The GM is Not There to Entertain You

[Reynard]

To me they are analogous.

I think switching up the metaphor could help. To me, a DM is the architect. An architect's job is to design a space that serves the people who will use it. An architect who designs a playground does want to entertain the kids who will use it.

The playground architect isn't necessarily pushing the kids on the swing or playing lava tag. But they are, in a way, entertaining the kids by designing a space in which the kids can have fun.

I see my role as a DM as being a playground architect. I am designing structures through which my players create fun. At the same time I can be a really adaptive architect and add, subtract, or change my structures as needed to make things even more fun for the players.

But an architect is removed from the process after designing it. That's a more apt analogy for the game designer or adventure writer, I think. The GM doesn't have to be involved in the design process at all. In my dinner party analogy, they could have ordered everything pre-made from their favorite restaurant and hired a decorator to set up the house before the guests come over and still be the host of the dinner party.

 

[Morrus]

Running games isn't meant to be "fun" or "entertaining".

Sure it is. Nobody at the game should not be having fun.

 

[Umbran]

Do you think the GM is responsible for your fun when you play?

I find this to be a poorly posed question.

I think everyone at the table shares responsibility for fun for everyone at the table. I think the GM has a lot of responsibility, as they hold a lot of the creative power and control of flow at the table - with that power comes responsibility. But the players do also hold responsibility for their own fun, as well as the fun of others at the table, each in their measure.

RPGs are collaborative endeavors, so everyone's got at least some responsibility for the outcome.

Does how you feel depend on whether you are playing with friends, randos or pros?

I think of myself as a service-oriented GM. I am there to present a game for the players. I am there for them, not the other way around. So, I take significant responsibility for presenting a game the players are apt to like.

 

[Umbran]

Dance! Dance, GM! <shoots six-shooter at GM's feet while he dances in terror>

That's not a constructive picture. One can (and generally does) have responsibility without being made to dance at whims.

How about we engage in some nuance here, folks?

 

[MGibster]

That's not a constructive picture. One can (and generally does) have responsibility without being made to dance at whims.

It was just a joke. I've made my feelings known in other posts throughout the thread.

 

[BookTenTiger]

But an architect is removed from the process after designing it. That's a more apt analogy for the game designer or adventure writer, I think. The GM doesn't have to be involved in the design process at all. In my dinner party analogy, they could have ordered everything pre-made from their favorite restaurant and hired a decorator to set up the house before the guests come over and still be the host of the dinner party.

Whether you are using a premade adventure or homebrewing, you are still providing opportunities for the players to have fun. To me that seems like entertaining.

 

[Reynard]

Whether you are using a premade adventure or homebrewing, you are still providing opportunities for the players to have fun. To me that seems like entertaining.

I think it is a case of using imprecise language on my part. I think I made it clear in my OP if not the thread title, thought, that what I meant was the GM is not solely responsible for the fun at the table or to make sure the players are entertained in a passive way. RPGs are not movies or TV. They demand a significant input by the participants for the entertainment of everyone involved, even if there's only one GM. hence the dinner party analogy.

 

[Umbran]

It was just a joke.

It looked less a joke than a snarky comment in joke's clothing. Thus my comment.

 

[eyeheartawk]

It looked less a joke than a snarky comment in joke's clothing.

Yeah, to avoid this sort of situation I always wear the same clothes when I'm joking, so there's no confusion.

Crocs, fanny pack and Starter jackets.

 

[Reynard]

I think of myself as a service-oriented GM. I am there to present a game for the players. I am there for them, not the other way around. So, I take significant responsibility for presenting a game the players are apt to like.

That is one way to view the job, and that's very close to how I view it when i am running at a convention. But I don't think of myself as performing a service for my regular groups. We are all playing together and it so happens I much prefer to be the GM, they in a way they are doing me a service by letting me take on that role.