D&D General DM with too High Expectations - Advice?

[cmad1977]

She doesn't feel like she has the time to DM and doesn't want the responsibility.
I've offered to run a game for them, most recently when the DM took a month off because of burnout, but no one jumped on it - possibly out of a fear of offending the regular DM. Two other players in their group have also spoken about wanting to try DMing, but the regular DM kinda squashes their offers.

Ack!
Poison player alert! The group needs to let him go and get back to playing. Let the other players run games.

 

[MarkB]

The strategy this GM is setting out to use seems dangerous for a GM who feels he's risking burnout. This will involve a lot more work than simply GMing, and work of entirely new kinds - video editing being the first and most important new task. If the GM was already feeling overburdened, adding a lot of new tasks doesn't strike me as the right way to do things.

I could be wrong, some people do find new energy in adding more of a work burden.

He may be looking to the example of those who make a full-time living from streaming and other gaming activities, and thinking that if he can do this instead of his day-job, he'll be a lot less stressed.

He might even be right, but it's a long journey to get there, and there's no guarantee that he actually has the aptitudes to pull it off.

 

[Catulle]

He may be looking to the example of those who make a full-time living from streaming and other gaming activities, and thinking that if he can do this instead of his day-job, he'll be a lot less stressed.

He might even be right, but it's a long journey to get there, and there's no guarantee that he actually has the aptitudes to pull it off.

I'd suggest that, by attempting to force compliance with his desires before establishing his group's enthusiastic consent, he has proven that he does not.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'd suggest that, by attempting to force compliance with his desires before establishing his group's enthusiastic consent, he has proven that he does not.

What does that have to do with him pulling it off?

 

[Catulle]

What does that have to do with him pulling it off?

Isn't Far Verona doing well these days?

 

[embee]

Also, side note: this dude needs a reality check. Brands like Critical Role, The Adventure Zone, and Dice, Camera, Action are successful because their groups consist entirely of people who were already celebrities. Ain’t nobody getting rich and famous for being a DM alone.

Not even Cody of the Pathfinder Flouncing fame?

 

[ART!]

Well, now that he refuses to run, I guess it's time for one of them to step up without him being able object. If he doesn't want to play, he can effing sit out.

See my edit. They came to him to discuss what they wanted out of the game, and he decided to take his ball and go home. He has no place to get pissy if someone else decides to get a new ball for them to play with.

Seems pretty straightforward to me:

DM: I want us to play this style and form of D&D game.
Player(s): We don't really want to play that and prefer the earlier style we played.
DM: Either we play the game I wanted or we play board games on game night.
Player(s): Well, Toni says she is willing to give DMing a try so we're gonna go play X thing.
DM: I don't want to play that. I only want to play what I described.
Player(s): That's cool, but I guess you're gonna have to find someone else to play that way with, in the meantime you are welcome to join game X. If not, maybe the next game will be more to your liking. Hopefully, we can still get a board game night in every once in a while too - so you should definitely come to that!

The DM can then whine and insist that no one else should run a game if it doesn't match his preferences without compromise, but not sure why that would be persuasive and not just reason to be like "What the heck is wrong with that guy? He's being a baby!"

I feel like I know this because in the past I was that baby and got over myself.

Ack!
Poison player alert! The group needs to let him go and get back to playing. Let the other players run games.

Given what the OP had said about the now former DM, I wouldn't even want him involved as a player, and so wouldn't want to include him in conversations about who will run what next. Why give him yet another chance to be a jerk to the group?

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

It was stated he was a long-time friend for at least some of the group. You can disagree about gming styles without ending friendship. Even if he isn't interested in dm'ing a light game he could have fun playing in one or they could all have fun playing the occasional boardgame even if he declines to continue playing rpg with the group...

But I can see the danger you point out!

 

[Blue]

They did talk about it. That it didn't work out as hoped doesn't mean they didn't talk. And I'm still not sure why everyone insists he should have left the door open to someone else DMing for the group when it's pretty obvious he wasn't interested in playing a less intense campaign either. I wouldn't bring up options I wasn't good with or that would disinculde me either. I don't think anyone would.

To address " And I'm still not sure why everyone insists he should have left the door open to someone else DMing", you're mischaractrerizing it some. It was "Everyone insists he didn't have a right to shut down all other conversation and unilaterally declare what was played next".

Why would one player in the group (explicitly no longer the DM by their own choice) get to stop others from talking about what to do next and instead get to dictate it?

And this wasn't the first time he silenced other voices - he also edited out everyone else's questions and comments from the recording before sending it around to the others.

 

[Oofta]

To address " And I'm still not sure why everyone insists he should have left the door open to someone else DMing", you're mischaractrerizing it some. It was "Everyone insists he didn't have a right to shut down all other conversation and unilaterally declare what was played next".

Why would one player in the group (explicitly no longer the DM by their own choice) get to stop others from talking about what to do next and instead get to dictate it?

And this wasn't the first time he silenced other voices - he also edited out everyone else's questions and comments from the recording before sending it around to the others.

I don't have a problem that he made a decision about what he wanted to do, it's how he made the decision and approached his players. It was done in a rude and dismissive manner. It would have been better to have a conversation to see if some compromise could have been reached.

But the kicker to me is that they're still dictating to the rest of the group what they can and cannot do. Are they paying for something that enabled this get together? What gives them the authority to decide what type of game they will play?

My advice to the OP's wife would be to contact some of the players that had previously offered to DM and see if they want to start a game. Invite the original DM but set it up separately, even if the original DM decides not to join she can still game with most of her friends.

In any case, games break up for all sorts of reasons. I wish anyone who wants to be a professional DM luck because they're going to need it. Like lottery level amounts of luck if you want to stream and maybe pay for a book or two. So it's too bad, and hopefully a friendship is not lost over this but sometimes you just have to move on.