Is the DM the most important person at the table

[Nagol]

I haven't, but admittedly I've skipped several posts. I have seen quote a few people saying it's harder and being accused of saying it's hard. I have seen those people like my posts clarifying that while it's not hard to DM, it is harder than playing.

Heck, for many people playing is hard. It can be very difficult to carve out consistent multiple-hour blocks of time to engage in entertainment.

Being a DM is hard for some; much like knitting and birdwatching are hard for me.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Oh. It is local root beer. Well that floats my boat.

So you're saying you like root beer floats?

 

[FrogReaver]

Eh, for the most part the argument has been framed in terms of DM workload vs. Player workload.

Wel it's been framed that harness can be compared by looking at workload.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Since yesterday, one of the games I’m playing in has been put on hiatus because the DM has other commitments that prevent him from ensuring he can DM adequately. He is still able to play though.

Irony!

 

[Fanaelialae]

Since yesterday, one of the games I’m playing in has been put on hiatus because the DM has other commitments that prevent him from ensuring he can DM adequately. He is still able to play though.

Irony!

This has has been the case in my group as well, to all of the DMs at some point (including myself).

Things in their lives got hectic and they weren't confident in their ability to devote the time and resources that they felt were necessary to running a good game. So they bowed out and another DM took over (we're fortunate in that this group is made up of multiple DMs).

It was perfectly understandable. Life happens; most of us at that table are getting older and have greater responsibilities away from the table than we used to. In many cases, the one stepping down would still play, just not run. IMO, it's not all that much different from asking someone else to take over due to DM burnout, this is just preemptive.

 

[pemerton]

No; but it's most of it, which means if discussions like these don't largely revolve around it they're not much use for the vast majority in the hobby.

And?

This isn't a community service provider for D&D players. It's a discussion forum for RPGing. And the description of the General forum says it's for discussion of systems that don't have their own dedicated subforums.

This repeated attempt to channel all discussion into discussion of D&D is becoming a bit frustrating. If you want to talk about DY&D there's a whole other part of the board set aside just for that.

 

[Imaro]

And?

This isn't a community service provider for D&D players. It's a discussion forum for RPGing. And the description of the General forum says it's for discussion of systems that don't have their own dedicated subforums.

This repeated attempt to channel all discussion into discussion of D&D is becoming a bit frustrating. If you want to talk about DY&D there's a whole other part of the board set aside just for that.

It's as frustrating as trying to define why GM'ing is harder than playing for (most) GM's because X... and being continuously told not all games require X. Where "not all games" is some obscure ttrpgthat only a minuscule portion of the hobby base has heard of and even less play regularly.

How does citing such a game in fact address (again for the vast majority of the hobby since nothing is 100%) whether GM'ing is harder than playing and/or it has more importance as a role? Instead it feels like more of a way to push a particular playstyle or shut down real conversation as opposed to addressing the question in a practical way

 

[Ovinomancer]

It's as frustrating as trying to define why GM'ing is harder than playing for (most) GM's because X... and being continuously told not all games require X. Where "not all games" is some obscure ttrpgthat only a minuscule portion of the hobby base has heard of and even less play regularly.

How does citing such a game in fact address (again for the vast majority of the hobby since nothing is 100%) whether GM'ing is harder than playing and/or it has more importance as a role? Instead it feels like more of a way to push a particular playstyle or shut down real conversation as opposed to addressing the question in a practical way

There's a way to make this argument without denigrating games or people aware of more games than D&D. Sure, 800 pound gorilla and all, but let's not be elitist either way, yeah? Because, it's equally frustrating to see people treat not only D&D but the accumulated detritus of tradition and belief that surrounds "how you play D&D" be cited uncritically and without any consideration that there might be a different way, even in D&D, much less outside of it. It's a diverse hobby, so unless you really only want D&D, let's not be so hasty as to call everything else "niche" and decide to ignore that everything else just because it's more comfortable and less challenging.

 

[MGibster]

The majority of mainstream games rely on a similar dynamic between the GM and the players as found in D&D. GURPS, anything produced by Palladium, most World of Darkness games, Legend of the Five Rings, Paranoia, Call of Cthulhu, Traveller, Star Wars produced by FFG, WOTC, and FFG, Shadowrun, Savage Worlds, Alien, and many others I'm sure. But that doesn't make games with a different dynamic any lesser for it.

 

[pemerton]

The majority of mainstream games rely on a similar dynamic between the GM and the players as found in D&D. GURPS, anything produced by Palladium, most World of Darkness games, Legend of the Five Rings, Paranoia, Call of Cthulhu, Traveller, Star Wars produced by FFG, WOTC, and FFG, Shadowrun, Savage Worlds, Alien, and many others I'm sure. But that doesn't make games with a different dynamic any lesser for it.

I've GMed quite a bit of Classic Traveller over the past two-to-three years.

I won't dispute that it puts certain demands on the GM (as it does also on the players). But I wouldn't say that prep is one of the them. I say this only because I get the impression that preparation is being identified (in this thread, if not necessarily by you) as a significant burden on GMs. And for Traveller I don't think it is.

A referee needs to roll up a few NPCs and worlds, true, but that is pretty quick. Designing starships takes more time but the system comes with a number of prewritten designs (analogous to a D&D MM) that are good enough to work with.

There's no need to prepare "adventures" in advance beyond these things. It can be played pretty close to "no myth" style, using the various systems (for patrons, other encounters, random generation of cargo, etc, etc) to establish the required setting elements as one goes along.

I get the impression that this is different from eg WoD or CoC, which - as I understand it - depend much more on preparing the adventure. (Though I've run Cthulhu Dark sessions fine with no prep and riffing off the players' PC professions to get things going.)