payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
I think this is the result of GMs that only know how to use a microwave to make food.
The GM is Not There to Entertain You
pogre
Legend
It is important to me for a group to bring energy to the table or I get burned out. I have had some groups who have sat back and basically wait for me to give them a show - that gets exhausting in a hurry. I do hope to bring a fun and entertaining session, but not a one man show.
I think this is a big reason online play is so exhausting for me - I just cannot engage and feel the players' energy in the same way.
I think this is a big reason online play is so exhausting for me - I just cannot engage and feel the players' energy in the same way.
I'll flip it around - I'm the GM most of the time so my players are at least partly responsible for my fun. If I wasn't amused and engaged by what they were doing at the table I wouldn't run games.
So by that metric yeah, I'm also partly responsible for their fun. If they aren't engaged and amused by what I'm doing then they're not coming back. And this comes back to my feeling that the division between "GM" and "player" is silly - we're all players. The GM's role as a player is just different.
Now is the GM solely responsible for the fun of the other players? No of course not. Anyone who makes that argument is likely either a GM who is putting the weight of the world onto their own shoulders and needs to dial it back or someone who has never GM'd and needs to try it to get a different perspective. Or a GM who is a frustrated entertainer and uses gaming as an outlet for their desire to have an audience listen to them perform I guess (I had one of those once at a con a few decades ago - worst game of anything I've ever played in my life.)
I take issue for that reason even calling the GM's role the "facilitator of fun" . The GM is the host of a party that they want to attend - you can have party hosts who are so busy worrying about everyone else's fun that they don't have fun at their own parties, but it's a sad event when it happens, not a typical one or a goal to shoot for. (I guess in this analogy a paid GM would be an event planner who gets to also attend the party? Analogies are failing here...)
Yora
Legend
Because the companies only sell microwave food.
Helldritch
Hero
The dinner analogy is great.
Bad, boring guests makes for bad boring dinners.
Same for gaming.
A bad cook just makes a bad dinner.
Both cook and guests must be good to each others.
Bad, boring guests makes for bad boring dinners.
Same for gaming.
A bad cook just makes a bad dinner.
Both cook and guests must be good to each others.
payn
He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
This just sounds like a lack of culinary experience.
BookTenTiger
He / Him
I just know from experience that the more work I put into making the game fun for my players, the more fun I wind up having.
A character died last session after two years (in real life) of adventuring. Personally I find permanent death fun... I like the shock, the sense of gravitas, knowing there are real consequences... But I left it up to the player, and they really want to keep playing their character. So we are finding a cool way to bring them back.
Even though their fun is a little different than mine, I know that my experience as a DM is going to be better because I'm making the game more fun for my players.
A character died last session after two years (in real life) of adventuring. Personally I find permanent death fun... I like the shock, the sense of gravitas, knowing there are real consequences... But I left it up to the player, and they really want to keep playing their character. So we are finding a cool way to bring them back.
Even though their fun is a little different than mine, I know that my experience as a DM is going to be better because I'm making the game more fun for my players.
beancounter
(I/Me/Mine)
The GM is not solely responsible for the players fun.
The GM provides the setting and scenario. It's up to the players to decide how to interact within that framework.
The GM provides the setting and scenario. It's up to the players to decide how to interact within that framework.
Yora
Legend
I think fun is a misleading term for GMs.
Running games isn't meant to be "fun" or "entertaining". You're not doing it to get the kind of adventure that you want to see. It should definitely be enjoyable and rewarding, otherwise there'd be little point in doing it. But there are many kinds of work that are very enjoyable to certain kinds of people, even though they are work and not play, and you couldn't call them fun. And plenty of people do them for free, investing their own time and effort.
I think that's a much more productive approach to being a great GM than trying to make the game "fun" for yourself.
Running games isn't meant to be "fun" or "entertaining". You're not doing it to get the kind of adventure that you want to see. It should definitely be enjoyable and rewarding, otherwise there'd be little point in doing it. But there are many kinds of work that are very enjoyable to certain kinds of people, even though they are work and not play, and you couldn't call them fun. And plenty of people do them for free, investing their own time and effort.
I think that's a much more productive approach to being a great GM than trying to make the game "fun" for yourself.
