Do You Consider Yourself A Good DM -- If Yes, Why?

[Privateer]

Now, I know on these boards we have good DMs. I'm sure, if we compiled the knowledge of all of the DMs on these boards, we could create a utopian D&D society that would bring joy to the joyless and solve world hunger. Or create a darn good game. I'm not sure which yet.

I want to know what you good DMs do to make your game go from "decent" to "earth-shatteringly good." Is it your planning? Your acting? What is that talent that you have that makes your game so good?

Also, how do you reccomend others improve their game to be more like yours?

 

[Crothian]

I think I'm a fine DM. People seem to have fun when I run a game. I'm not on PC's level of DMing ability, but I can carry my own.

My strength I think comes from allowing the PCs to do what they want. I like to allow people to be creative so I have to do a lot of improvisation to deal with it especially in modules. I also try to allow players to make the characters they want, and I'll alter the rules to help if need be. I'm not afraid of powerful PCs as they are easy to deal with, though I perfer poor ones. I also try to feature each PC in a particuliar day. I try to throw in something for all of them to enjoy, even if it ends up haing to be 7 different things (one for each player).

 

[Agnostic Paladin]

Well, not really, no.

(I'm going to tell you why despite you only asking those who do think they're good to do so.)
I can conceptualize great stories, scenarios, and situations for characters to roleplay in and fight in and save the world in, but my execution is lacking. I have a hard time conveying to my players. That, and I'm horrible at keeping things running smoothly when it comes time to actually play.

 

[Psychotic Dreamer]

I do not really consider myself a good DM/GM. I do try to tell a good story and the players often think I run a good game, but I consider myself an average DM/GM at best.

 

[Mr Fidgit]

wow, this is tough

What is that talent that you have that makes your game so good?

ad-libbing. i think when i'm 'on' it works fantastically well. when i'm not, the game is like watching a train wreck

and just another comment...i think i do very well adding 'flavor' to a game when there's research involved. i've run a couple of successful games (one Rifts, the other Deadlands) where the reasearch i've done has really helped to improve the game

Also, how do you reccomend others improve their game to be more like yours?

i wouldn't - simply because i've run more unsuccessful games than successful ones (i'm still striving for 'the perfect game')

and i don't think you can teach anyone to ad-lib well. it's like when famous comedians are interviewed and are asked if you can teach someone to be funny. you can't. you can teach someone how to tell a joke, but that's totally different

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I think overall I am a fairly weak DM, if only because I am so friggin lazy.

I also hate playing NPC's, I'm for crap at that. I don't tend to think "in character" as the DM, I am very tactical and detail-minded, so very often I will describe to the players what an NPC says to them, instead of just saying it to them. As a consequence I don't think my players ever really know when I am speaking as the DM or as an NPC, which can be jarring to a game.

But I think that one of my strengths is being able to run a fun game with little to no preparation.

The secret, of course, is a big pile of dead bad guys. (TM)


Wulf

 

[blackshirt5]

I like to think of myself more as a good worldbuilder than a good DM. I'm detailing places, people, and gods, for an epic, beautiful world. And then I'll probably turn it over to another guy to help me co-DM it.

Although my players told me last night that game was especially good, and now you can truly see a difference between when I first DMed and now, it's a world of difference. But I'll always be, in my minds eye, the kid sitting around, letting others stay in the spotlight while I work silently in the back. And frankly, that's the way it was meant to be for me, IMO.

 

[WizarDru]

I think I'm a pretty good DM. Why? Because the players always come back, and they tell me they enjoy the game. Put simply, they have fun.


And if that isn't what makes a good DM, I don't know what does.


(as for specifics, I like to think that I excel at weaving character's personal stories into the greater campaign arc, and giving everyone's character a chance to shine....but I also let them beat the snot of Evil. )

 

[Psion]

I also hate playing NPC's, I'm for crap at that. I don't tend to think "in character" as the DM, I am very tactical and detail-minded, so very often I will describe to the players what an NPC says to them, instead of just saying it to them.

I personally see nothing wrong with that. I see no reason for making a dramatic production out of every shopkeep. I find GMs who NEVER break out of character much more annoying. Sometimes, dwelling on the roleplaying of every supporting cast member can become extremely boring and time consuming.

 

[Henry]

I think I'm good, but not great. I could definitely be better.

Why do I think I am good, at the least? For Crothian's reason: people seem to enjoy the sessions I run, and in the past I have actually had gamers request me as DM for a particular game.

What makes a good DM a GREAT one? Timing. Experience. Handle on the rules. Finally, knowing how to give individual players what they want in a session. Knowing the proper mix of roleplaying to violence, and challenges to puzzle solving, is the best skill a DM can learn.

What's the only way to learn? By observing. And by DOING. Over, and over, and over again, consciously attempting to get better at all of the above.

The only difference between someone like Piratecat, or Wulf Ratbane, or Sagiro, and "Joe/Jane Schmoe" - is practice, and willingness to learn.