Pathfinder 1E How many DM's in a group is a good / bad thing?

[Li Shenron]

We decided to have at least two, both running separate campaigns.

While one campaign (module) was running, the other DM was getting their game/module ready all the while getting to play as a PC in the current one.

Usually one campaign was low-mid level, while the other was mid-high level.

If the current DM could not make it, the other DM could start/continue their's for that session.

In time, we had expanded that concept when our group became bigger, and more experienced players/DMs joined. Instead of creating a new campaign for each DM, they would then create a side/story that would fit within the bigger campaign.

If it works for your group, then go for it. We were normally 3-4 DMs in our longest-running group, but we never shared the same campaign. Each DM would run her own (although I don't think we ever had more than 2 ongoing at the same time), but not mess with the others', mostly because as players in another DM's campaign we didn't want to get spoilers. I think it's much easier to keep them separate, and if you don't have a DM tonight, someone can just try to run a one-shot.

 

[gamerprinter]

The primary reason we don't switch campaigns when a different GM takes over, is the constant complaint by several players "What? We have to roll up new characters, again?", so to avoid that issue altogether we stick to the same campaign. And as stated, the campaign is the same but the circumstances have changed, and there is no chance of one GM/Player getting spoilers of anything (unless its our own spoiler, but then we play, as if we don't know about it).

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I like having ex-GMs who have burnt out a bit on GMing in my group. They tend to appreciate what you do and also make an effort to be good players because they've been on the other side of the screen. It's also good to watch them get their confidence back.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

In general, it sounds like "one active GM, one standby" (plus three players) is the ideal minimum, so that there are release valves and backup support when somebody needs a break. From there, it sounds like roughly every second or third additional player being willing to try to DM now and then. At least, up until you hit a critical mass of group size, at which point "cellular division" is the natural result, though players can still quite easily move back and forth between groups (especially in older-style D&D).