How I like to be 'DMd'

[DaveMage]

I like a DM whose main goal is fun challenges.

I also like my character to advance/gain xp relatively quickly. (This is mainly because I don't get to play as often as I want. If I was able to play more often, then a slower pace would be fine.)

Otherwise, I'm not picky. I like DMs who prefer story over combat as much as I like DMs who hate story and love combat.

At this point in my life, though, I just love the rare times we actually get to play.

 

[demonpunk]

I primarily DM, but I love to play with a DM I like. Here's what I expect:

1) Know the rules. Stick to them mostly, and be clear on your house rules.

2) Keep the session moving. This applies to rules rulings and the pace of the adventure.

3) I like a detailed world. If you have a homebrew, answer my questions. If its prepackaged, know the world.

4) Enjoy D&D. My favorite thing to do after a session is to sit around and talk about D&D for awhile.

 

[ForceUser]

I primarily DM, but I love to play with a DM I like. Here's what I expect:

1) Know the rules. Stick to them mostly, and be clear on your house rules.

2) Keep the session moving. This applies to rules rulings and the pace of the adventure.

3) I like a detailed world. If you have a homebrew, answer my questions. If its prepackaged, know the world.

4) Enjoy D&D. My favorite thing to do after a session is to sit around and talk about D&D for awhile.

I can't echo this enough, especially #2. There's nothing that kills my interest faster than a session getting bogged down in rulebooks, nitpicking, and idle chatter. It is the DM's responsibility to take control of the ebb and flow of the game, and to make the adventure feel, well, adventurous.

 

[Arnwyn]

Of course, I also DM my players in much the way I want to be DMd (this hardly requires an insight bonus to realise).

How do you prefer to be DM'd ?

Is it the same or different to your preferred style of DMing ?

I would like to be DMed exactly how I currently DM. (And, as you mention, that would be pretty obvious.)

BUT - I want precedents set, I want a new formal structure that can be relied on to replace the RAW formal structure.

But I don't want a strict DM!

At first blush, I find your statements to be contradictory (and maybe a little painful for the unfortunate DM).

I know for myself, I prefer a strict DM. I consider it a game, first and foremost, and thus I expect the rules to be followed. Only when it is painfully and blatantly obvious that the rules don't fit do I care for the breaking of them (and if you have to question whether that's true, then it's not). Now, what I consider a "rule" as opposed to a "guideline" is something else altogether.

 

[molonel]

Both of my DMs have now invoked this rule:

Don't bring anything broken into the game. You know what "broken" means. If you have a question about an item, a spell, a prestige class or whatever, ask me. If you knowingly bring something is broken into the game, I will remove it. The same goes on the DM side of the screen, too. If something I use turns out to be broken, and the players point out that it's broken, I will remove it, too.

Beyond that, I like to know in advance what house rules are in play. House rules are fine. I prefer them, in fact. But house rules on the fly, invoked too often, aren't fun.

 

[Mercule]

1) Know the rules. Stick to them mostly, and be clear on your house rules.

Oy! The longer I play, the more convinced I am that house rules can be the bane of a good game. So long as they are clearly enumerated and spelled out, it's no big deal. And, sometimes, you need to houserule for flavor. But having a situation where there's any real ambiguity is a sure way to gum things up and confuse people.

I'm very much wishing that my current game stayed closer to the RAW. And, in the future I'll not be house-ruling unless there is a clear need to change something. If the RAW is able to even get you close to the feel you want, leave it alone.

Just for the record, I prefer all my house rules and variants, but it's rather difficult for me to find the time to make them all available to everyone. If a couple of players grabbed "Unearthed Arcana", that'd really help, though. Oh, and Spirit Shaman sucks.

 

[sniffles]

I agree with the majority of items most posters have listed, such as being firm and knowing the rules. All of the GMs I play with are good, know the rules, and are generally fun to play under. Two issues have come up recently, though:

Try to give every PC a moment in the spotlight. Don't let one PC outshine the rest, no matter how much you may like that character (or that character's player).

Recognize that what you enjoy out of the game may not be what the players enjoy (i.e. roleplay vs. combat, puzzles, dungeon crawling, etc.), and try to adjust your style accordingly so everyone gets some of what they prefer.

I also have a bit of an issue with GMs who GM quite differently than the way they play. I have a friend who as GM is very much a RAW type, while as player he loves to try out alternative rules (and frequently suggests them). I find it kind of annoying that in his campaign we don't get to enjoy any of those goodies.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I prefer:

1) RAW by default
2) Minimal houserules
3) A campaign theme
4) Clear indication of what is & what is not campaign appropriate
5) Good pacing
6) Some Plot resolution
7) Alternate plot threads to be exposed
8) Consequences, good & bad, expected & unexpected
9) Related to above, occasional lucky breaks
10) Knowledgeable dm with a backbone & understanding
11) Good keen fellow players with a desire to make the game a success
12) Some tailored magic items
13) A mix of challenges
14) My character gets some time to shine
15) Throws the occasional curve ball to wake us up
16) The session ends with us players going "awww"

Goodness, I could type on for a page, I am sure.

 

[Lela]

I prefer:

1) RAW by default
2) Minimal houserules
3) A campaign theme
4) Clear indication of what is & what is not campaign appropriate
5) Good pacing
6) Some Plot resolution
7) Alternate plot threads to be exposed
8) Consequences, good & bad, expected & unexpected
9) Related to above, occasional lucky breaks
10) Knowledgeable dm with a backbone & understanding
11) Good keen fellow players with a desire to make the game a success
12) Some tailored magic items
13) A mix of challenges
14) My character gets some time to shine
15) Throws the occasional curve ball to wake us up
16) The session ends with us players going "awww"

Goodness, I could type on for a page, I am sure.

Who's stopping you? Go ahead.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I like Dungeon Masters who encourage players to pursue their character's goals in his "sandbox", so to speak, and who throw in their own ideas for stories and plots and opponents in a way which coheres with the PCs' plans.

For instance, if a PC is on a quest to recover the axe his grandfather carried, and you as a DM have a great idea for a necromancer's lair carved out of icy caves on the side of a mountain and filled with frozen undead monstrosities that you want the party to explore, it's so much better to have the PC discover (or, at least, come to believe) that the necromancer has possession of his grandfather's axe for some reason than it is to have some friendly NPC hire the party to recover from the necromancer's lair some object that matters to him, but not to any of the PCs.

In other words, I like campaigns which are driven by the PCs - which also excludes campaigns which revolve around the PCs but are not driven by them, such as the same-old-same-old "destined heroes save the world" malarkey. I like campaigns where player and player character choice determine what they do - which is not to say that they're immune to the consequences of their choices, because I also really like it when a DM just plays the game straight and lets the dice fall as they may.