D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[TiQuinn]

Would you consider yourself to ever have been a bad DM?

Yeah, definitely. My first game was a one shot (actually two shot I suppose) and everyone after the game was telling me what a great job I had done, and how fun it was, including our regular DM. So of course, I thought why not tackle a whole campaign for awhile? That’s when I learned that running a one shot and running a regular campaign carry with it different levels of effort, and I was not prepared for the week-in, week-out work. I also was running Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, which without a lot of extra time put into it, can really be a slog, and I let it turn into one quickly.

 

[kermit4karate]

I guess because some people here think fewer than 3 out of every 100 DMs are bad...if one can't see they might be bad, they are less likely to try to improve.

OK, so it's a battle over semantics. Perhaps if we change the words we're using, we'll realize that our positions aren't that far off from each other.

Can we try characterizing those less-than-perfect DMs as something other than "bad"? Because I'd look at this differently if it were closer to "has room to improve.

 

[AlViking]

Maybe "bad" means something other than "abusive or controlling."

Maybe it does for you, I think abusive and controlling (along with a couple other terrible patterns) is what makes a bad DM. But this whole side tangent was spawned out of discussions of abusive and controlling DMs. The poll was given as support for the idea that abusive and controlling DMs are common, although depending on how you read the poll it is nowhere near the 25% initially claimed.

The thing is we will never come to agreement on what being a "bad" DM means because in most cases it's a completely subjective judgement that will vary from one player to the next.

NOTE: bad according to the dictionary "not good in any manner or degree." Doesn't say anything about being worse than average.

 

[Eric V]

Maybe it does for you, I think abusive and controlling (along with a couple other terrible patterns) is what makes a bad DM. But this whole side tangent was spawned out of discussions of abusive and controlling DMs. The poll was given as support for the idea that abusive and controlling DMs are common, although depending on how you read the poll it is nowhere near the 25% initially claimed.

The thing is we will never come to agreement on what being a "bad" DM means because in most cases it's a completely subjective judgement that will vary from one player to the next.

It's not that subjective.

If the DM engages in behaviour that would drive a player to another game that is exactly the same except it doesn't have said behaviour, then it's bad. Not "evil person"-bad, but bad in that the behaviour needs to change.

 

[kermit4karate]

I really, really hope that no new DM reads the attitude that "If you aren't above average you're bad" to heart. Because I can't imagine how anyone would want to start DMing, would want to acknowledge that they can always improve if they're automatically labeled "bad". Nobody starts out DMing as an amazing DM. The important thing is to accept feedback, pay attention to what your players enjoy (they may or may not tell you) and don't stress out about it too much. We all make mistakes, we all have small ways in which we could improve, all of us will inevitably hit a ceiling of how proficient we are at certain skills.

I'm reminded of an analysis of a recent James Bond movie, where the analyst said that yes what Bond did was within the realm of what people can do. On the other hand there is no individual alive who could do all of those things as well as he does. I will never be as good at voices as a professional voice actor, it doesn't mean I shouldn't try. I will never have the incredible depth and detail that Matt Mercer has for Exandria, but I can still do my best to create a believable and coherent home brew world. I will never create the amazing dioramas people post on this forum now and then but that's one I'm just going to have to give a pass on, even if people do praise the minis I paint. There will always be someone better at some aspect of your DMing so don't let anyone ever tell you you're a bad DM because you aren't as good at some aspect as someone else.

Are people at the table having fun? You're doing okay because that's all that really matters.

It's an unhelpful characterization. It's one thing to use "bad" or "you suck" with a friend in jest, but it cuts differently with a stranger or an acquaintance as a criticism.

Besides, who made them the judge of bad??

That's the DM's job.

Ha! Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[AlViking]

It's not that subjective.

If the DM engages in behaviour that would drive a player to another game that is exactly the same except it doesn't have said behaviour, then it's bad. Not "evil person"-bad, but bad in that the behaviour needs to change.

I "drove a player to another game" because I don't allow evil characters. I don't like running games for evil characters and I have players that don't want it either. That makes me a bad DM? Really? By your definition if a DM is not the right DM for every player in existence then I think every DM is likely to be bad.

 

[Eric V]

I "drove a player to another game" because I don't allow evil characters. I don't like running games for evil characters and I have players that don't want it either. That makes me a bad DM? Really? By your definition if a DM is not the right DM for every player in existence then I think every DM is likely to be bad.

" I don't like running games for evil characters and I have players that don't want it either."

So that's a table decision, not a behaviour in-game or something else.

 

[kermit4karate]

We should create a spinoff thread to this one called "I can't wait for this Daggerheart fad to end."

Ha! Kidding. Good morning, everyone!

 

[AlViking]

" I don't like running games for evil characters and I have players that don't want it either."

So that's a table decision, not a behaviour in-game or something else.

I was the one who decided it because I will never run a game with evil characters or even participate in a game where evil characters are a focus of the game. It's a personal preference of how I want to spend my leisure time.

But there are other examples of someone leaving for some reason, no DM can be the best DM for every player in existence. I retain the vast majority of players but I don't think a goal of retaining absolutely 100% of players is realistic. Different people want different things out of playing the game. If you have a hard time retaining a group it's a pretty clear indication you need to change something. But then people claim that people "put up with" bad DMs all the time because that's the only choice they have so according to those opinions we can't use that as a criteria either.

So I limit my definition of bad DM to something like

1. Doesn't listen to feedback
2. Knowingly have objectionable plots or content (see #1)
3. Run strict railroads with players being unable to make any decisions (again, see #1)
4. Are abusive or controlling, includes misogynistic, bigoted, insulting

Perhaps a couple others. But even those in small doses doesn't make a DM bad (with the possible exception of #4), it may just be part of the learning curve we all have. If you're (eventually) willing to listen to feedback and change to be a better DM that just means you're learning to be better. There is no objective agreed upon definition of what makes a DM bad.

 

[kermit4karate]

It's not that subjective.

If the DM engages in behaviour that would drive a player to another game that is exactly the same except it doesn't have said behaviour, then it's bad. Not "evil person"-bad, but bad in that the behaviour needs to change.

I disagree all over the place!

Bad can be very subjective.

When do you ever find another game that's exactly the same in all but one way?

What gives one the right to say that another's behavior needs to change? Are they the Sheriff of Badtown? They can suggest or ask for it to change, but a voluntary RPG table isn't a courtroom.