Dual DMs?

[S.Bense]

Anyone have any experience, pros, cons, or thoughts in general to share concerning two (or more I suppose) DM's for a campaign? How were the duties seperated, etc.?

A buddy of mine and I are considering dual-DM'ing a campaign for about 8 or so players, and are unsure how practical the approach is.

 

[Psion]

Well, if it's anything like processors, it really only helps if you have a multi-threaded adventure, but it is occasionally useful if you have a math co-GM.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Tried it. Hated it. At the time I had a very low-magic outlook (this was a Shadowrun game) and he had a very high-magic outlook. We kept ruining each others ideas.

The only time I've seen it work was in a combat-heavy game with a large number of bad guys. The second DM ran the battlemat and a couple of the monsters. It worked well. But really, we were about one step away from wargaming at that point. Nothing wrong with that of course, but something to keep in mind.

 

[SinisterMinister]

I think the only way to make it work is not to have co-DMs, but a DM and and an assistant DM.

The main DM is responsible for the story arc and other big picture stuff, while the assistant DM keeps track of NPC stats during combat, etc.

The other thing an assistant DM could do would be to voice certain NPCs, but the two of them would have to ave done a lot of planning beforehand.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

I tried it once a long time ago... It went alright, but it wasn't something we kept doing. We only did it because the party was split up on different planes, once they got back together, we went back to 1 DM.

 

[domino]

Anyone have any experience, pros, cons, or thoughts in general to share concerning two (or more I suppose) DM's for a campaign?

I tried it once, but accuracy per DM went down the toilet.

 

[Galethorn]

Never tried two DMs at once, but...

I have done a whole Star Wars campaign (very successfully I might add) with two GMs, me and one other guy.

You see, we both have very similar tastes, and we both understood the rules and setting really well, but we both wanted to play in the campaign...so we'd rotate for each adventure; I'd do one, and he'd play, then he'd do one and I'd play. Overall, it worked out really well, and we're gonna start an occasional fantasy campaign in that same format in the near future.

However, one problem I see is that both GMs need to know where the other one wants to take the story, which means a certain inability to have any surprises/switcharounds that are too big, but the small stuff seems to work fine.

 

[Herobizkit]

I've tried multiple DM's before. It works well, IF the DM's can agree on how much treasure/magic should be given out and IF the DM's agree to have some creative leniency with one another's creations.

By this, I mean that if one DM creates a town with stuff in it, the other DM should also have the same town with the same stuff when HE DM's.

Usually it's very bad to kill off other DM's NPCs without their permission.

If the DM is running his PC as an NPC when he DM's, it's up to the players to make sure the DM does not favour his PC over the rest of the group.

With multiple DM's, it is everyone's job to be sure the game is run fairly.

 

[mr_outsidevoice]

I have tried it in the past. It worked well enough then, but things really weren't coherant and unified except for the characters were the same.

If you try it, you will have to communicate strongly with your partner. Decide on shared house rules, and try to be consistent on interpretations of the rules. Have strong outlines on the stories being run.

You can run splitting the party stories better, and two people playing NPC's can be a good thing.

Combats can be more efficient with another body helping keep track of things like spell durations, enviromental factors, Tactics, and random events.

Having someone looking up a rule while you continue to run other aspects of the game can also help keep things smooth.

 

[Truth Seeker]

I am currently in the process of running an Eberron campiagn, with another DM.

It happened on a fluke, when Eberron was first released, we did a demo for it. The other Dm was impressed with it *the session*, and ask me to run side by side with it. The demo later grew as a campiagn down the road.

So far, it works well, cause we both understand the importance of one rule. The players' enjoyment comes first. And second, the zaniness that come from the two of us, works well, and we can bounce an improv situation of each other that quickly and work into the game.

And if by chance, if one of us is out for some reason, the game will not be held up or cancelled on short notice, cause there is a part missing.

And mostly, if there is no ego involved, the sessions can be run with the miminal fuss, and mostly there must be an understanding. That each DM there, is not there, to showboat who is greater in storytelling or whatever else. If there is general path being followed, and whatever steps are being done to get there, is decent and proper, as long both DMs' are aware of it, in general.

Communication is the very important number one factor, in having a great and successful dual-Dming stint. If there is no talking between gamemasters, before the game, during the game and after.

Don't bother joining up.

And oh, one more thing, Dual-Dming is usually done, when your gaming party is in the double digits...doing for less than that catergory number...one will suffice.

Or, as someone else noted, a party split will have the use for a dual-Dming, only if the situation is truly warranted.

But that depends upon many factors...

Almost forgot, we be hitting one year mark soon in doing this.