GM Confessional

[Musing Mage]

I don't balance any encounters.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not putting Ancient Dragons on the random encounter table or anything like that. But I'm not carefully trying to dial in a fixed "difficulty" to match the party's ever-changing level/resources, either. I put monsters on the map where they make the most sense, in numbers that make the most sense. I arm them with equipment that makes sense to the campaign setting, and then trust the players to know when they are in over their heads.

I informed the players at Session Zero that encounters will not be balanced to their characters, and that a combat victory is not always guaranteed. They thought I was bluffing until I showed them the rules for Escape and Pursuit that we're going to use for fleeing combat.

That's not a sin! That's how it should be! The Sin is that you think it's a sin!

 

[Musing Mage]

I tend to stretch myself too thin, running too many games across multiple systems... and my ability to maintain the games begins to unravel as I slowly burn out... missing details, making errors, mixing up rulesets etc.

 

[James Gasik]

What I tend to do is, I create "optional" encounters with powerful creatures. I'll make sure the party is not surprised, and when they see it, they can easily avoid it. If they go to tackle it anyways- well, it'll be worth their while, because I'm not super evil, but if they get beat to hell, I'll be like "hey, nobody said you had to fight it".

Somehow, I still get the stink eye.

 

[payn]

What I tend to do is, I create "optional" encounters with powerful creatures. I'll make sure the party is not surprised, and when they see it, they can easily avoid it. If they go to tackle it anyways- well, it'll be worth their while, because I'm not super evil, but if they get beat to hell, I'll be like "hey, nobody said you had to fight it".

Somehow, I still get the stink eye.

Sign posting can be real difficult.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

The number of games I've started but fell into disrepair over all my years is not insignificant. Sometimes it's not worth the effort. Sometimes, you have to start over to rebuild and learn from mistakes.*

*Tangentially, this is one of the things that makes me skeptical whenever I heard about 30-40 year long campaigns. I think it helps people develop as players and GMs to start over, and if you're just playing the same thing this whole time, you might miss growth opportunities. I try to imagine still running the same game as when I started playing D&D, and it means I likely never would have tried all the things that would become pivotal later on in my growth as a GM and player.

I've got a bad tendency to end campaigns what can only reasonably be called prematurely because of either boredom or having eroded ability to deal with systemic issues. Neither are virtues. I'm not as bad as some GMs I know, but if I let myself go, I could get as bad.

 

[Cruentus]

I have a tendency to hold campaign/adventure info too close to the chest. I always hope my players will talk to NPC's, ask questions, make connections between things, etc., and so I've been called "stingy" with my info. I'm working on it, but I also don't want to have to telegraph everything, or remind them of everything...

 

[jdrakeh]

I hate doing "funny voices" when I GM.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Burnout.

I lose interest or get overwhelmed and just end a campaign, often leaving plot threads dangling forever. Sometimes just a session or two in.

My track record for actually bringing campaigns or even single adventures to a satisfying conclusion is abysmal.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I have a tendency to hold campaign/adventure info too close to the chest. I always hope my players will talk to NPC's, ask questions, make connections between things, etc., and so I've been called "stingy" with my info. I'm working on it, but I also don't want to have to telegraph everything, or remind them of everything...

This is something I've been working on for a long time, and although I still struggle with it at times, I think I've mostly got a handle on it.

I heard something that helped me; "a secret kept is never as interesting as a secret shared."

I give information out regularly and freely. Even when it comes to esoteric information and so on, I tend to relinquish that far easier than I used to. I don't want the game to be about the PCs not knowing something, I want it to be about what they do with the information when they have it.

 

[RivetGeekWil]

I suck at voices for NPCs.

Also, and I'm not sure this is a fault, but I don't like it if the players seem stuck and will help them work through the situation. I don't give them the answer (often, I don't actually have an answer, and am working through it with them as much as helping them).

I also don't care about "metagaming", at all, and am likely much unfun for competitive players, immersionists, and simulationists.