GMs: When Is Enough Enough?

[payn]

I don't know. I think sometimes you can prep everything perfect but, you never really know how a game plays until you actually play it.

I always wanted to run Delta Green (the newest edition) but when I got a chance SHEESH what a trash boring system that was.

Now it was the opposite with Champions Complete: I thought it would be brain damage but, I actually enjoyed it a lot more than I imagined.

All totally fair, however, is the best way to find out if you like a system or not is to launch a long campaign?

 

[dragoner]

Running a game? I'll know beforehand, nearly 40 years of experience count for something.

 

[Theory of Games]

Not exactly- I'd prefer to be running DCC, but DnD5e is what my players prefer and I like my players enough to keep running DnD5e.

You are a saint. I normally run what I want BUT sometimes I'll check with players if I have a few options

Not that sort of prep. I create what I call a loose-weave campaign: I put PCs in situations, and cover the likeliest outcomes, but stay ready for surprises.

As a GM, I generally have no agenda other than to see it play out. Wearing the hat of the villains, I have a clear goal and imposed personality traits/resource boundaries.

I try not to change systems much. Its not always possible, though.

Oh I always have an agenda when I run games: Slam the PCs! I realized decades ago that the harder I make the campaign, the more the players like it. Many players want a challenge, not a cakewalk IME

Everybody changes systems, but doing it after you start a campaign is different, yeah.

I love running a long sandbox campaign and see where it goes. I react to the players and let them drive. It's my world, but i let them pick if they want to help the rebels or the crown and not knowing where it will go keeps it fresh and exciting.

Like other said above pick what you want to run and how you want to run it and don't worry about the players. Im not letting a dragonborn in my campaign so if that's a deal breaker sorry.

Agreed on campaigns, but "long" is very subjective. If I can squeeze it all into 8-12 months, that's a win. The key is a fast pace IME.

Agreed also on Dragonborn. Never let one in a game I ran. Same with Monks. I run a lot of superhero ttrpgs and the PCs can be ridiculous on the power level, but I try to say yes unless the PC just breaks the game.

So my buddy and I switch off being DM. He likes long-running campaigns (our current B/X-OSE game is on session 52), but every 6-8 months either real life gets in the way for him or he gets burned out, then I jump in. I prefer shorter campaigns (8-12 sessions, but I've run 20-22 sessions as well) and I like to try out new systems or genres.

When I run a new game, we initially just do one session first, and then discuss if it is working for us. If we like it, we generally commit.

I wish I had a co-GM like that. Most players refuse to run anything except one character. Is that selfish? IMO you're doing it right by running one session then deciding if everything works. I'm trying that

Bingo. For my Rogue Trader game, we loved the setting, we thought the premise sounded really fun, but once we started playing it we came to dislike the rules. More recently, I tried running Cyberpunk Red for my group and we quickly came to dislike the system. Not just the system, but the setting itself. Sometimes you don't know until you try.

Very well said

All totally fair, however, is the best way to find out if you like a system or not is to launch a long campaign?

I don't think you should, but I don't run long campaigns. And I GM online 100% now so after Session 0 and Character Creation if I don't get things going at a good pace, I'll lose players. That and if I stop after a month and assess the system, I can lose players. Any pause online can cause players to stray so I have to assess a new system on-the-fly. It's just the nature of the beast

Running a game? I'll know beforehand, nearly 40 years of experience count for something.

Even with a new system?

 

[dragoner]

Even with a new system?

It has to have something to make me want to play it. I do try new stuff, mostly as player, or just run it knowing that it is not going to hit.

 

[Theory of Games]

It has to have something to make me want to play it. I do try new stuff, mostly as player, or just run it knowing that it is not going to hit.

I'm the same way. When I ran Shadowdark I knew it was a one-time thing before I started.

Right now I'm gearing up for another superhero campaign but I have two systems I'm debating: Champions Complete or GURPS Supers. The debate made me start this thread because I want to make sure I have the right system. The two systems are a lot alike (heavy SIM, point-buy) but Champions has a level of stat-track that can annoy me. I don't want to get months into the campaign and change my mind so this will be a long debate

 

[dragoner]

I'm the same way. When I ran Shadowdark I knew it was a one-time thing before I started.

Right now I'm gearing up for another superhero campaign but I have two systems I'm debating: Champions Complete or GURPS Supers. The debate made me start this thread because I want to make sure I have the right system. The two systems are a lot alike (heavy SIM, point-buy) but Champions has a level of stat-track that can annoy me. I don't want to get months into the campaign and change my mind so this will be a long debate

For us, it's usually we see something at the store, and someone is like "let's go" and we'll try it out. A break in a regular long running game is good. I know myself, and the group so that I know what is going to work, how things are gonna go.

 

[Theory of Games]

For us, it's usually we see something at the store, and someone is like "let's go" and we'll try it out. A break in a regular long running game is good. I know myself, and the group so that I know what is going to work, how things are gonna go.

That's good having a regular group. I've been running games for different groups ever since I first became a DM (high school). But I moved around a lot too. I think I might get bored with the same group actually, but I don't know. You know what the players want from a game due to experience. For me, it's almost a micro-game trying to figure out the playstyle of new players. What sucks is figuring out what the players want but then realizing I don't like the system we're using