Is the DM the most important person at the table

[Nagol]

Oh, comfort is a big thing. I don't deny that. I'm questioning if that counts as evidence that they might not enjoy other games if they overcame that barrier. I've had good luck getting groups to play other games. Presenting one shots or short runs so that there's not much opportunity cost seems to work well. That might be the groups I've encountered, it might not. I will say that, until the last few years, all of the games we tried had pretty strong traditional roles for players and GMs. A few blurred the lines a bit, but the structure remained. Still, I haven't had much trouble getting my current group to play Blades -- they love it. We are, however, currently playing 5e because we like that game, too. I'm excited to try running a Scum and Villainy game soon, which I know I'll have little trouble pitching and will have to actually be selective in players, but that's because I know a lot of Firefly fans and I'm pitching a game in that vein. I hope to get back to 7Sea 1st ed sometime, though, as I think I can make that game really sing by moving towards a 'play to see what happens' mode rather than the GM determined games that always seems to wilt a bit.

I run a lot of different game engines too. One of the advantages of being the GM is I can say "I'm running X; who wants to play?" Most players seem to be down for most game systems I'd consider. There are a few players that won't play specific games that rub them the wrong way. Ars Magica has a couple of players that really don't want to deal with downtime/lab work, for example.

Next time I need a recharge, I'll be running a 1-2 session of BitD. I'd really prefer to play, but there are no nibbles. The person in my circles who would've most likely been willing to run it is now a former GM :-{

 

[hawkeyefan]

I run a lot of different game engines too. One of the advantages of being the GM is I can say "I'm running X; who wants to play?" Most players seem to be down for most game systems I'd consider. There are a few players that won't play specific games that rub them the wrong way. Ars Magica has a couple of players that really don't want to deal with downtime/lab work, for example.

Next time I need a recharge, I'll be running a 1-2 session of BitD. I'd really prefer to play, but there are no nibbles. The person in my circles who would've most likely been willing to run it is now a former GM :-{

One of the things I’ve been doing lately is finding games I want to play, and then figuring out which of my players would be a good fit for that game, and prompting them to run it when our current 5E campaign is done.

So far, I’ve got a few good matches. None for BitD, though, which is a shame because I’d really like to give playing a try rather than GMing.

But I’ll settle for some Mothership, Esoteric Enterprises, and Spectaculars, for now.

 

[Manbearcat]

For some reason, it's really, really important for a cohort of people to insist that they understand other people's preference better than they do.

What the hell do you think you're adding to the conversation with this crap?

There is no "some reason."

There is no "cohort."

There is no "insist."

There is no claim to "understand other people's preferences better than they do."

This is utter_nonsense.

Cue the mods to censure me. This is just dumb and I don't even care to engage in a conversation with the likes of this so just boot me @Umbran or whomever.

 

[Maxperson]

You can only have a Starlord if I get a Groot!

Someone else can have the raccoon.

Done! That raccoon comes with some nasty weaponry. I'll take him.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Maxperson]

What? No one takes Drax?

Probably because they can’t see him. He moves so slow that you can’t perceive him.

No thank you! They don't call him the Destroyer because he beats people up. My bathroom still hasn't recovered from the last time he was over.

 

[pemerton]

This is why I ask players for backstories. I at least want something I can tie into the campaign, to make the story actually about the players' characters, rather than some sort of Adventure Path for whichever characters show up. Sometimes I get more than I think I want, but I think I'd rather have that than no one gives me anything.

Bold emphasis mine...I'm sure @GameOgre was not trying to get things going for an adventure.
Your kickers get one out the gate much like a decent backstory could - we are talking about ONGOING prep.
His 2-4 hour preparations are, I imagine, for many, if not every, sessions.

So once the out the gate happens, then what? The kickers you provided do not relieve prep once the game gets going. There will be more locales, more NPCs, deeper plots, foreshadowings, combats, setups/framing, mapping and twists....

In a game that uses a technique like "kickers", or otherwise has the players play a role in framing and set-up, generally that will continue. One would expect the players to drive the action to a considerable extent. For instance, in my Dark Sun game the PCs ended up sheltering in a safe house that one of the players posited was familiar to that player's PC. A fair bit of action revolved around that.

In this sense it is more than just the GM tying backstories into an adventure that s/he plans. That's how it reduces GM prep requirements.

Some of the ways that people are suggesting don't seem to me as though they'd make DMing easier for me. Probably others share this feeling, and I suspect that some of the frustration and irritation is (what seems to be) the blithe presumption that we haven't thought of these things or tried these things or given these things any consideration at all, and decided against them (or found they didn't work, in practice, for us).

I'm confused. The post of mine that you quoted wasn't a reply to you. It was a post that was responding to the general theme of must GMing be hard work?, which had also crystallised into an actual request for advice about how to reduce prep for a 5e D&D game.

You quoted my post so I'd like to point out that I'm refering to the desired playstyle by players not about GMing being hard* and how certain posters are unable to grasp why such players prefer that particular playstyle.

*I fail to see how you got that GMing is hard from my post.

I interpreted your post as part of the ongoing discussion, which is about the challenges of GMing. If people want to play games driven overwhelmingly by the GM working from GM-prepared material, then yes, GMing will be hard. The reason some posters are identifying other possible approaches and techniques is because they have been asked for concrete examples of how GMing 5e D&D can be made less demanding.

If the parameters for discussion are how can GM prep and demands on GM time and energy be reduced in a game where the main orientation of play is towards the players working through material provided by the GM from his/her prepared notes, then the answer is obvious: it can't be. I mean, there might be some efficiencies like using already-prepared stat blocks (as @hawkeyefan has suggested) and cribbing exising maps (as someone elase suggested). But most people are probably already doing that as much as they happily can.

This is why I have been taking 5e D&D literally but talking about techniques that move away from the approach italicised above.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Darth Solo]

D/GM are more important:

The D/GM is more significant due to scarcity and skill: Everyone can't run a game, especially run a game well. Is it "hard"? Definitely "harder" than showing up with a character sheet. Even running a game "Lazy GM" style, it's more work via improv than what the players do because of NPC load.

Call D/GMs "more valuable". "Value" translates as "importance" due to prominence at the gaming table - "prominence" equating to "work load". Like previous posters have noted, players can divorce themselves from a campaign post-game.

D/GMs are ALWAYS dealing with the campaign, whether players are present or not.

I know there's a company within our hobby that want to diminish the importance of D/GMs, but that only harms our hobby by marginalizing D/GMs. We need more of US. If D/GMs feel unimportant, they won't run games.

That's a form of "Gatekeeping" in itself.

 

[prabe]

In a game that uses a technique like "kickers", or otherwise has the players play a role in framing and set-up, generally that will continue. One would expect the players to drive the action to a considerable extent. For instance, in my Dark Sun game the PCs ended up sheltering in a safe house that one of the players posited was familiar to that player's PC. A fair bit of action revolved around that.

In this sense it is more than just the GM tying backstories into an adventure that s/he plans. That's how it reduces GM prep requirements.

But if a campaign has been going on for long enough, there are prior events in the campaign that can also work as inspiration for further adventures. It doesn't necessarily make it quicker or easier to write up a session, but it might make it easier to germinate ideas.

I'm confused. The post of mine that you quoted wasn't a reply to you. It was a post that was responding to the general theme of must GMing be hard work?, which had also crystallised into an actual request for advice about how to reduce prep for a 5e D&D game.

Sorry. I understood your post to be part of the ongoing discussion, where there were some people suggesting importing techniques/ideas from other games into D&D 5E, and others (mostly those who are currently running D&D 5E) were trying to explain why those techniques/ideas/whatever didn't seem likely to ease prep time for the games they were actually running. I don't think I remember you doing that, and I apologize if it seemed I was saying you were.

If the parameters for discussion are how can GM prep and demands on GM time and energy be reduced in a game where the main orientation of play is towards the players working through material provided by the GM from his/her prepared notes, then the answer is obvious: it can't be. I mean, there might be some efficiencies like using already-prepared stat blocks (as @hawkeyefan has suggested) and cribbing exising maps (as someone elase suggested). But most people are probably already doing that as much as they happily can.

This is why I have been taking 5e D&D literally but talking about techniques that move away from the approach italicised above.

My experience of the campaigns I'm running is that there's more of a feedback loop, once they're going. The players/characters decide what to do, sometimes suggesting new things; I the DM figure out what's between them and what they want to do. There have been side quests that have turned into major events, and there are what seem to me like major story threads still hanging. So, I might write up notes for a session, but I'm pulling ideas from what the players/characters say and do.