Do you GM for yourself or others?

[Kannon]

Oh, to be sure, I'm not completely draconian about it. I've let in rules, feats, classes, prestige classes, spells, etc. from other sources after review (I've also said -no- more than a few times). I just let people understand up front it's the exception not the rule so no one new to the group is disappointed. Anytime you say "let's play DnD" there is an understandably large number of players/DMs that take this to mean "lets haul out our library of official, non-official, and/or fly by night publishers d20 books and play D(ewey) and D(ecimal) the RPG."

I've always played that way really, I'm the TSR/WotC nightmare customer. I need a PHB, the MM and I'm good for a multi-year campaign (the DMG for whatever edition is nice, but optional - I've already got the Gygax DMG always on hand, heh. It's quirky and flat out bizarre but somehow packs more inspiration in it's pages than most of the newer texts.)

The only reason I don't have restrictions on rules like this is because I know my players. Otherwise I'd cut stuff down to settings-appropriate. Only time I've ever had powergamers it was in deathmatch campaigns that were a bit more adversarial. (Build fairly/within the rules, play to win, on both sides.) Well, there was that one time, but he learned he can't out powergame the GM....

Generally, I do pick up a fair few of the GM suppliments when I can for two reasons, one, is there's some neat stuff hidden in there, and I can twist into whatever campaign I'm currently running. Two, I may as well vote with my wallet if I like something, right?

(Incidentally, my GM resources aren't limited to the system I'm using, either. I've stolen a ton of things from Pathfinder and 2e Dark Sun for my current 4e game.)

 

[ryushima2011]

I think for both, cause I play for my own enjoyment, but a lot of my enjoyment comes from the enjoyment of others.

 

[Agemegos]

I realize that most GMs are a mix of both (and optimally, both player and planner have a great time). But when it comes time to choose a system, design a homebrew, set limitations, allow splat books, or make any of a thousand other GM decisions, is your first thought, "This is what I will enjoy running?" or "This is what the others will enjoy playing"?

Well, that's a tricky question. On one hand all my designs have significant features in them that are designed to make them RP settings and adventures as contrasted with, say, plausibly world-building or writeable stories. I design stuff and set it up to be fun to play, which necessarily means to be fun for players.

On the other hand, I GM to have fun, and I expect the character-players to make efforts to amuse me and one another just as I make efforts to amuse them. I enjoy the spontaneity of RP better than the private enjoyment of world and plot design. So you'd have to say that I do what others will enjoy for my own enjoyment, and do what I will enjoy for their enjoyment.

It is something that we all do together, not something that I do for them. There is no question of my subordinating my enjoyment for their enjoyment or vice-versa, because we enjoy it together. It's a false dichotomy: I do not choose what I will enjoy over things that they will enjoy, nor do I choose things that they will enjoy over what I will enjoy. Rather, I choose things that we will all enjoy.

On the gripping hand, I sometime run things that not everyone wants to play, and then those who aren't interested drop out.

By extension, I also ask if any of you have run games or systems you've disliked, for the benefit of a group of players?

Yes, I have. It never worked very well. I'm always more fun when I'm having fun, and nothing makes a game go quite like the enthusiasm of the GM.

 

[Jack7]

What I mean is, do you think of GMing (the planning, writing, developing, session running, etc) as something you primarily do for your own enjoyment and that hopefully others will enjoy too ... Or do you think of being a GM as something of a service, where you fashion things mostly to the tastes and desires of the players as best as possible, even if this means running games that are not your favorite?

I think of it as both, and my player soften tell me they have found the games I run both enjoyable and useful (in real life).

But I would have to say that generally speaking (because I cannot really know just how useful or beneficial or even enjoyable a game was to them, only they can really know that) I am the primary beneficiary of my games.

For the following reasons: it helps my imagination, it often helps me invent (I see or invent a game device and then think, how might this work in the real world?), helps me problem solve, has often helped me gain psychological insight into others and how they think and behave, and has sometimes been the basis for fictional worlds I have later modified and adapted into my fictional writings. (It has also on occasion been the source of numerous non-fictional articles I have written.)

But there have also been a number of other benefits as well. Over time it improved various skills I either learned or improved through gaming - such as writing, mapping, organization, plot development and mapping, linguistic and language skills, (en)coding and (en)crypting, detective, SAR, mathematical abilities, observational capabilities, vocabulary (especially the use of antique or foreign terminology), historical knowledge, research skills, communications, planning, and logistics/resource allocation.

I'm sure there are other advantages either directly or indirectly related to gaming I have not recalled or recorded. But primarily I would have to say that the greater share of benefit in game DMing/GMing has gone to me.

Or maybe I should say that I feel I have enjoyed the greatest share of benefit by my gaming efforts on the behalf of others.

 

[Elf Witch]

I DM for my enjoyment I really dislike the idea of DMing as a service because to me that implies an unequal relationship with the players and leads to the mentality of players first and player entitlement issues.

Now part of my enjoyment is seeing the players having fun and engaging with the world I have created for them to come and play in.

As a DM I enjoy taking their characters and weaving them into the world so they feel like they have a made a difference. I work with my players to make sure they are having fun.

I would not run a system or campaign that I didn't like because I would not be having fun and my my enjoying myself is as important as the players enjoying themselves.

 

[Dragon Sin-Camealot]

To the game masters out there: Who, in your mind, is the primary beneficiary of your gaming?

In what context and when? I recently completed two sessions. I take a professional approach. I'm there to interpret the script to help the players follow the adventure.

If there's a problem they're not afraid to tell me. I resolve it normally without being a jerk. This is a social activity and not a high stakes tournament.

I'm not sure in what aspect you want the question answered but opinions like these could be a topic of conjecture. Also, I don't know if anyone here has ever witnessed one of my sessions and could be considered hearsay.

Whatever happens we all try to have fun nevertheless. I get frustrated when the DM has to look up all these little rules. It can't be all things to everyone.

 

[gamerprinter]

While I prefer to GM rather than play, the story/creation I prep would be a total failure with no enjoyment on my part if the players did not have a good time. I enjoy creating for an audience - my players. It requires both sides of the equation for me to have a good time. Otherwise why play at all?

 

[Dragon Sin-Camealot]

While I prefer to GM rather than play, the story/creation I prep would be a total failure with no enjoyment on my part if the players did not have a good time. I enjoy creating for an audience - my players. It requires both sides of the equation for me to have a good time. Otherwise why play at all?

Do you mean everyone should have fun? Keep in mind some of this is conjectural/opinionated.

There are some cases where the DM didn't enjoy it and had to slog through it. Some stories are only 'normal' to the players.

It's like baseball. If you knew where the ball would go after the batter hit it it wouldn't be any fun.

We know about the old and we also play for the possibility of something new.

 

[gamerprinter]

Do you mean everyone should have fun? Keep in mind some of this is conjectural/opinionated.

Of course. As hinted in my last post, I see a GM as a performance artist. The thrill of being a GM (in my mind) is entirely dependant on the successful entertainment of the the audience; the players. If the players are unhappy, then I the artist am disappointed and frustrated. I want to please 'me', but I cannot be pleased if the players are not pleased as well. Its a group dynamic, the pleasing of one and not the other cannot happen. All have to be pleased for a successful game.

There are some cases where the DM didn't enjoy it and had to slog through it. Some stories are only 'normal' to the players.

True in both cases. The road to a successful GM is a hard one. We 'performance artists' probably cannot always succeed. Its a goal, but one that at times is more trying than other times. As long as the game is 'normal' for the players, its not a failure. And you cannot have a constant high point throughout the game. Sometimes it takes a normal game to occur, which is built up to an exciting high point. Even action movies require some down time, to appreciate the overall quality of the great moments in the game.

Sometimes, yes, the GM is slogging through the adventure to get to what is supposed to be fun - there is no guarantee that your performance will always be at your best. Its a goal only.

It's like baseball. If you knew where the ball would go after the batter hit it it wouldn't be any fun.

We know about the old and we also play for the possibility of something new.

Of course. And unlike a play or a movie, the script isn't entirely written at the beginning. RPGs are an impromtu performance art. Not knowing how the other actors (players) will react is very much a part of the excitement created in a game session. If I knew where the player intended to take my encounter placed before them - it wouldn't be any fun.

GMing is a performance art that requires a performance audience to work as an enjoyable experience.