-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
DM Types
- Thread starter Hussar
- Start date
FireLance
Legend
In my view, a Provider DM is just applying the principles of servant leadership to DMing.Vegepygmy said:
I believe the caricature of a Provider DM as wishy-washy or a "Monty Haul" DM is as inaccurate as that of the World Builder DM launching into 20-minute lectures about the minutiae of his world, or the Duelist DM being excessively adversarial and antagonistic.
Winterthorn
Monster Manager
Based upon the definitions in the OP: I'm basically a World Builder + Director + Provider.
I like to emphasize the world details so players can "feel" their PCs are in a living world with cultures and languages and politics and war. As a World Builder I use published material to keep the player's interested in the setting in which their PCs are adventuring. Emphasizing legends and history are very helpful.
I like to keep focused on the main goals of the PCs and avoid what I see as the pit falls of diversions; I just follow the players' intentions and they react to the challenges I create predicated upon their previously communicated interests - I allow few red herrings and otherwise everything contributes to the players' goals one way or another so they make definitive progress. Being a Director means I have to fudge to keep things moving forward.
I like to be sure the players have fun and I rely on their feedback as to what they'd like to experience - within reason
As a Provider I am sensitive to player enjoyment - if they are typically happy in my sandbox, then I know I've done a good job.
So I'd say I'm a blend of these three types but never overly pronounced in any of them. My style is more third person narrative than immersive roleplaying. I save most of my roleplaying for key moments when I think it have most relevance or impact upon the PCs/players. I assume players are OoC unless its clear they are in character - less confusion and embarrassments that way, and it's easier for players to ask questions. I find the IC/OoC dicotomy is a challenge to keep clear. I am a visual person so my players use minis/counters and there are always maps and pictures and soemtime some music - that seems to always work well.
I like to emphasize the world details so players can "feel" their PCs are in a living world with cultures and languages and politics and war. As a World Builder I use published material to keep the player's interested in the setting in which their PCs are adventuring. Emphasizing legends and history are very helpful.
I like to keep focused on the main goals of the PCs and avoid what I see as the pit falls of diversions; I just follow the players' intentions and they react to the challenges I create predicated upon their previously communicated interests - I allow few red herrings and otherwise everything contributes to the players' goals one way or another so they make definitive progress. Being a Director means I have to fudge to keep things moving forward.
I like to be sure the players have fun and I rely on their feedback as to what they'd like to experience - within reason
As a Provider I am sensitive to player enjoyment - if they are typically happy in my sandbox, then I know I've done a good job.So I'd say I'm a blend of these three types but never overly pronounced in any of them. My style is more third person narrative than immersive roleplaying. I save most of my roleplaying for key moments when I think it have most relevance or impact upon the PCs/players. I assume players are OoC unless its clear they are in character - less confusion and embarrassments that way, and it's easier for players to ask questions. I find the IC/OoC dicotomy is a challenge to keep clear. I am a visual person so my players use minis/counters and there are always maps and pictures and soemtime some music - that seems to always work well.
TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
I am not surprised that "World-Builder" is getting the most votes.
Myself, I'm a Plotmeister, with strong elements of Actor and Provider.
This kind of stuff is fascinating to me. Thanks for posting this.
Myself, I'm a Plotmeister, with strong elements of Actor and Provider.
This kind of stuff is fascinating to me. Thanks for posting this.
Nyeshet
First Post
Hard to say exactly, but Worldbuilder is a given and Provider probably also works. Were it possible to include fractions of the choices, I might also have chosen a bit of Duelist and Plotmeister, and perhaps even a touch of Master of Ceremonies.
But all of these really overlap quite a lot. A good worldbuilding experience should have enough detail to be nearly as emersive as suggested in Master of Ceremonies - although some occasional bg music (instrumental &/or natural sounds, mostly) and perhaps some slight adjustments to lighting can also help at times. (Who really plays a Halloween game with full lighting?)
I'm no where near as much of a plotmeister as some on this thread have showed themselves to be. My plots do not risk entanglement of myself or the players to the point of mutual confusion, but rather they are the direct result of world building - the details are there and I just take advantage of them. If an area, due to its geography, cultures, etc is prone to bandits, etc, then should the party wander through it they are likely to be set upon. If the area is also ever now and again contested over by two or more adjacent areas, then there is a chance that perhaps one of the bandits is there to destabilize the region in preparation for an invasion (or other form of takeover). Little things like that add up, growing into complex webs of plots. The 'webs' at first are no more complex than a few strands with a couple connections, but after several months of game time the interactions have in and of themselves created a more complex, emersive, and intricate web for the players.
So, really, while I could perhaps have chosen Master of Ceremonies and Plotmeister, I did not, as they are ends that come about from World Building, not initializers in and of themselves, at least for me.
As for the bit of Duelist, World Building requires an attention to detail, and Provider sort of insists upon working towards the interests of the players (and conflict will inevitably be one for one or more of the players). Also, playing a fight poorly weakens the interest and potential enjoyment for the players as much as the it does the GM. If creatures have Int 8, they should not be treated as animals - they have the capacity for ambush, complex tactics, and even strategy. Indeed, even wolves (Int 2) have the capacity for ambush and at least some tactics (Trip, etc). So again Duelist might have been chosen, but it was more there due to World Building and Provider considerations than on its own merits, at least for me.
But all of these really overlap quite a lot. A good worldbuilding experience should have enough detail to be nearly as emersive as suggested in Master of Ceremonies - although some occasional bg music (instrumental &/or natural sounds, mostly) and perhaps some slight adjustments to lighting can also help at times. (Who really plays a Halloween game with full lighting?)
I'm no where near as much of a plotmeister as some on this thread have showed themselves to be. My plots do not risk entanglement of myself or the players to the point of mutual confusion, but rather they are the direct result of world building - the details are there and I just take advantage of them. If an area, due to its geography, cultures, etc is prone to bandits, etc, then should the party wander through it they are likely to be set upon. If the area is also ever now and again contested over by two or more adjacent areas, then there is a chance that perhaps one of the bandits is there to destabilize the region in preparation for an invasion (or other form of takeover). Little things like that add up, growing into complex webs of plots. The 'webs' at first are no more complex than a few strands with a couple connections, but after several months of game time the interactions have in and of themselves created a more complex, emersive, and intricate web for the players.
So, really, while I could perhaps have chosen Master of Ceremonies and Plotmeister, I did not, as they are ends that come about from World Building, not initializers in and of themselves, at least for me.
As for the bit of Duelist, World Building requires an attention to detail, and Provider sort of insists upon working towards the interests of the players (and conflict will inevitably be one for one or more of the players). Also, playing a fight poorly weakens the interest and potential enjoyment for the players as much as the it does the GM. If creatures have Int 8, they should not be treated as animals - they have the capacity for ambush, complex tactics, and even strategy. Indeed, even wolves (Int 2) have the capacity for ambush and at least some tactics (Trip, etc). So again Duelist might have been chosen, but it was more there due to World Building and Provider considerations than on its own merits, at least for me.
Duelist. Without challenges the game becomes dull and predictable, regardless of the weapons you carry or spells you cast, when you walk all over the foes in the blink of an eye, I lose interest and the players have a lot less fun as a result.
I love plot, characterization, customization and the details involved in world building, but before anything else the challenge should be put on the table so players earn whatever it is they receive.
I love plot, characterization, customization and the details involved in world building, but before anything else the challenge should be put on the table so players earn whatever it is they receive.
Lord Rasputin
Explorer
Horrid. I try for rich, detailed worlds and fail miserably.
Hussar
Legend
I'm thinking the linky Pogre provided is a bit skewed in its results. Not enough questions to really nail down a particular slant on the DM. I certainly don't see myself as a Master of Ceremonies. :/
Sure, there's probably a bias in the article, it's nearly impossible to write without one. But, it's still pretty useful regardless, IMO.
Sure, there's probably a bias in the article, it's nearly impossible to write without one. But, it's still pretty useful regardless, IMO.
Maldin
First Post
Plotmeister/Worldbuilder/Director
With plots that take real-world decades to unravel. ;-)
Denis, aka "Maldin"
Maldin's Greyhawk http://melkot.com
With plots that take real-world decades to unravel. ;-)
Denis, aka "Maldin"
Maldin's Greyhawk http://melkot.com
Similar Threads
- Poll
