How do you determine a "Real Bad Dungeon Master"

[Andre]

Not to hijack the thread, but can someone explain to me exactly what Railroading means?

Railroading is deciding where the story ends before it begins.

Example: Star Wars.

For Episode VI, George Lucas admitted he needed Luke to go "beserk" and beat up Vader, but he just couldn't figure out why Luke would do such a stupid, un-Jedi thing. He finally came up with the silly scene where Vader threatens Leia, and Luke goes beserk...

In Episode III, we all know Anakin is going to turn to the Dark Side. But it was so contrived, it was almost ludicrous.

There are so many examples in the Star Wars movies of the action being forced to create a particular result. In effect, the plot drives the characters, rather than the characters driving the plot.

 

[Voldrath]

Railroading is deciding where the story ends before it begins.

Example: Star Wars.

For Episode VI, George Lucas admitted he needed Luke to go "beserk" and beat up Vader, but he just couldn't figure out why Luke would do such a stupid, un-Jedi thing. He finally came up with the silly scene where Vader threatens Leia, and Luke goes beserk...

In Episode III, we all know Anakin is going to turn to the Dark Side. But it was so contrived, it was almost ludicrous.

There are so many examples in the Star Wars movies of the action being forced to create a particular result. In effect, the plot drives the characters, rather than the characters driving the plot.

The plot... um ... i mean FORCE works in mysterious ways.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

In my experience, the qualities of a good DM fall into three categories: rules mastery, story mastery and table mastery.

That was a good post to read, thanks for the insights.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

LOL. I wonder how many folks on this board would pick up on that, for that matter...

Mary Sue - isn't that when an author injects a loved one into their story as a character? Very poor form.

 

[Goblyns Hoard]

Worst example of running a game I ever had the misfortune to be subjected to:

3 PCs in a Cyberpunk style game (can't remember what actual system). OK so we're probably a little low on the power front particularly as he liked to play fairly fatal sames. But instead of preparing a game for the power level of the party we're faced with a game where we're more or less forced to hire 2 DMPCs in order to even have a reasonable chance of success. And yes I'd seen one of them as a player in another game. But that wasn't the worst part.

So my gunslinger is talking to the NPC fixer... and one of the other player's characters is also talking to the guy (all of this is by phone). So instead of introducing the two characters and having us start working together the GM actively tries to keep us from meeting each other. C'mon man - the normal problem is how do you get this wierd group of people together in the same room and convince them to go adventure not how can I keep the PCs separate so that I'm just running three solo adventures in the same evening. That also wasn't the worst part.

The worst part was the GM decidimg half way through the game to go downstairs and spend 40 minutes on the phone to various people to try and convince them to go to a bar with him later that night. When he came back with zero success he played another hour or so and then disappeared to the phone again. By the time he'd come back from that time we'd left... and to my knowledge none of us ever saw him again.

 

[Hussar]

To me, if the player's actions were left unchecked, the DM would have perhaps lost control of the game - resulting in still being called a sucky DM. While I disagree with the DM's method of handling things, you can't just let the PCs run rampant. Left with (what I assume) was such a large amount of cash, the game would likely have derailed anyway. Unless stealing from jewel merchants was the whole point of that campaign.

So what you've got here is a player making bad decisions, compounded by a DM making bad decisions to try and keep the player in line. The DM knew there was a problem, but didn't apparently have the tools to deal with it properly. This game was going down one way or the other it seems...

I'm not sure I understand this. The player is playing a thief and wants to rob something... and that's a bad decision? Umm, isn't robbing someone pretty much exactly what a thief should be doing? Isn't the sign of a good DM being able to roll with the punches the players throw at you and sort out the problems? Sure, we would have had a fair bit of cash all at once. However, there are a number of things that could be done to sort the problem:

1. The gems and jewelry are hot, how do we dispose of them?
2. If we do dispose of them, a fence is likely only going to give us about 10% of value - that solves the money problem right there.
3. We could get caught.
4. The jewel merchant could reappear sometime later with the group of mooks he's hired to get his gems back.

And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure that people could come up with even better ideas than that.

Me, I'd be doing backflips if my players ever took this much initiative in my campaign. I'd absolutely love it. I've seen far too many players passively sit back and wait for the next hook to be dangled in front of their rubbery fish lips. To squash a player's plans like that is just so incredibly insulting. That the player A) cared enough about the game to actually try something on his own and B) was interested enough to invest a great deal of time and effort into his actions shows how seriously this player took the game. To have his plans piddled all over because the DM couldn't adapt her rock solid plotline to incorporate this is just sad. And, really, how can I blame other players for a lack of initiative when there are DM's out there who will take a huge dump in the middle of their plans whenever they stray from the script?

 

[Gnarlo]

Animated vise.

Preferably one that has a habit of going "AWOOOOWAwwwwooowawoooo" and "nyuck nyuck nyuck"

 

[rushlight]

I'm not sure I understand this. The player is playing a thief and wants to rob something... and that's a bad decision? Umm, isn't robbing someone pretty much exactly what a thief should be doing? Isn't the sign of a good DM being able to roll with the punches the players throw at you and sort out the problems? Sure, we would have had a fair bit of cash all at once. However, there are a number of things that could be done to sort the problem:

1. The gems and jewelry are hot, how do we dispose of them?
2. If we do dispose of them, a fence is likely only going to give us about 10% of value - that solves the money problem right there.
3. We could get caught.
4. The jewel merchant could reappear sometime later with the group of mooks he's hired to get his gems back.

And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure that people could come up with even better ideas than that.

Me, I'd be doing backflips if my players ever took this much initiative in my campaign. I'd absolutely love it. I've seen far too many players passively sit back and wait for the next hook to be dangled in front of their rubbery fish lips. To squash a player's plans like that is just so incredibly insulting. That the player A) cared enough about the game to actually try something on his own and B) was interested enough to invest a great deal of time and effort into his actions shows how seriously this player took the game. To have his plans piddled all over because the DM couldn't adapt her rock solid plotline to incorporate this is just sad. And, really, how can I blame other players for a lack of initiative when there are DM's out there who will take a huge dump in the middle of their plans whenever they stray from the script?

Well, it all depends on context. Was the player looking to start an exciting storyline - or was he looking to abuse a befuddled DM into unloading piles of cash for the player's private amusement? It's one thing if the player says, "I'd like to be a serious burgler. DM, that's the story path I'm taking Bob the thief down!" It's another if he says, "Well, the DM didn't describe that jewel guy as being too tough. I think I can make a several thousand GPs even though I'm only level 2! Then I can buy l33t stuff!"

In the former, I'd relish the chance to build a story. In the latter, I'd knock the player on the head and send him home. Was the player trying to build a story, or was he trying to abuse the DM and his game?

And to be sure, whatever course of action you took to deal with the attempt to run off with such a large horde of gold, the player in question - if he's like example 2 above - will cry foul unless he's got a big number with lots of zeros next to the GP line. All of the examples above can be considered "railroading" or whatever term you prefer. Sure, they are more plausable than "Well, the vendor left an hour before you made your move!" - but they all have the same effect. "No stealy-da-gold for you looter-boy!"

 

[Storm Raven]

And to be sure, whatever course of action you took to deal with the attempt to run off with such a large horde of gold, the player in question - if he's like example 2 above - will cry foul unless he's got a big number with lots of zeros next to the GP line. All of the examples above can be considered "railroading" or whatever term you prefer. Sure, they are more plausable than "Well, the vendor left an hour before you made your move!" - but they all have the same effect. "No stealy-da-gold for you looter-boy!"

None of the examples are "railroading". They are the reasonable consequences of the PCs actions. They are fairly predictable responses of NPCs to activity initiated by the player. That is the antithesis of "railroading".

 

[Gentlegamer]

Oh, so many kinds...
Here's my rogue's gallery of bad DMs, presented as archetypes culled from 25 years of play:

I'm-not-only-the-DM, I'm-also-a-Player: His NPCs are actually pet characters who never seem to fail their saves, have special powers not available to the PCs, and use the actual PCs as extras in their own epic stories, which the players have to watch passively from the sidelines. Often displays the traits of the Railroad Tycoon, too (see below)
Warning Signs: Makes disclaimer that he doesn't favor his NPC party members; never shows you their dice rolls; talks at length about what his pet characters are doing, at the expense of the PCs' screen time.

Railroad Tycoon: She has the plot already figured out, and you're just here to admire it. Please keep your hands in your pockets as this DM takes you on a no-stops tour of the pre-determined story line. Also known as Look but Don't Touch.
Warning Signs: Often tells you what your character is doing or thinking; gives strong hints for or against certain courses of action; throws extra monsters at you when you win a fight you're not "supposed to" win.

It May be an Imaginary Universe, but it's all Mine: He may be a powerless loser in real life, but when he puts up his DM's screen, he owns you, brother. Your PC will be subject to every degradation and humiliation he can think of at the hands of his super-powerful NPC villains. How many times must he achieve a TPK before you realize that your primitive dice are useless against him? Can't understand why he can't keep players interested, because after all, he presents them with such challenging scenarios.
Warning Signs: Tolerates no questioning about his judgements, even in after-session discussions

And then Everyone was rescued, by, let's say, Moe: Her campaign is not a persistant world, just persistently confusing. Whimsical does not begin to describe her breezy attitude towards continuity. You can't depend on any story element, NPC, or location to be the same from week to week; she never writes anything down, or remembers significant events from the last game session.
Warning Signs: Relies on players to recap last session; pleads "authorial license" when called to account for contradictory story elements.

Excellent Rogues Gallery, it fits my experiences, too.