Why would you wrap up the session just because the players leave? You can get a lot done once they're out of the way.But if they leave early, haven't you in fact spoken for more than 31% of the time?
That presumes that the DM is speaking after every player speaks. What happens when you have two PC's talking to one NPC? Do none of your players talk to each other in that conversation?In a city, say the group is going on a shopping trip, or investigating leads to some mystery. There is no way the DM is talking anything less than 50/50, as they are the NPC's. Of course, players/chars can argue about plans, and I have seen that consume all kinds of time.
In combat, the DM is definitely talking more than 50% of the time, with the percentage increasing with more bad guys/terrain effects/Legendary Actions increase.
NPCs in scenes their characters aren't present in ("Kathy, why don't you play as the blacksmith...")
I think there are two separate but overlapping issues here.Quick Note: I tagged this as D&D General because I specifically want to talk about running D&D games. I know that other systems have really different ways of sharing the narrative burden. Feel free to bring those other games into this discussion, but let's overall focus on running D&D.
I'm an elementary school teacher, and I find a lot of my teaching practice bleeds into my DM'ing. One of the things I've tried to do in my classroom is reduce the amount of time that I, as a teacher, am talking. If I can have a student revoice something, I will. If I can have a student take attendance, pass out snacks, give appreciations, read the directions, etc etc etc, I will.
This is part of a larger trend of moving teaching (especially in elementary school) away from lecture-based lessons. The general idea is that teachers used to speak 70% of the time, and the goal now is that teachers speak 30% of the time, and students speak 70% of the time. Generally.
Anyways, I've started to think about this in my D&D games.
I've started to feel uncomfortable with how much my voice as a DM dominates the table during D&D. I'm often the one explaining the rules, describing scenes, and filling the session with talk, talk, talk. However, I feel like this is the base expectation of D&D: that the DM should speak 70% of the time. After all, it is my job to describe what the characters are seeing, then describe what happens when they try different things.
I do, however, want to try speaking less. I want to try to pass that burden over to the players. I want to try to speak 30% of the time.
Here are some ideas for ways I could pass the narrative burden over to players:
Here are some more radical ideas:
- Have players describe the consequences of their actions in detail (for example, I say "you hit, describe the blow").
- Ask players to describe inconsequential features of dungeons and towns ("Bob, tell us about this cultist statue...").
- Allow players to play as NPCs in scenes their characters aren't present in ("Kathy, why don't you play as the blacksmith...")
So what do you think? Is this a strange, quixotic quest with no real benefit? Is this a molehill just I'm willing to die on?
- Ask players to design important NPCs, and play as those NPCs.
- Ask players to design towns, then run portions of the session when characters are in town.
- Ask players to create interesting descriptions for dungeons, then run the mechanics while the player describes what the dungeon looks / sounds / smells like...
- Have players design random encounters, then describe those encounters when they occur...
- Ask players to contribute design ideas to settings during battles, and then have their descriptions be narrative truths...
Do you think there's any benefit to a DM speaking only 30% of the time?
Hard disagree on both. I've got a couple of recorded sessions to back me up too. Investigations often lead to extensive discussions between players. Hell, I've dropped some info and sat back to watch extremely extensive discussions many times in many RPGs.In a city, say the group is going on a shopping trip, or investigating leads to some mystery. There is no way the DM is talking anything less than 50/50, as they are the NPC's. Of course, players/chars can argue about plans, and I have seen that consume all kinds of time.
In combat, the DM is definitely talking more than 50% of the time, with the percentage increasing with more bad guys/terrain effects/Legendary Actions increase.
The question posed by the OP was whether people agreed or not. Some people do, some people don't.That presumes that the DM is speaking after every player speaks. What happens when you have two PC's talking to one NPC? Do none of your players talk to each other in that conversation?
People keep getting hung up on the number. That's not the point. The point is, DM's should try to talk less so that the players talk more. Heaven knows I've had more than a few players who are virtually catatonic at the table and only react when directly spoken to. Having players be a bit more willing to initiate things rather than passively waiting for me to roll up the plot wagon isn't a bad thing.
The problem, for me, is I see so many DM's who want to roll up the plot wagon, and in the words of this thread, MASTER the game.
A light touch on the reins often gains better results.
One might think so but my experience is that it's uneven. It is worth considering though. Numbers below are all for D&D, other RPGs vary widely.Doesn't it depend on the number of players?
Yeah at least two of my players are like you. Two totally aren't but forcing everyone to describe stuff etc in D&D which isn't well-adapted for it (unlike, say, Dungeon World) would likely not be fun at all for them, and everyone should be having fun.The question posed by the OP was whether people agreed or not. Some people do, some people don't.
It really seems like this is just a back-hand way of saying that players should have more control over the initiative. Players, not the DM should fill in details of an area, play NPCs and so on. Which, cool if that's what you want.
However, I don't want that. When I play I want the DM to control the world and NPCs. I want to focus on running my PC, not the world. I've been in situations where the DM handed me the reigns for an NPC and I kind of hated it. Not that I have a problem running NPCs, I DM all the time. It's because when I play D&D I want to be a character in the story, I drive the story by what I say and do, not by creating the world or controlling the NPCs*.
So if you want to have a player controlled narrative (or whatever the proper phrase is), good for you. I don't. I also wish people would just come out and say what they want, there's nothing wrong with it. Just like there's nothing wrong with wanting a DM to set, and control, the stage the PCs are actors upon.
For me? I have no idea what my percentage is. I try to encourage people to contribute, but some people just want to be there for the story to unfold and just aren't into exposition. Others would ramble on forever, boring the rest of the players. I try to balance the game to maximize enjoyment for the players and myself.
*Exceptions exist like info on my PC's personal backstory and history.
Yeah, I have no idea how much I talk during the game and it varies significantly from session to session and group to group. Some people really hate having to do the descriptive dialog thing and it's not fun for them. I don't try to force my preferences on the players, I try to work with them to figure out what works best for their enjoyment. Saying the DM "should" only talk 30% of the time sounds too much like one-true-wayism to me.Yeah at least two of my players are like you. Two totally aren't but forcing everyone to describe stuff etc in D&D which isn't well-adapted for it (unlike, say, Dungeon World) would likely not be fun at all for them, and everyone should be having fun.
I think 30% talking is probably close to where I normally am but I have a bunch of experienced players who actively like describing and planning and Rping and so on, and I've had plenty of fun as a player in groups where the DM took up much more time. I mean there are awful windbag DMs out there who need to learn to shut up but I don't think this advice is going to help them, sadly.