I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
?
The OP just lists the words, not their definitions. The definitions are exclusively to be found in the link. Where's the mismatch?
DM Types
- Thread starter Hussar
- Start date
?
The OP just lists the words, not their definitions. The definitions are exclusively to be found in the link. Where's the mismatch?
TheAuldGrump
First Post
Hmmm, Worlbuilder, Plotmeister, Director, and Actor, all in that order. Worlbuilder and Plotmeister go together, since some plots are built into the setting. Director... I like manipulating the players by controlling information flow, but I never, ever tell them what to do. I view games as closer to improvisational theater than storytelling.
Actor is where I get to have some fun during the game.
The Auld Grump
Actor is where I get to have some fun during the game.
The Auld Grump
Treebore
First Post
Kamikaze Midget said:
Did you see the quiz link in Pogre's post #27? According to the definitions given in the OP's link to the GameCraft thread, I am not a "Master of Ceremonies", which the quiz says I am.
So I am question the Quiz's validity, or if they are even using the definitions given in the GameCraft thread.
I can be a "Master of Ceremonies", but I rarely put in the effort of being one. Except, like I stated before, when I run Ravenloft as a setting, or I run I6. Then the payoff is just too good to not go for it.
Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
LG Human World Builder 7 / Actor 5 / Plotmeister 4
World Builder, then Actor, then Plotmeister.
World Builder - I love detailed worlds, it's a lot of fun. Though to be honest my group seems to really grove on that (or at least has some very vocal people who appreciate it), so the past several years that's been a big point.
Actor - A world is presented by the people in it. (Okay, *I* try to present the world by the people in it.) Plus I love to RP. Plus it's the only way to get the shades of grey I love across. The people you like but are evil. The people you respect but don't like. The Robin Hoods and the Nottinghams.
Plotmeister - Hmm, actually, I think I'd say I'm a sub-category of this. I have the pleasure to be in a several decade long FR game where the DM runs several groups at a time. Something I took away from that is I like as a player when things are happening in the world around me that aren't just because of what we did. Makes it feel rich and alive. So I have lots of plots of various lengths, but many of them it's just fine if they never hit light of day or if the characters choose not to pursue them. Which gives me a lot _freer_ hand in designing plots.
BTW, I think I'm the anti-duelist. Through observing the campaign I run, my goal in battle seems to be to provide a hefty fight that they know they have been in one, but not to kill them. Death will happen, be it through not knowing when to stay and when to run, poor dice, poor tactics, NPC motivations, or just wrong place/wrong time. They need the risk to make combat rewarding. But I've never set out with the goal to kill a PC. NPCs may be trying to kill PCs, but they're limited by the same world and rules as the rest. I have set out to kill allied NPCs - but that's a legitimate narrative device.
Cheers,
=Blue(23)
World Builder, then Actor, then Plotmeister.
World Builder - I love detailed worlds, it's a lot of fun. Though to be honest my group seems to really grove on that (or at least has some very vocal people who appreciate it), so the past several years that's been a big point.
Actor - A world is presented by the people in it. (Okay, *I* try to present the world by the people in it.) Plus I love to RP. Plus it's the only way to get the shades of grey I love across. The people you like but are evil. The people you respect but don't like. The Robin Hoods and the Nottinghams.
Plotmeister - Hmm, actually, I think I'd say I'm a sub-category of this. I have the pleasure to be in a several decade long FR game where the DM runs several groups at a time. Something I took away from that is I like as a player when things are happening in the world around me that aren't just because of what we did. Makes it feel rich and alive. So I have lots of plots of various lengths, but many of them it's just fine if they never hit light of day or if the characters choose not to pursue them. Which gives me a lot _freer_ hand in designing plots.
BTW, I think I'm the anti-duelist. Through observing the campaign I run, my goal in battle seems to be to provide a hefty fight that they know they have been in one, but not to kill them. Death will happen, be it through not knowing when to stay and when to run, poor dice, poor tactics, NPC motivations, or just wrong place/wrong time. They need the risk to make combat rewarding. But I've never set out with the goal to kill a PC. NPCs may be trying to kill PCs, but they're limited by the same world and rules as the rest. I have set out to kill allied NPCs - but that's a legitimate narrative device.
Cheers,
=Blue(23)
Vegepygmy
First Post
I agree. The closest for me would be Director, but I have no desire to avoid or entirely cut out "actions that don't advance the plot or reveal something about the characters."Raven Crowking said:
I also wonder about this statement regarding Providers:
Really? Most players consider the Provider to be the best kind of GM? Based on the description given, the Provider sounded kind of wishy-washy or "Monte Hall" to me, and the kind of GM I would probably least prefer.
I suspect a bit of bias in the description there. Anyone else agree?
the Jester
Legend
World builder first; then master of ceremonies, then plotmeister.
Sound of Azure
Contemplative Soul
I'm a Duelist/Provider, in my opinion. I'm pretty good at making stuff up on the fly, so most of my players consider me a Plotmeister, even though I'm not (I would love to be one, however). 
I just love challenging my players (in various ways), because they clearly enjoy overcoming such challenges. It's just cool to see them beat the odds time and time again, and when they don't... I commiserate with them.
With regard to being a provider, I don't DM because no one else will, but because I only have time for so many games at one time, so the DMing tends to run round-robin between the 3 main DMs, with occasional one-shots from the other players (the ones we trust to run things, at any rate
).
I just love challenging my players (in various ways), because they clearly enjoy overcoming such challenges. It's just cool to see them beat the odds time and time again, and when they don't... I commiserate with them.
With regard to being a provider, I don't DM because no one else will, but because I only have time for so many games at one time, so the DMing tends to run round-robin between the 3 main DMs, with occasional one-shots from the other players (the ones we trust to run things, at any rate
).
Kid Charlemagne
I am the Very Model of a Modern Moderator
I'd say more plotmeister/world builder than anything else, but with definite elements of actor, director, and duellist. While I have certain tendencies in the Master of Ceremonies direction, like handouts, maps and such, I don't have the extreme elements that he gives that style.
Lonely Tylenol
First Post
World Builder/Duelist/Plotmeister
Of course, since I've been running published adventures a lot lately, I guess these days I'm mostly just a Duelist.
I used to play under a wannabe plotmeister. We wandered around in a world that made no sense, but about which we always had the feeling that we were missing something that would make it make sense. Whenever we tried to take control of a situation, so that we could force it to make sense, things got even weirder in response. The only thing we could reliably do was to create null-life zones all over the planes by exploding kegs of demonic black powder. This, however, seemed to hasten the coming of the end of the multiverse, but by the end of the campaign we were starting to wish it would just get it over with.
Of course, since I've been running published adventures a lot lately, I guess these days I'm mostly just a Duelist.
I used to play under a wannabe plotmeister. We wandered around in a world that made no sense, but about which we always had the feeling that we were missing something that would make it make sense. Whenever we tried to take control of a situation, so that we could force it to make sense, things got even weirder in response. The only thing we could reliably do was to create null-life zones all over the planes by exploding kegs of demonic black powder. This, however, seemed to hasten the coming of the end of the multiverse, but by the end of the campaign we were starting to wish it would just get it over with.
Similar Threads
- Poll
