Forked Thread: DMs - No one cares how long you worked (was: Rant -- GM Control...)

[Arnwyn]

Somehow I doubt that you are crafting your campaign setting with no regard for how your players play.

And you'd be correct. However, the OP was unclear enough for me to make the statement I did.

It's not all black/white extremes that this thread - and the one it was forked from - make it out to be (as much as ENWorld loves that sort of nonsense). The matter is just how much of a say players get in crafting a campaign... and funnily enough - it'll be different for everyone.

No regard (for either side)? Some sort of creepy equal utopia? Or - more likely - something in between.

 

[maddman75]

The problem I have with that is that my players are just so unhelpful in finding out what they want to eat. They aren't helpful, they just say 'yeah that's fun', and when I ask 'so what do you want', they just want to 'ride out the adventure'. It's really hard to prepare a meal for someone when you don't know what they like.

Well, no, they aren't going to help you .

In all likelyhood you have some very social players. Getting together to hang out and game is the important thing, and playstyle is secondary to that. I'd try to make the game as accessible as possible, and have a very pro-active style. They aren't going to want to comb through a library to learn about a lost secret, they're going to want to defend the town from orcs, or kick in the door of the bad guy and show him what for.

Keep it simple, keep it exciting.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

i dm because i enjoy it, not because i want to put in work in exchange for someone's gratitude. Since i am dming because i want to, my players owe me no additional consideration.

That said, i consider it one of my responsibilities as a good dm to set a tone for the game and enforce it to some degree. That isn't me being a jerk or lording it over people -- it's something i do because i think it will make the game more fun for everyone.

This.

Also, I agree with maddman75's statement that nothing in the game world really exists until it interacts with the PC's. Canon for my campaigns is set only when I put forth the information in-game.

 

[Reynard]

The only thing I'm responding to here is the general "take the GM down a notch" attitude

Welcome to EN World.

 

[FireLance]

Agreed, but let me make a more general point.

On ENWorld, my impression is that there is generalized agreement that GMs need to cede more authority to players. The general undercurrent is that player contributions to a narrative are somehow purer and more worthy than GM contributions. As a consequence, we have post after post that admonishes GMs to consider things from the player's perspective, but rarely the other way around.

I think one of the reasons for this is that the DM role tends to attract the kind of person who needs to be reminded from time to time that he should see things from the other players' perspective.

 

[Mallus]

Welcome to EN World.

Oh please.

 

[I'm A Banana]

As per usual, I'm on board with everything maddman75 is on about.

Your campaign setting is not a delicate unique snowflake. If you're DMing in order to force others to enjoy your worldcraft, you're doing it for the wrong reasons, and you're not going to be satisfied unless you're lucky enough to find a group who specifically likes that (and that's a rare group indeed).

Don't have an ego about it. Very few people really care at all.

 

[architectofsleep]

Forked from: Rant -- GM Control, Taking it Too Far?



I really disagree with this attitude. I run games because I enjoy running them, simple as that. I don't expect nor do I deserve to control the game just because I did prep work. If you don't enjoy DMing, then let someone else do it. If no one enjoys it, play a board game or something. Or play a game someone does enjoy running.

The players should have an equal say in the nature, tone, and events in the game. I don't, and the people I play with don't show up for a game to have a DM show off his delicately crafted campaign setting. No one cares. They want to adventure, play out their character's issues and goals, and have some fun. If your setting enhances that, then good! If not, then abandon it.

But in no case should you lord over the other players because of your choice of how to spend your free time. 4e with a DDI subscription can require very little in the way of prep time.

Just my opinion.

I feel similarly (obviously ). When I GM, I really want the players to enjoy the setting. To that end, I do my level best not to constrain their creativity. Just as I appreciate it when they enjoy the little touches I put in, I enjoy the little touches they put in.

And as a player, I sometimes put hours upon hours into my characters, working on background, reading spells, researching animal companions, and figuring out how things (like wildshape, e.g.) are going to function so I don't slow down the game while I'm there. Granted, a GM always puts in more work, but to insinuate that the work a player puts in is somehow less valuable is the epitome of selfishness.

I might not go as far as saying that players should get equal input into the tone once it's established, but in the beginning, if everyone wants to play things a little bit light-hearted and the GM builds a dark and serious campaign, there's going to be friction for sure. Once the game begins, however, the GM should be prepared to let some things go and allow for the game to be a collaborative effort.

 

[FireLance]

I think it's fair to say that players do appreciate the effort that DMs put into preparing the game, BUT players will appreciate the effort more if the result is something they enjoy. If they aren't enjoying the game, they may be intellectually aware that the DM has worked hard, but they are unlikely to respond positively on an emotional level.

A DM may put more effort into preparing for a game, but it is part and parcel of being the DM. It may be over-idealistic of me to think so, but I've always believed that being placed in a position of responsibility (whether you are a parent, a boss, a political leader, or a DM) means that you should focus more on your responsibilities than your rights. A DM who thinks that his right to have a good time should take priority over his responsibility to ensure that his players are having a good time probably ought to re-consider whether he is actually able to handle the responsibilities of the role.

 

[Arnwyn]

A DM who thinks that his right to have a good time should take priority over his responsibility to ensure that his players are having a good time probably ought to re-consider whether he is actually able to handle the responsibilities of the role.

Take priority over his/her responsibility? Yeah, quite probably.

Take equal priority? Hmmm... Now friction is occurring, and things are a lot more grey (and is probably the majority of situations, AFAIC).

When push comes to shove (i.e. beyond compromise - which, we all agree, is the first solution), whose right to have a good time wins out? The DM? The players? The DM and the majority of players?