Was there only one DM at your table?

[Templetroll]

We had between 12 to 16 players and at least 8 were DMs and I think all were homebrew worlds.

 

[Valiant]

Its only natural to have more DMs as time went on (esp. after 25 years). THis question should really break it down into time periods.

When we first started playing (years 0-2) 1 DM
Years 2-3 2 rotating DMs
Years 3-6 3 rotating DMs (one retired).
Year 7 and beyond (at that point everyone in our group had DMed or was an experianced DM, the only non-DMs are wives who have no interest in DMing (for whatever reason).

 

[Hussar]

So, basically your point is that in very new groups, you might have 1 DM with a group of inexperienced players. That's a very far cry from your original claims.

 

[WayneLigon]

It was not unusual for us to have a 50/50 split. I have played in a number of groups where ALL of us were also GMs. Right now, it's myself and one other person. A third person could GM and has in the past but he's unable to make the time commitment at the moment.

 

[Maggan]

Its only natural to have more DMs as time went on (esp. after 25 years). THis question should really break it down into time periods.

When we first started playing (years 0-2) 1 DM
Years 2-3 2 rotating DMs
Years 3-6 3 rotating DMs (one retired).
Year 7 and beyond (at that point everyone in our group had DMed or was an experianced DM, the only non-DMs are wives who have no interest in DMing (for whatever reason).

For my group:

Year 0 and onwards: several DM's.

Being a DM was/is fun, so it was natural that several of us wanted to do it.

/M

 

[Hussar]

To be fair though, I think that Valiant is possibly right. If I were to change the poll to say, "In your first year of gaming, did your group have one or more than one person with DMing experience", I'd likely get a different answer.

But, then, that wasn't the claim I was trying to address. The original claim was that in 1e, the majority of groups had one DM and everyone else had no DMing experience.

What would be the reason for this poll to be so skewed in the other direction? 91 people are ALL exceptions? I find that difficult to believe.

 

[kenobi65]

What would be the reason for this poll to be so skewed in the other direction? 91 people are ALL exceptions? I find that difficult to believe.

Well, we're talking about a game system that many of us haven't played in close to 20 years now, and those experiences are, in many cases, 25 or so years old. And, yet, all of your respondents are still playing RPGs 20-25 years later, and are active in an online RPG community.

I'm not sure that that makes us particuarly representative of 1E AD&D groups from 25 years ago. I would imagine that there's an awful lot of 1E players who haven't played RPGs in years, have no involvement in the hobby anymore, and thus aren't represented in this poll.

 

[Stormtower]

My AD&D group (12- and 13-year olds in 1986-87) had three of four with DM experience by the end. We intentionally rotated the DM's seat between the three of us who wanted to try it. That was a cool group! We rarely finished a campaign, though. Lost of houserules and ignored rules (grappling, psionics, init, level limits). Occasionally we played Marvel Super Heroes between AD&D sessions.

Before I met my three cohorts in the four-kid group, I was introduced to AD&D (from B/X, which I had picked up myself at age 8) briefly through one friend who "graduated" one of my BECMI parties into AD&D stats. We played one-on-one with me controlling three PCs, but that only lasted about 3 sessions. Six months later I found the four-kid group.

 

[Hussar]

Well, we're talking about a game system that many of us haven't played in close to 20 years now, and those experiences are, in many cases, 25 or so years old. And, yet, all of your respondents are still playing RPGs 20-25 years later, and are active in an online RPG community.

I'm not sure that that makes us particuarly representative of 1E AD&D groups from 25 years ago. I would imagine that there's an awful lot of 1E players who haven't played RPGs in years, have no involvement in the hobby anymore, and thus aren't represented in this poll.

I'll buy that.

But, what would be the reason for the wide difference in perception though? Why would those who dropped out of the hobby way back when have such a different experience?

I'm not being skeptical, I just can't think of a reason. Those that stayed with the hobby had more than one DM, and those that dropped the hobby usually had only one DM? Seems a bit, odd.

 

[Storm Raven]

I'll buy that.

But, what would be the reason for the wide difference in perception though? Why would those who dropped out of the hobby way back when have such a different experience?

I'm not being skeptical, I just can't think of a reason. Those that stayed with the hobby had more than one DM, and those that dropped the hobby usually had only one DM? Seems a bit, odd.

One could argue that, if that is the case, then the argument that the game is better when the players don't know the rules doesn't work. After all, if those who had lots of DMs in their group (and thus had lots of people who knew the rules at the table as players) are still playing, and those who had only one DM and a bunch of "ignorant" players aren't. . .

Well, it seems to me there is a logical inference to be drawn from that (assuming that is what the data shows, which I don't necessarily think is true).