My DM'ing has gotten worse over the years, not better

[Guest 85555]

At the end of the day there are a bunch of different approaches to GMing and adventure design and you need to find the one that is right for your comfort level and your group's enjoyment. The more you expose yourself to other GMs, the better sense I think you get of other possibilities.

 

[pawsplay]

Yeah, there's a big swath of area between turnip farming and saving the world. My players tend to be in between: they are interested in community-building and invested in the local portion of the world, but in a more adventurous sense. So it's quite possible that they would not refuse the call to adventure, but they might not have the same level of buy-in for a "save the world" scenario as they would a "become major figures within the nation and play the game of politics" scenario.

Sure, if I turned the game into a 20-level "fight a big evil thing for the fate of the world" thing they might still enjoy themselves. But they might not enjoy it as much as "topple this cabal of rival lords and witches, take over their lands and remold the nation in your image". Doesn't mean they want to farm turnips, necessarily.

Preference does have something to do with it. However, I would say that in general my sweet spot is very similar to how you describe yours. The 20 level campaign is something I embarked upon specifically because I wanted to have a new kind of experience. Also, my players like the epic stuff.

When I threaten to burn people's turnips, it's not because I choose for my preferences to trump others. That's just one example of creating a space for adventures to happen in. In a more local game, it might be something like a new street gang trying to increase their territory, in a an area that overlaps with the PCs' activities. I always have several things going on. Even in the big twenty level campaign, there was plenty of local intrigue, and several sub-bad-guys and rival bad guys and lesser-of-two-evil guys etc. The War Against Turnips is simply the natural consequence of one choice in response to campaign events.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

a DM's tale he tells is alot like a flower garden, he plants the seeds and gives it water and soil and lets the flowers grow, its not an exact art, but the ending result is always beautiful

 

[Raven Crowking]

Frankly, if I want someone to tell me a tale, I'll pick up a book. Or watch a movie.

If I want to tell a tale, I'll write one.

I understand the metaphor; I think the metaphor leads to misunderstanding of what makes a good game. Obviously, if your tastes vary from mine, your "good game" may be different.

[MENTION=56189]Kzach[/MENTION]: Does the game you're running surprise you? If not, it's just work. You could write a story, see it published, and get a bigger reward for your efforts at the end of the day. A game has to surprise you to make GMing fun. I'd recommend Beta Testing Dungeon Crawl Classics for a session or two. The unexpected is joy in the heart of GMing, and that game is designed to ensure that the unexpected happens.


RC

 

[Elf Witch]

Imx, players never have their PCs become turnip farmers. But, if they genuinely did make that choice then, I think, for the GM to truly be respectful of it, he'd have to make the game revolve around turnip farming - village life, bringing up kids, dealing with an outbreak of Turnip Blight. The game's high point would probably be fighting one ankheg. Forget all the end-of-the-world, cities exploding stuff, that's not what the players want.

Otoh, it may be, as pawsplay says, a refusal of the call to adventure, where the PC is at first reluctant, but we all know he's going to take up arms soon and fight the BBEG. If so, then the initial refusal isn't a very meaningful choice. It isn't telling us much about what the player wants.

I agree with this with one caveat is the DM interested in running this game because if they are not then the game will suck either from lack of DM enthusiasm or DM resentment.

 

[Elf Witch]

I use the story approach of three acts when I prep too. I have found it makes me a better DM and it frees me to be more creative when the game actually starts.

I put in the hook. I plan several scenarios on how I think the PCs will go. 99% of the time they do this. If they don't then I make something up on the fly.

The climax for me is the reward. What kind of items I want to put in and maybe some clues for future hooks.

I have never had a player complain of being railroaded or that they feel like they have no choices.

Because I know my players I can pretty much design encounters that will interest them.

When I start a new campaign I have an idea of a "story" I would like to see unfold. I tell the players this is what I have in mind are you interested?

Just because I have a "story" in mind does not mean I know how it is going to end or how the journey is going to unfold. That part is up to the players. I don't try and force them to do it my way. Or try and force my vision on them on how I think it should unfold.

I also talk to the players about there hopes and wants for their characters so I can tailor the game to make it more personal for them.

I let them know upfront if I would like to run a major evil save the world game. I don't bait and switch.

If they are not interested and want something else instead then depending on if I am interested I will run that or pass to someone else.

I would never run a sandbox game for my group because they are not the type of players who would enjoy it. They would end up just sitting there paralyzed on what to do and spinning their wheels.

 

[Barastrondo]

I agree with this with one caveat is the DM interested in running this game because if they are not then the game will suck either from lack of DM enthusiasm or DM resentment.

Exactly. The most important thing to realize is that it works both ways: if either the GM or the players are lacking enthusiasm for or resentful of a campaign direction, the game won't be that fun. So far, what's worked best for me is presenting a number of rather broad-strokes campaign ideas that I'm excited about running, and then letting the players choose what sounds most entertaining to them. This is most likely to set up a feedback loop in which our enthusiasm feeds one another, and then the game winds up being pretty successful.

 

[pawsplay]

Frankly, if I want someone to tell me a tale, I'll pick up a book. Or watch a movie.

If I want to tell a tale, I'll write one.

I understand the metaphor; I think the metaphor leads to misunderstanding of what makes a good game. Obviously, if your tastes vary from mine, your "good game" may be different.

[MENTION=56189]Kzach[/MENTION]: Does the game you're running surprise you? If not, it's just work. You could write a story, see it published, and get a bigger reward for your efforts at the end of the day. A game has to surprise you to make GMing fun. I'd recommend Beta Testing Dungeon Crawl Classics for a session or two. The unexpected is joy in the heart of GMing, and that game is designed to ensure that the unexpected happens.


RC

Yeah, if the GM can't be surprised, at least in some small way, it's not really a RPG.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I can't prove you're wrong, but I would not recommend this advice to anyone. My viewpoint leans more toward, "No plot survives contact with the players."

I agree with that sentiment - those darn players are always messing with my plots! How dare they think of something I didn't think of first. Damn them, damn them to a TPK!

 

[NewJeffCT]

I would never run a sandbox game for my group because they are not the type of players who would enjoy it. They would end up just sitting there paralyzed on what to do and spinning their wheels.

I think my group might end up doing that as well - I was thinking of going more sandboxy for the next leg of my campaign. But, my group has several strong willed veteran gamers in it, and I'm afraid if they have 8-10 different choices in front of them, they'll end up arguing (I mean, discussing) about all their options and what to do next, with each person favoring a different choice.

So, if that ends up happening, I'll have to nip it in the bud and cut down their options and make sure that they have a few longer-term goals in mind.