GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[prabe]

That doesn't tell me why you can't ask the players before you begin those months of work.

Are you actually investing that amount of time and energy before you know who is going to play the thing? If so... you must have way more spare time than I do.

Can't speak for anyone else, but if you're the Forever GM, and you have (or believe you have) the players' trust, you might work that way. You might see what kind/s of campaign interest the players before you start--it seems like a good idea to me--but in some groups it might be superfluous.

 

[Radaceus]

My world, my rules. Deal with it, and enjoy!

Playing an RPG is about having fun, its about participating in the game, it is as much the players obligation as it is the GMs to make that happen. As well as, there is an unspoken contract ( or there should be, that was the deal way back when, it may have been waivered since...) between the PCs and the GM- that the GM will be unbiased and fair, and the players will accept his/her rulings.

 

[Umbran]

Can't speak for anyone else, but if you're the Forever GM, and you have (or believe you have) the players' trust, you might work that way. You might see what kind/s of campaign interest the players before you start--it seems like a good idea to me--but in some groups it might be superfluous.

Yes, but if this was the case, they players are unlikely to be rejecting your offering, so wouldn't fit the scenario the thread's about.

But, as you note - if you are the Forever GM, so that the players are right there, why not ask?

I mean, if you are cooking dinner for your spouse, you probably ask if they're okay with the plan before you put heat to a pan, right? And that's only talking about prepping one meal. But for months of work, you don't ask?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Why in Gygax's name are you doing months of work before getting buy-in from the players?

As someone who has done this to his regret (twice!), usually because past indications have been that it'd be acceptable and you've either misjudged or someone's taste has changed and you haven't known it. Its entirely possible you've also done it when time presented for use in an indefinite future point when you couldn't even be sure what player group composition you'd have.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That doesn't tell me why you can't ask the players before you begin those months of work.

Are you actually investing that amount of time and energy before you know who is going to play the thing? If so... you must have way more spare time than I do.

See my comment above. In my case, it was exactly the opposite, that I did it when I happen to have a period of more spare time than usual, well before it was going to be a thing.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Why in Gygax's name are you doing months of work before getting buy-in from the players?

I GM what I want to GM. If the players aren't interested, they don't have to play.

I've never had any problems filling a table.

 

[aramis erak]

That doesn't tell me why you can't ask the players before you begin those months of work.

Are you actually investing that amount of time and energy before you know who is going to play the thing? If so... you must have way more spare time than I do.

While not the intended, I've also done that.

Recently even. I've prepped for 4 systems recently - but am using 2 of them.
Prepped: Stargate, Talisman Adventures, Cortex Prime, and Twilight 2000.
I've got some players for EACH of those, but only Stargate and Talisman are hitting the table. Both groups want me to run Pendragon again... but I'm not ready for Pendragon - but if my players decide as a group to go to it, I can be ready in a week. 3 Weeks if they insist on a different edition than 4th.

My friday group has asked for Star Wars, Star Trek (but not Modiphius'), or Firefly... But I think Talisman for them is more suitable for me to put adventures out there. When

My sunday group is playing Stargate

Vaesen is going away not because I don't like it, but because I'm not comfortable running it with my own adventures (and the 4th adventure in the book just fails to capture me). My friday group is not prone to subtlety. So, we finish the adventure, and move on to Talisman.

Stargate is limited run. I've an end point, after which I plan to migrate the sunday group to their choice of T2K4, Pendragon, Talisman, or a homebrew in Cortext Prime, or, just maybe, Burning Empires.

Some of my prep is done on each of those. None of them is quite ready besides Talisman.

 

[MNblockhead]

This is also why it’s a good reason as a DM to not put weeks into fleshing out a campaign before you’ve even run the idea by the players yet. The more pre-work you’ve done, the more a compromise feels like a capitulation.

Except for the lonely fun of building settings.

Coming up with campaign ideas and fleshing out story lines, major NPCs, etc. is enjoyable to me. I have some campaigns I have been tinkering with for years that I've not found an opportunity to run yet. It is like writing fiction for some. It can still be enjoyable to write stories even if you never publish them.

I find that if I want to run a tightly restricted game of D&D, it is best to run as a mini campaign. Increasingly, I enjoy running one-shots and short campaigns so that I hit a wider variety of settings and play with a wider variety of concepts. If one really grabs the group, it can be turned into a longer campaign.

 

[MNblockhead]

Why in Gygax's name are you doing months of work before getting buy-in from the players?

Maybe because some of us enjoy writing campaigns.

There is nothing wrong with writing a campaign and seeing if you can find players who want to play in it. You don't have to have the players before you start working on the campaign.

How is this any different than spending $20-50 on an adventure book? Or a new game for that matter. I don't ask my current players to vet my game purchases.

I write or buy what interests me and see if I can find enough players to play the game.

In my regular play group, I have one player who doesn't like sci fi games. When I run games of The Expanse or Paranoia, he doesn't play those games. I don't forego running them because one player doesn't like them.

For our main monthly game it is different. As a campaign gets close to wrapping up, I start throwing out ideas for the next campaign and we agree as a group. For my monthly game, the group of people are more important to me than the game being run.

 

[Aldarc]

Baloney. D&D is no less D&D just because it uses a subset of PC races, classes, and monsters.

So would you argue then that Adventures in Middle Earth is Dungeons & Dragons?