along with it."

 

[Creamsteak]

Hah! Just found an old thread I made a long time ago very similar to this one:

Does being a DM make you a better Player? Does being a player make you a better DM?

 

[talinthas]

i think that every DM should take time out and sit on the other side of the screen, to remind them what its like to be a player. I've been DMing pretty much continuously since 3e came out, and i just started playing in a few games recently. Playing has really helped me see where all the holes in my DMing style are, and how frustrating some of the things i do as a DM can be for a player. in the end, doing both makes you better at both.