D&D In a Castle Organizer to Launch D&D Dungeon Master University

The makers of D&D In a Castle is launching a new program - a seminar to help Dungeon Masters improve their skills. Tabletop Vacations is launching Dungeon Master University, with the first symposium (their words) launching in early 2026. This is an officially licensed D&D event, meaning that Dungeon Master University can use the logo and other D&D IP in their promotional work. Dungeon Master University will take place at Oglethorpe University in Atlanta, GA.

Per the press release announcing the event, there will be four learning tracks spread out over two days. Tabletop Vacations will bring in "acclaimed Dungeon Masters, industry professionals, and seasoned storytellers" to run the various sessions.

The four tracks are as follows:

• Skill Building – Learn to run dynamic encounters, manage player behavior, and sharpen your improvisational instincts.
• Campaign Building – Design memorable story arcs layered with meaningful adventures, and learn the art of narrative pacing.
• World Building – Construct compelling settings, factions, lore, and ecosystems that bring your tabletop to life.
• Career Building – Explore the business of Dungeon Mastering with advice from professional DMs, streamers, writers, and content creators.

The first Dungeon Master University will take place January 2-3, 2026. Spots will be limited.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The people I would be concerned about (if that's even the correct term to use) would be people that would look at this seminar as an investment that would pay for itself by making money running games for money. I suspect it's more just for people who blow more money on vacations than I normally do, and it doesn't sound like a scam. I'm just too much of a cheapskate to spring for this even though I suppose I could afford it if I wanted to.

On the other hand I once looked up a 3 day racing course for similar money but I got vetoed by my wife so who am I to talk?

Given the low amount of money professional DMs make -- enough to pay for game books, but not enough to replace a full-time job -- I sure hope they'd start with the zero-cost investment of inhaling everything Matt Colville, Sly Flourish and the Alexandrian have to say before dropping hundreds or thousands of dollars on a three-day seminar.

 

[Alzrius]

I think the better measure is being a successful professional GM, as in, you successfully get clients who pay you with some regularity. That that is about more than learning to be a GM.

Though I respect that a lot, I'd be fired if that were my job (after killing Jason off and countless screaming Argonauts).

 

[Professor Murder]

Though I respect that a lot, I'd be fired if that were my job (after killing Jason off and countless screaming Argonauts).

Only if the client's didn't desire that.

 

[Distracted DM]

Given the low amount of money professional DMs make -- enough to pay for game books, but not enough to replace a full-time job -- I sure hope they'd start with the zero-cost investment of inhaling everything Matt Colville, Sly Flourish and the Alexandrian have to say before dropping hundreds or thousands of dollars on a three-day seminar.

Some of us have turned it into a full-time profession, but IME it's definitely more of an exception (I think it's mostly luck, finding people that're willing to pay a high price and value your skills). And like any other entertainment job, it can be volatile (even if they love your games, sometimes peoples' circumstances change and they can't afford $40/session).

OTOH I know some GMs that make a good living of it because they charge similar but live in very low-cost areas, like the Philippines.

 

[Distracted DM]

Though I respect that a lot, I'd be fired if that were my job (after killing Jason off and countless screaming Argonauts).

I think there's a misconception that if you're running games for pay, you're going to avoid killing PCs because you're afraid of what'll happen, that they'll leave the game, etc... but the desire is for the right players to find the right GMs for them- so while they may be unhappy if a character dies, they're at your table because that sort of thing can happen. I don't brag about killing PCs, but it's a rare campaign that doesn't have any character deaths. Close calls are many.

Running games for pay hasn't changed the way I run games much, with the exception that I run ~5-6 sessions/week instead of 2. I guess it also gives me even more reason to blow $$$ on map patreons, art, etc... but I was already spending a lot of money on stuff like that before I started running professionally.
edit: Oh, and I run most of my games online. In-person pro GMing is a lot harder because of finding players in your local area, though it can pay better... whether you're running for companies, or (much more easily) for kids.

 

[BruceWright]

And here I am, like a fool, teaching the same thing for free at my local public library!!


Honestly i can say this product isn’t for me, but i don’t begrudge the people who might want to enjoy something like this, nor the people who would spend their time preparing, traveling to, and teaching this for pay.

Just because some of us do this as a hobby doesn’t mean we should feel any particular way about those who do it for pay.

It’s work. It’s honest work. It’s creative work. I wouldn’t want to make my hobby my job, but others do. Maybe if it paid better, I would be tempted.

But just because i teach it at my library and others do at a nice resort doesn’t make me good and them bad. We’re just doing things differently for our own reasons.

 

[MNblockhead]

I think there's a misconception that if you're running games for pay, you're going to avoid killing PCs because you're afraid of what'll happen, that they'll leave the game, etc... but the desire is for the right players to find the right GMs for them- so while they may be unhappy if a character dies, they're at your table because that sort of thing can happen. I don't brag about killing PCs, but it's a rare campaign that doesn't have any character deaths. Close calls are many.

Exactly this. I'm speaking from the consumer side. For a one shot, which is most of the paid games I've ever done, whatever. I'll adapt to the table and can have fun with most styles of play. But for a campaign, I would want to know that the DM is willing to let me character die if the dice go against me. It is very hard for me to get into campaign play and be invested in my character, other PCs, and the party in general if I know that there is little to no chance of the PC dying. But I realize other players may feel differently. It is important to set expectations in the session/campaign description and at the first session.

Running games for pay hasn't changed the way I run games much, with the exception that I run ~5-6 sessions/week instead of 2. I guess it also gives me even more reason to blow $$$ on map patreons, art, etc... but I was already spending a lot of money on stuff like that before I started running professionally.
edit: Oh, and I run most of my games online. In-person pro GMing is a lot harder because of finding players in your local area, though it can pay better... whether you're running for companies, or (much more easily) for kids.

I've never been tempted to run games as a paid DM for many reasons. But one of them would be I know I would end up feeling pressure to blow money and time on content, mods, music, etc. I think it can be worth it if you have a number of adventures that you run over and over again for different groups. But I could see it really cutting into profits for long campaigns.

As a paying player, I've never minded very basic, low-tech approaches. But I wonder how much of a different it makes to attract and keep the typical customer of services like Start Playing.

 

[Distracted DM]

I've never been tempted to run games as a paid DM for many reasons. But one of them would be I know I would end up feeling pressure to blow money and time on content, mods, music, etc. I think it can be worth it if you have a number of adventures that you run over and over again for different groups. But I could see it really cutting into profits for long campaigns.

As a paying player, I've never minded very basic, low-tech approaches. But I wonder how much of a different it makes to attract and keep the typical customer of services like Start Playing.

I never would have started if my wife hadn't pushed me to give it a go after I left my law clerk job! The taboo of pay to play was baked into me at a young age

The fancy stuff is for me really, because I'm running online- like I said, I was already spending $$$ on maps etc for running online games before I went pro... It's because it helps keep me engaged. In person, I just use a wet erase mat and miniatures for combat (miniatures inspire me, it might be a tactile thing), but otherwise theater of the mind is king.
But for online, I need a certain "quality" of presentation for it to be interesting for me, because I'm not in the same room with the people and the people are a big thing for me, that social interaction. And while webcams help (I'm always on webcam), a lot of people don't like to be on camera.. and even when they are, it's not quite the same to me (though it helps). So I guess having cool maps and art and weather and line of sight helps fill in that gap.