Take, take, and take and never DM. What do players bring to a gaming group?

[ruleslawyer]

After reading some of these comments I am a little amazed. It really does feel as if I am reading a pity party from DMs....

I think you may be a little melodramatic about this, as Lord P said.

I have to say I've never had this problem; maybe my friends are all control freaks, but in the circle of high-school friends with whom I've gamed, *everyone*, with the exception of the players who were just tagging along to hang out with their buddies, wanted a turn at DM-ing. It's true that I've done the lion's share of DM-ing for any group of people I've played with, but that seems to be because a) I enjoy it; b) I've got a huge stack of rulebooks; and c) everyone thinks I'm pretty good at it.

Emirikol's experience is not mine, but having never been to a convention or RPGA event, and having never (until my current group) played with people with whom I didn't have a long-standing friendship beforehand, I can say that within *my* experience, players are willing to give a lot, and I certainly have never heard complaining of the sort he mentions.

 

[Elf Witch]

I think you may be a little melodramatic about this, as Lord P said.

I have to say I've never had this problem; maybe my friends are all control freaks, but in the circle of high-school friends with whom I've gamed, *everyone*, with the exception of the players who were just tagging along to hang out with their buddies, wanted a turn at DM-ing. It's true that I've done the lion's share of DM-ing for any group of people I've played with, but that seems to be because a) I enjoy it; b) I've got a huge stack of rulebooks; and c) everyone thinks I'm pretty good at it.

Emirikol's experience is not mine, but having never been to a convention or RPGA event, and having never (until my current group) played with people with whom I didn't have a long-standing friendship beforehand, I can say that within *my* experience, players are willing to give a lot, and I certainly have never heard complaining of the sort he mentions.

I was joking about the pity party line sorry I thought I had but on the smiley face.

I also did not say every DM is a control freak but I have played with some who just don't enjoy playing they have said so. It is a matter of control having it is to hard for them to let someone else run because they are not in charge of how things are going.


And if DMs are so unhappy and feel that their players are not grateful but they don't feel that they can stop because then there won't be a game then I stick by my martyr comment because that is exactly what that is.

 

[Henry]

I know I joined the Bugaboo Friends Network, and I'm glad I did! I made 5,000 dollars my first month! A friend of mine made 7,000! And next month my goal is 20,000 dollars!



Now, on a more serious note....


...I just remarked to my group last night that we have an unprecedented situation going on: There are more people wanting to start new campaigns than we have time to play!!! In the past, One other player (now on a break) and I have been the main two Dm'ing. More recently:

1 player is slowly planning his Star Wars game he wants to resume from 2005 sometime in 2008;

1 player wants to continue running his current high-level game (18th +) after we wrap my Eberron game;

1 player wants to try his hand first-time DM'ing by running a Mutants and Masterminds silver age type game;

and 1 player wants to 1st time DM a Planescape game!

and the last player, while not actively putting anything together, is inspired by this and is thinking about doing something himself next year.

I've not had this much enthusiasm happen in a group in 15 years. Last time was back in high school!

 

[Henry]

And if DMs are so unhappy and feel that their players are not grateful but they don't feel that they can stop because then there won't be a game then I stick by my martyr comment because that is exactly what that is.

...And what would you call fellow players who complain when the DM isn't offering a game because he's burned out?

As for me, who has this pathological complex that the worst day gaming is still better than the best day spent fishing, I've sucked it up and run the game anyway, in the past.

 

[Elf Witch]

...And what would you call fellow players who complain when the DM isn't offering a game because he's burned out?

As for me, who has this pathological complex that the worst day gaming is still better than the best day spent fishing, I've sucked it up and run the game anyway, in the past.

I think they are selfish prats.

If a player or DM is feeling burned out to the point that they are stressing out from it then it will effect the game which won't be fun for anyone involved.

If a game is not fun any longer then keeping it going because its your only game fix does not seem very healthy to me. I would think if you are not having fun it would eventually lead to the game not being fun for anyone involved.

 

[nyrfherdr]

I personally, don't think it is a problem if players don't DM.
I do think that players should actively engage in the game and make it fun.
And I think people should express their gratitude as often as they can... That's just what friends do. This requires nothing more than saying "Thanks." "Great Game." or any of a dozen similar comments. Specific feedback is even better, because it makes the game better.


Elf Witch: I am the martyr that Pendragon spoke of. I do not have the luxury of playing with my high school buddies. I don't have the luxury of playing with my college buddies. I don't have the luxury of playing with people I knew even 5 years ago. I moved for my job.

I have met new friends and have new buddies.
To meet new gamers you have to create a game.
To create a game, 99 times out of 100 you have to DM. That isn't martyrdom, that's reality. You can do something else, or play D&D as the DM.

I have certainly stopped DMing for several groups in those 5 years. It was not fun. Then I started new groups with new people until things clicked.

I have also played RPGA games and at Conventions. It is often a thankless job to DM, especially for the RPGA. I can't articulate why in a short post.
Non-RPGA Convention games I have had much more luck with and a much better experience with players. Maybe I've just been lucky there and unlucky with RPGA events.

Game ON!

 

[Kae'Yoss]

...And what would you call fellow players who complain when the DM isn't offering a game because he's burned out?

I'm rather fond of "Kackpratze"

 

[Mallus]

It depends on whether you think DMing requires natural talent (either you have it, or you don't) or takes skill (which can be learned). Our group tends to believe the latter...

You know, those aren't mutually exclusive. Most gamers I know would say a good DM has both learned skills and a natural affinity.

Running an RPG is an inherently social activity. And every campaign can be seen as a kind of ongoing negotiation, with the DM in the role of arbiter, managing the different players expectations of the game, both challenging them and parcelling out rewards/the opportunity for reward, smoothing over conflicts, managing 'screen time', etc. Doing that well requires a lot of social intellegence, and that really be taught.

You can give a person good advice for dealing with other people, but you can't make someone good with people.

and we like the philosophy of "taking the DM out of the equation" because it makes the job of DMing much easier.

What does that really mean? And what about a given DM's creativity, assuming you and your group enjoy the creative output of their games?

If you take me out of the game I run, you get a different game. My players tell me that a lot of their enjoyment comes fom my specific, not to mention highly idiosyncratic, take on a D&D gameworld.

 

[Mercule]

I had one of my players tell me last week that he enjoys my game. That felt good. I've got one player who has repeatedly called me a bastard, but I think it was meant as a compliment.

Otherwise, 90% of the feedback I get is "negative" in some way. I don't mean "you suck", but just minor gripes about whose character is more powerful, not really liking a ruling on esoteric situations, that sort of thing.

Being someone who thrives on verbal feedback, I could really do with some more.

Really, in thinking about it, my current group is getting a lot better than most I've gamed with. They often bring food. They also seem to be paying attension most of the time.

 

[Henry]

What does that really mean? And what about a given DM's creativity, assuming you and your group enjoy the creative output of their games?

If you take me out of the game I run, you get a different game. My players tell me that a lot of their enjoyment comes fom my specific, not to mention highly idiosyncratic, take on a D&D gameworld.

I'm of two minds on it. Call it the "Chez DM" and the "McDM's" mindsets.

At "Chez DM", the Game Master has LOTS of control over the game environment, makes rules (sometimes on the fly) for a lot of things, because there ARE no rules for them, and in general is the Majordomo for the game. Without him, the restaurant's closed, so to speak, so eaters need to find another restaurant, or start their own. Some DM's render a, quite frankly, CRAPPY experience; a small pool, however, render the finest gaming experience that can be enjoyed.

At "McDM's", there's a rule for 90% of what's going on in-game, and a DM, with proficiency, but less proficiency required than that to start your own campaign from scratch, and no matter what DM you go to, you get a similar, consistent, not unpleasant, yet not inspired, experience. You're never disappointed -- but you're never raving about the game the next day.

I enjoy the safety net that "McDM" provides. However, I ultimately prefer the lack of said safety net, even if it means running into substandard DM's. In order to have the highs, you gotta sometimes have the lows, too. It's part of the package. (And all of a sudden I'm getting flashes of the movie Equilibrium here. )