Do you know you're a bad GM?

[Rel]

Wow. I wish I were a unit of measure... I wonder how I'd rank on the Rel scale.

Come to one of our Game Days and we'll give you an official ranking.

In an attempt to address the actual topic of the thread more seriously, I will say that, not so long ago, I was an "ok" GM. Becoming a member of ENW put me on the path of becoming much, much better at it.

I think there is a lot of wisdom to be gleaned simply from reading the threads here. I also think that understanding who your players are and what their preferences are, in a systematic and mutual way, helps more than anything else. For those purposes I HIGHLY recommend reading either Robin Laws "Laws of Good Gamemastering" or else the chapter on Player Types from the 3.5 DMG II (also written by Laws). The concepts therein gave me a tremendous tool for making the game fun for specific players and the group as a whole.

Finally, I think one thing that all GMs could benefit from is playing games with a broad spectrum of other GMs. Thanks to the NC Game Days and going to GenCon I've gotten the chance to play with a huge variety of GMs over the last 5 years or so. From a (very) few of them I've learned things not to do. And from a lot of them I've picked up some techniques that are simply brilliant. I'll give you two quick examples:

At one of the NC Game Days, I watched Piratecat run a Dread game. This was in a room with multiple game tables at it but they were spaced far enough from each other that people could easily move around. I watched as he would walk all the way around the table and get behind some of the players as the game unfolded. Having somebody standing behind you, especially in a game about horror, is CREEPY. Especially when they do voices and sound effects as well as PC does. It kept people very on edge and focused and I completely stole this technique for one of the Sky Galleons of Mars games that I ran that had a "explore the ghost ship" section in it. Worked like a charm.

The Universe runs about as awesome a Mutants & Masterminds game as you're ever likely to play (he and PC are about tied I'd say). One thing that TU often does is have multiple battlemats running at the same time. In a superheroes game, some of the PC's (and bad guys) have movement powers so huge that they can cover vast distances in even a single round. Rather than try to constrain this, TU just runs with it and lets there be two encounters going at the same time. Sometimes a PC can even be in one location on one round and another on the following round. It allows for very interesting fights and I'd recommend the technique to any M&M GM.

So there you go. I could cite numerous other examples but my point is simply that, if you recognize some shortcomings in your GMing style, there is not need to give up. Read threads here and try new things. And, above all, play. You can learn more in a single 4-hour slot at a Con or Game Day than in reading pages and pages of threads here.

 

[The_Gneech]

I've been told I was "awesome," but it was by someone known to engage in hyperbole so I take it with a grain of salt.

-The Gneech

 

[Joshua Randall]

As Socrates said, "the highest form of excellence is to question oneself and others."

It's highly useful to self critique you DMing, as long as you don't take it too far. If you're running a game and your players are having fun, then you're doing it right!

However, DMing encompasses so many different types of activities that it is quite difficult to be good at all of them.

If you want to get better at something, do it! If the game you're DMing doesn't support or encourage a skill you lack, use another system. (Although this can be hard if your players don't want to try another system.)

Finally, since the OP asked, here's what I think about my own DMing:

* I'm good at advance preparation. I'm very organized.
* I'm good at making handouts, battle maps, and other "stuff" that goes on the table.

* I'm decent at thinking on my feet when the player do something unexpected.

* I'm bad at play-acting. All my in-character NPC voices end up sounding the same, all my NPCs have the same mannerisms, etc.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I know my players enjoy my games, and that's good enough for me.

I know about my biggest DM failing, but I can't see to do anything about it. I can't, for the life of me, stay interested in my own campaigns for more than a few adventures, less if there's a long gap between two of them. My players have called me on it several times, sometimes harshly.

AR

 

[jeffh]

I am well aware that my NPCs, with rare exceptions, could be a lot more lively, and that I am not always as well-prepared as would be ideal (though I've gotten much better at improvising as time goes on).

I think I say "yes" and "no" to players in about the right proportion but I constantly worry both about being too controlling and about being too liberal (having received a steady stream of both sorts of complaint - from the same player! - in some games from several years ago; but then, most of the other players regarded that player as the main problem there, and anything I was doing wrong - other than not keep him on a sufficiently short leash - a distant second).

And sometimes the players seem to find and process every clue correctly and still get caught in session-long decision paralysis. That seems to be player-generated, a case of a couple of people being both analytical to a fault and highly persuasive, but I always wonder what I might be contributing to the problem when that happens. (Then again, as least they're prepared to put that level of thought into the game in the first place; I know GMs who would kill somebody to have that "problem".)

If it weren't the fact that my old players basically chain me to a desk and force me to run games every time I go back to Winnipeg, I'd consider myself to be somewhere in the middle of the pack with quite a lot to learn. But apparently they think I'm pretty darn good.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Let me think...

My worst attributes as a DM:
Control - In another life I played/ran Storytelling games and developed a taste for in depth character background and development. As a DM I have a habit of insisting the same from my players. I have recently come to realise that not all players are interested in that level of detail. In trying to draw a "deep" character out of a player I can end up taking control of the PC's background. When that happens it kinda begins to cease being the Player's character and becomes one of my NPCs.

Fickle - I can get bored with a game REAL quick. I'm always thinking down the road about games that I'd like to play/run. Sometimes I get so excited about playing a new game that it detracts from my enjoyment of the current game. If I am running a game I'll sometimes want to ditch the one I am currently running and start up the new one. If I am playing I'll pitch the new game to my group and if they aren't receptive I'll start looking for a group that is interested in the game I want to play. This is probably my #1 worst flaw and I have to brace myself against it at times to force myself to carry a game to conclusion.

My Good Point:
Involvement - I have in the past been able to get players to reach new levels of roleplaying. Something as simple as asking them to stand while roleplaying (I also stand and take the part of whatever NPC they are interacting with) works wonders. The dice and character sheets kinda fall by the wayside and that is when I really feel like I am in "The Zone". I have gotten the best feedback from my players when I can get them to that level of involvement.

 

[Nebulous]

I can recognize some of my strengths and weakness, but certainly not all of them.

I'm great at making props for the adventure, whether battle maps or handouts, etc. I'm great at creating custom soundtracks and sfx for our games and i spend a large amount of time working on that.

I'm not always so good at handling NPCs voices and mannerisms, and i'm pretty much crap at creating in-depth plots with deep character background interaction and political intrigue.

However, I would say that what one person considers a "Good" DM or Player could easily be a "Bad" DM or Player to someone else.

 

[Umbran]

Even if we leave out strengths and weaknesses for a moment, there's a matter of style. Every GM has personal style, and that style won't work for everyone, and will come across to one player s "bad GM", even if everyone else in the group loves the GM's work. Much as two people can love a book, and a third despise it. You can't please everyone.

For example - Adult or mature themes in a game. Some GMs use them a lot, others don't. And one person's gratuitous sex and gore is another's delightful afternoon.

But, even on the things that lots of folks consider generally applicable GM skills, strengths, and weaknesses - sure, I have some of each. I try to be aware of the ones that matter for my group.

For example - I am not an aggressive scheduler, and that's a problem for my group made of people over 30, some of whom have kids and all of whom have other hobbies and activities on the weekends.

 

[messy]

yes, i'm a bad dm, and i know it.

just don't tell my g/f, cos she's a newbie player and doesn't realize how bad i am.

messy

 

[Irda Ranger]

Self critique is useful. Player critique is better. I always ask for feedback.

I'm not a bad DM, I'm a "continually improving" one. Ask for feedback, and always say "Thank you." If one player says something that's unfair the others usually call him on it without you having to say anything. Nods around the table just means you accept it.

The most important thing to realize is that you (the DM) don't know what the players want from a DM until you ask them. You can guess, but you can't know. And the quality of a DM is "Does he deliver the experience the players are looking for?". There's no competing Platonic Ideal. That's just a DM projecting his own preferences.