Should a GM be a Captain or Navigator?

[Umbran]

Organizationally (as in, getting sessions to run) the GM is usually Captain.

But otherwise... my usual thought is that the GM is more like a vacation planner. You come in, and the GM gives you several options of things to do. Sometimes it is a complete package with everything scheduled out for you. Other times, it's pretty loose - you pick a destination, and you work out some of the travel arrangements and places to stay, but otherwise you're free to wander on your own. A really good planner will work with you to find out which is right for you.

 

[Janx]

Nah, he's the location manager, the set dresser, and the production assistant who herds the extras.

And who do those people report to? The Director. (or Producer).

Whichever guy it is, the GM is that guy.

Shaman's right with his analogy about those movie making roles.

The director gets cited, because he owns those aspects.

The analogy as director literally fails when people assume the director is taking a firm hand on how scenes play out. Which is really the player's job as actors in an improv film.

I think the key to remember, is D&D is like an improvised film, not a traditional film with a strict director.

 

[SkredlitheOgre]

I wasn't aware that the GM had to fit into one particular role. Funny how a role-playing game might require someone to fill more than just one role.

I have never, ever played only 'Captain' or 'Navigator.' It's always both of those and more in the same session or, more likely, even the same encounter/exploration/puzzle because the party misses a clue/plot device, runs out of ideas or they fail Skill checks.

Sometimes you're Captain, sometimes you're Navigator. Sometimes you're Engineer and sometimes you're the pretty girl/hot guy waiting on the shore for the ship to come back in. Sometimes you're all of those at once and sometime you're none of them at all.

 

[jonesy]

I wasn't aware that the GM had to fit into one particular role. Funny how a role-playing game might require someone to fill more than just one role.

Yeah, that is funny. There's this idea floating around that people should be put into neat little boxes, and yet we are talking about a game where anyone can be in any box they want. Or even out of them.

 

[El Mahdi]

Ok, the idea is a captain tells the crew what to do, but doesn't steer the ship.
The navigator follows order to steer the ship but has little choice what is done.

So in your opinion should the GM tell the party what needs doing and let the players find their way, or should the GM listen to the players and give them the path to complete what they set out to do?

Yes.

Serious answer, a GM is both of those things as the situation dictates. A better description would be:

A GM is an Expediter.

You expedite the process of the game to achieve the games objective...which is, simply put: to have fun.

If the group is bogging down with no idea of where to go, then the GM's job is to help guide them, and may require clear direction (Captain).

Most of the time, the GM is simply there to describe the world as the PC's actions affect it (Navigator).

The GM is also there to adjudicate the PC's actions (Judge, Referee).

The GM also has the added bonus of being able to watch and appreciate the unfolding story, much as the players also do (Observer, Audience).

The GM is whatever they need to be at the moment.

 

[Serendipity]

GMing is, like so much else in this hobby, subject to a lot of personal interpretation. This isn't a criticism. The downside is that a lot of mixed metaphors get sacrificed, pierced, and mutilated trying to find a single overriding definition, which I don't think can be done. At best, a "generally held by many" type definition is probably as close as we're going to get.

Personally? I think that (for me) at the very basest definition, a GM is "an impartial referee who plays the NPCs and is sometimes a world builder" - no more, no less.
Surely, a GM (both by personal preference, and by needs of a given game or group of players) CAN do other things, but for the essential notion of what the GM does, to me that's it.

 

[korjik]

Well put, but this was asking for opinions. Not necessarily what works best when but what you feel provides the best game when done well.

My answer is that you cannot be one or the other exclusively, or that there are times when you should not be one or the other at all.

Most games that I have ran/DMed have needed some captaining and navigating to start out, but once the group has a working knowledge of the setting, they self-generate adventures. The come up with the goals, I come up with the setting around those goals.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Heh - Cartographer! He's the one that makes the maps!

The Auld Grump - Here Be Dragons....

 

[Rogue Agent]

Ok, the idea is a captain tells the crew what to do, but doesn't steer the ship.
The navigator follows order to steer the ship but has little choice what is done.

The GM should be the ocean and lands unexplored.

The players are in charge of figuring out (a) what they want to do and (b) how they're going to do that. Thus, they are both determining where the ship is going and charting the course for getting there. They are both captain and navigator.

 

[howandwhy99]

Neither as best the DM can manage. A referee is preferable for me.

I tend to see the GM role as puzzlemaker. The players are the captains the crew and the navigators. Plus everything else and can make some of the puzzle too.