D&D General What is YOUR GM style?

-Pace and influenced by player input.
-Sometimes organised but more than willing to throw that prep in the bin.
-Not precious.
-Gaming has been my #1 hobby for 40 years, so has much love.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jack Daniel

dice-universe.blogspot.com
My refereeing style is best summed up with two pithy sayings: "the world is the world" and "we explore dungeons, not characters."

The first statement is both a method of refereeing and a philosophy of play. I've created the setting before the campaign begins, populating all the hexes and towns and stocking the dungeons, and the setting will tick along according to its own internal logic; I'll never alter it on a whim (or because of the "rule of cool"), nor will I move some element into or out of the players' path. (That is: quantum ogres are totally verboten, and I'm still carrying personal trauma from past GMs who overestimated their ability to "make a game up on the fly" and thought that their "733t improv skillz" weren't just tantamount to flagrant railroading.) But of course the game world will evolve dynamically over time and respond appropriately to the players' actions (or inaction).

The second statement is one of the old rallying cries of the OSR. In spite of that, I still find it useful to drive home the point that I'm here to present a world full of places to explore, mysteries to solve, challenges to overcome, and allies and enemies to interact with — but I'm not going to tell a story, or encourage anyone who doesn't like play-acting to improv lines of dialog in character. You, the player, are sitting at my table to feel like you're on an adventure, not to simulate the personality and psychology of some boorish dwarf.

Rules-wise, I'm almost certainly going to be running some variant of OD&D or possibly AD&D, depending on the setting. Players can expect me to reliably follow and apply the game rules (consisting of the core books plus whatever supplemental materials and house rules I've enumerated in a campaign handout). For the same reason that I won't lay down railroad tracks or invisible walls, I won't fudge rolls (in fact I prefer to roll out in the open as much as possible), rubber-band monster numbers or hit point totals, or ever do anything underhanded to favor either the PCs or the monsters.

As for the campaign model, my ideal (momentarily stifled by These Pandemical Times™, but I hope to get back on the wagon soon) is long campaigns with a persistent milieu, a large and constantly rotating player base, and players creating several characters that they choose from when deciding who to take on a given adventure — what you could variously call a living sandbox, a "West Marches" campaign, a Lake Geneva / Twin Cities style "fantasy wargaming club," or a "massively multiplayer offline RPG."

When it comes to creating a setting, my feeling is that a game world is at its most interesting when it's ancient, mysterious, and full of puzzles and clues. A D&D game should be 40% Myst, 30% Diablo, 20% Morrowind, and 10% John Carter of Mars. You can never go wrong following that particular recipe! :)
 
Last edited:


toucanbuzz

No rule is inviolate
  • Whatever makes it fun, #1. I want it good enough that players are writing each other on Discord to chat about what's going on, taking notes, chatting about NPCs as if they're real persons.
  • Immersion #2 priority. As a group, limiting character choices to fit the theme + theme (e.g. the constant despair of Curse of Strahd with gothic horror inspired by art and literature, very Dracula, no juvenile jokes during dramatic moments). Total immersion = rocking campaign. This also means getting into the idea that certain adventures are meant to go in one thematic direction (e.g. Strahd is about escaping Barovia, not opening an Inn and gallivanting around for buried treasure). In certain campaigns like my long-running Kingmaker, I use calendars where I track birthdays, holidays and major anniversary events so we can reminisce about what's gone on.
  • NPCs make the game go 'round. #3 priority, make them count. The best hero movies are often defined by the bad guy.
  • Keep the Splat Down. PHB + 1 book.
  • I'll Change Monsters. Many reflect older editions. Powerful demons and dragons have spells. Golems are immune to nearly all magic. Makes monsters a bit more like puzzles, where sometimes a particular character type gets to shine.
  • Slow it Down. I try to make levels last and elaborate on storylines. It's when the game goes to unexpected, unscripted territory that it gets really fun. Slowing it down helps quite a bit letting the game go places it might not usually go.
  • I don't do accents. (1) I can't. (2) IMO, accents aren't roleplaying. So, I keep a table of 3 traits (visual such as gold tooth, mannerism such as tapping leg when talking, and auditory such as talking out of side of mouth or ending every sentence like a question).
  • I don't fudge rolls. I don't roll everything in view, but major dramatic rolls, absolutely. Failure and character death make just as good a story as success at everything. The rolls help make that story something we can't script.
  • Character deaths are ok. It needs to be accepted that death can and will happen. And that's okay. It's about what story it creates. So, I really hate senseless ones and will weave in new elements, if I can, to avoid them (e.g. capture, a quest to recover the soul, a deal with the fey to build a new body, retirement). But, sometimes it just needs to be what it is.
  • Magic items should be cool. There is no such thing as a +1 sword in my games. Legacy items converted from 3rd edition, or the common amulet from Mechanus that for a brief moment makes everything orderly (auto 10 on a roll once per day), stuff that has a story about it that makes using it cool.
 

JiffyPopTart

Bree-Yark
I prefer the game have an element of danger as a player and a DM. There should be a very real sense that a character isnt going to make it out alive in some situations. I'm never going to single out a player character and try to kill them unless they continuously attack something well out of their league or do something stupid. But Im not going to fudge rolls in anyones favor either. Characters surviving should never be an expectation.
Death, especially as the campaign gets to higher levels, isn't much more than a speed bump to me.

That's why, when my player in 3.5 playing a tricked out super shield using shield specialist had a much more visceral reaction to my ruling the acid trap he failed a save against didn't hurt him at all but instead destroyed his prized possession.

Similarly the PCs letting down their faction by failing at something (and thus a behind the scenes struggle going their enemies way) is a bigger hit to them than losing some gold or creating a new character.

I've just never felt character death (Resurrection or not) was a motivating factor to be careful since either it's just you, in which case you make a new PC and resume all the old ties and plot, or you have a TPK in which case you have destroyed your own campaign.

But I do play with a guy who thinks his character dying is the worst possible outcome of any scene in the game so there is something out there for everyone.
 

niklinna

satisfied?
  • Character deaths are ok. It needs to be accepted that death can and will happen. And that's okay. It's about what story it creates. So, I really hate senseless ones and will weave in new elements, if I can, to avoid them (e.g. capture, a quest to recover the soul, a deal with the fey to build a new body, retirement). But, sometimes it just needs to be what it is.
Denise Crosby would approve.
 

R_J_K75

Legend
Death, especially as the campaign gets to higher levels, isn't much more than a speed bump to me.
I've just never felt character death (Resurrection or not) was a motivating factor to be careful since either it's just you, in which case you make a new PC and resume all the old ties and plot, or you have a TPK in which case you have destroyed your own campaign.
Sure if you allow a player to create a character after they die at the same level, or just resurrect them then theres no point to character death, and no incentive for a player to keep their PC alive. Honestly losing a few party members or all of them would definitely make the campaign more urgent for both the players and the PCs. Doesnt mean the campaign has to end, it just changes because the bad guys have the upper hand, are closer to reaching their goals and the stakes are now higher.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
0. Foremost: always encourage genuine, non-abusive, non-coercive player enthusiasm. I need to be able to step back and say, "even if this doesn't appeal to me, it makes my player(s) happy, and doesn't cost anyone else their happiness."

1. As Dungeon World puts it, "draw maps, leave blanks." Provide enough details to make the world come to life, but not so many that the players can't make choices. This is a little hard for me, as I tend to go HAM on worldbuilding and detail, but my players seem happy with how things shake out.

2. Draw the players into the action. I like a story where the characters matter--where you really can't just have one character die or disappear and have that mean nothing. So I tend to hand out items that draw toward a purpose, or drop hints about mysteries in a character's backstory, or in some other way weave a grand plot from the threads the players give me.

3. Always be willing to accept defeat. If the players outsmart me, they deserve that victory. I won't take that from them, even if it means a fight ends up being a nothingburger or a social interaction goes weird. It's okay for the players to get lucky or clever and not get the "full experience" I intended.

4. Make a bright world, but one threatened by darkness. It's a good world, one worth living in--and one worth protecting. Mercy works, kindness pays dividends, doing the right thing isn't stupid. Ordinary folks are weak and there are forces that are ready and willing to exploit and pervert the goodness of the world, but they can be stopped if people work for it. Heroism is what keeps the world from falling apart.

5. Give the players allies they can care about and opponents they can enjoy opposing. Obviously not easy for all players/groups, but you might be surprised (I certainly was!) at who gets fired up when beloved(/hated) NPCs merely get thrown into the spotlight.

6. Again as DW puts it, "Be a fan of the characters." You don't want pointless, dull ends for the PCs. Make events matter and have weight. If death is what will do that, go for it--but keep the cost in mind.
 

Jmarso

Adventurer
Some high (or low) points of my 'style':

1. I don't plan a campaign arc from start to finish. I let things be more sand-boxy, in general terms. I know where the campaign is going to start, but not where it's going to end. The BBEG is going to depend a good deal on where the players go, what they do, and the cages they rattle. I like the idea of lower levels = local heroes, medium levels = influencing the life and times of the setting, high levels = protecting the world or the plane from external threats. I don't run campaigns where the PC's are overtly evil with evil goals. This whole approach is why my hands-down favorite place to run a game is the World of Greyhawk. In fact, I don't think I've DM'd a campaign anywhere else since the 1980's, except for dips into Dragonlance and Ravenloft.

2. I try to put in as much prep time beforehand so that I'm not having to flip through books / tabs and generate stuff on-the-spot in game. It also allows me to tailor encounters and such (to a degree) to the group, although I like to leave in surprise elements for them along with the occasional too-easy or too-hard encounter, as the dice decree. If I know they are going to be traveling cross-country for a portion of an adventure, I roll and pregenerate the random encounters, weather, and all that stuff so that it is ready to go and I don't have to pause play to generate it on the fly. If the players do something that takes them off this 'script', such as it is, I'll adapt as necessary or go to random generation on the fly, even though it slows things down a bit.

3. When the players finish an arc or an adventure, the choice of where to go and what to do next is up to them. I'll usually set adventure hooks for them to choose from, and what they pick is the path they take next session. There's usually an understanding between myself and the group- because I do so much prep between sessions, once they pick something they generally stick to it, lest they throw things into total disarray. Stuff happens sometimes, though. :p

4. I usually roll behind the screen as DM, and sometimes I will have players make rolls that will have no effect, but it keeps them from that metagaming situation of 'he's making us roll so there is definitely something there.' More to the point, they know I do this with the 'random rolls.' I generally don't fudge any roll other than something that will obliterate a PC and disrupt the game, but that is not to be taken to mean that there is no danger. PCs can and do die in my campaigns, but occasionally to keep a story moving I'll show a smidgen of mercy that they never see, like maybe dealing normal damage on a monster crit instead of doubling it. That said, my monsters act and fight to the utmost of their stats, and the players had better be smart as well or perish. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. As I've mentioned in other threads, trying to negotiate / deal with evil monsters and humanoids usually ends badly for the party. They may achieve a temporary advantage or goal, but evil creatures betray. It's in their nature.

5. I've noticed in some games that players tend to take treasure on the spot as it's found. Since I've played as a kid, I've always encouraged a 'treasure kitty' during any given adventure, and the divvying of stuff that is not immediately useful or obviously useful to a particular class of character (potions, scrolls, etc, or magic weapons) is handled at the end of the adventure. Gems can be sold and money divided, or treasure partitioned into relatively equal 'shares' from which the players pick what they want between themselves. I DO NOT encourage PvP sort of play, or the party rogue stealing from his/her friends, etc, but I don't forbid it, either. It's their game, and if they want to engage in self-destructive behavior I sit back and let the chips fall. When it ends badly (as it often does), I simply point out that this sort of play is generally detrimental to a fun game, but it's up to them. The other advantage of a treasure kitty is that it gives players a choice to make: do party 'expenses' come out of the kitty before the profits are shared, or do they share beforehand and each player is responsible for his or her own expenses? For example, the party wizard has a lot of upkeep expenses for those spellbooks, etc, from which everyone benefits in the wild. Again, up to the players.

6. I do the occasional voice for the NPC's, most often if I'm going for a laugh. My voice-acting skills are somewhat lame, however, so for the more mundane stuff I'll often revert to third person narration. "The inkeep says he has no private rooms..." sort of thing.

7. I do like to keep combat spicy by narrating the outcome of actions. Critical hits get big hand motions and visceral descriptions of monster dismemberment, and so on. I've found players dig this, and I like having them describe their own kill-shots and stuff as well. I enjoy it, too.

That's a general overview of how I conduct a game.
 

pogre

Legend
1. Heavy prep.
2. Fast-paced.
3. Lots of combat challenges.
4. Memorable NPCs.
5. Be consistent and run the campaign for as long as the players have interest or we get to an epic level.
6. Be a cheerleader for the PCs.
7. Open rolling.
8. Try to listen and observe when players are the most engaged - give them more of that.
9. Run weekly at the same time on the same day. Start on time and end on time.
 

Remove ads

Top