D&D General Which Aspect of DMing Do you Struggle Most With?
- Thread starter Hexmage-EN
- Start date
Most players in con games actively want a satisfying 4 hour experience and are happy to let the GM "drive" most of the time, where as in home games, especially when you play reguarly and a lot, there's more room to let players stretch their legs with NPCs or whatever.
Making likable NPCs. I've excellent at making villains and rivals; the kind of people you love to hate. While I'll occasionally make an NPC the players like (and the party becomes very attached to them), most of the "friendly" NPCs are given a mild disdain. A few are even viewed with outright hostility; I've had friendly NPCs turned into enemies because of their treatment by the PC, which just reinforces their opinion of most NPCs...
I think it's better to overestimate than underestimate. I try to be prepared enough to two sessions, just in case the party either skips a section or is much more productive than usual. When I ran Murder in Baulder's Gate during an Encounters season, we spent 2 sessions before we even started the first official "encounter," since the party really wanted to meet the NPCs.
I have the opposite problem, in that I currently have about 7-8 ideas, but I just can't run enough. I just finished my 3rd campaign about a month ago, taking my first hiatus in about 6 years or so. Even still I'm putting together a Megadungeon to be runs as one shots for the weeks the DM can't run. I'm a bit of an addict
That's me.
I' great at improv, pacing, hitting player needs, and worldbuilding.
But I keep it all in my head and by the time the session is over,my brain is fried. So the short term memories never stick.
Another thing I am bad at is descriptions. I can't talk all bookish and describe all the detials of anything. I cheat and roll on tables with adjective on them.
"How does the orc leader look."
"He's bigger and has a roll red hat and a roll eyepatch"
This makes the other problem worse as everything is on the fly.
el-remmen
Moderator Emeritus
I keep a campaign wiki and usually spend an hour or so after the session updated/creating pages for things like NPCs and places. This has become esp. important now that my groups play every 3 to 5 weeks and we're all a little (um. . or a lot) older and pulled in a million directions and memories are shot.
For those who are interested, here is one of them: Revenants of Saltmarsh - Revenants of Saltmarsh
Last edited:
Yeah, with my new "PlaneJammer" campaign I am going to schedule for a half hour post-session notes period.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Keeping record
Great thread.
I am terrible at funny voices and, related to that, not the best at giving NPCs distinct personalities.
Recently I realized that I've done a mediocre job at creating memorable villains. Villains are notorious for not surviving first contact with the PCs, so I got into the unfortunate habit of putting very little effort into them. I'm now trying to correct that.
I know this sounds like I'm a bit of a bad DM. But I'm not. I just need to work a bit harder to bring to life the supporting characters in my campaign.
I am terrible at funny voices and, related to that, not the best at giving NPCs distinct personalities.
Recently I realized that I've done a mediocre job at creating memorable villains. Villains are notorious for not surviving first contact with the PCs, so I got into the unfortunate habit of putting very little effort into them. I'm now trying to correct that.
I know this sounds like I'm a bit of a bad DM. But I'm not. I just need to work a bit harder to bring to life the supporting characters in my campaign.
Voadam
Legend
I am barely competent at the online tech parts of our online group using FG. We each bought subscriptions and others are more proficient so it works well enough to use and it is our system as we are scattered across the country, but it is really frustrating as DM to be limited to some basic existing element stuff and not to be able to modify things as I'd like while knowing it can be done.
Multiple times I have spent half an hour before the game adding walls to a dungeon map only to have them show up only for me. I know how to modify creature names and numbers like attack bonuses and hp, but not to add abilities or do a creature from scratch.
The limited pallete of tools adds some good use of those tools, but it is frustrating.
Multiple times I have spent half an hour before the game adding walls to a dungeon map only to have them show up only for me. I know how to modify creature names and numbers like attack bonuses and hp, but not to add abilities or do a creature from scratch.
The limited pallete of tools adds some good use of those tools, but it is frustrating.
Learning to marry my improv heavy style, which in person necessitates a lot of scribbling on dry erase grids, with FGs "You Must Pick A Map!!" User environment has been a chore. Frankly all the lighting and line of sight tools in FGU has made it worse. But I'm getting there.
One thing I've struggled with in the past is plot consistency and plot fatigue. I'll put some interesting clues in front of the players, but when I try to figure out what is going on behind the scenes it becomes a tangled mess. And that's even before I figure out how to get that information to the players so they can act on it. It led to dm burn out.
Related to the other thread about railroading, this is why I prefer low prep, high improv, sandbox style games. Rather than trying to get everything together behind the scenes I just have a few minimal ideas and improv things at the table. Still learning/practicing how to do that best.
Related to the other thread about railroading, this is why I prefer low prep, high improv, sandbox style games. Rather than trying to get everything together behind the scenes I just have a few minimal ideas and improv things at the table. Still learning/practicing how to do that best.
ccs
41st lv DM
Not the same thing at all. At least not for me.
What I write/run/& how at a convention is not the same thing as what I'd put on the table elsewhere.
At a con there's 3:45 minutes to tell a coherent story. There's no such time limit at home even though our individual sessions 4-4.5 hours long. So at home the story can develop at a natural pace.
And at a con we're not BSing about work, the kids, the current Marvel movie, having the great "What do we want on the pizza?" debate, etc etc etc.
EzekielRaiden
Legend
The part I struggle most with, at least as far as I feel about it, is "over-supporting."
I think, particularly with the quietest player who is new to RPGs and not sure how to engage, I'm TOO eager to offer support, TOO afraid of long silences, and thus coddle him heavily in this regard. He doesn't need to step up to the plate much, because all it takes is five seconds of awkward silence and I'm altering the topology of the field so the plate is already under his feet.
Now, this may be a perception issue. But there are some other small ways that I feel I might be over-volunteering suggestions, rather than letting my players' natural creativity run wild. Whenever they DO have an idea I strive to be maximally supportive....but I worry that I'm invading their creative space by presenting options before they have a chance to let their own ideas grow first.
I think, particularly with the quietest player who is new to RPGs and not sure how to engage, I'm TOO eager to offer support, TOO afraid of long silences, and thus coddle him heavily in this regard. He doesn't need to step up to the plate much, because all it takes is five seconds of awkward silence and I'm altering the topology of the field so the plate is already under his feet.
Now, this may be a perception issue. But there are some other small ways that I feel I might be over-volunteering suggestions, rather than letting my players' natural creativity run wild. Whenever they DO have an idea I strive to be maximally supportive....but I worry that I'm invading their creative space by presenting options before they have a chance to let their own ideas grow first.
What I struggle with is deciding on the details of the plot when designing my own adventures.
I can easily picture what kind of tone, setting and casting I'd like to see in play. But, when it comes to deciding on who did what and why, the possibilities appear endless and I'm struck with paradox of choice. There are so many options, so many ways to assemble the puzzle of factions, NPCs and events, that I can't decide which one I like best.
Instead, I always see their flaws and keep starting back from scratch until it's game time; at which point I hurriedly throw the PCs in one of the situations I had in mind, choosing nearly at random, and find myself forced to wing the details based on players' expectations (either to support or trump them).
I can easily picture what kind of tone, setting and casting I'd like to see in play. But, when it comes to deciding on who did what and why, the possibilities appear endless and I'm struck with paradox of choice. There are so many options, so many ways to assemble the puzzle of factions, NPCs and events, that I can't decide which one I like best.
Instead, I always see their flaws and keep starting back from scratch until it's game time; at which point I hurriedly throw the PCs in one of the situations I had in mind, choosing nearly at random, and find myself forced to wing the details based on players' expectations (either to support or trump them).
Ath-kethin
Elder Thing
Keeping myself involved in an adventure I've discovered I don't care for.
In the past two months, I've literally just summed up the last half to 2/3 of three different adventures at the next session because I discovered a short way into running them that I just didn't care. And it's a problem I've had for decades, too - I remember similar occurrences all the way back in the mid 90s.
My argument has always been that the game has to be enjoyable for all participants, including me (always DM). And I strongly believe that's true. But it also true that as DM, I wield a disproportionate amount of power in the game/group. If the fighter quits or the wizard checks out, we can keep going. I'd the DM throws in the towel, it's hard for the game to move forward.
In the past two months, I've literally just summed up the last half to 2/3 of three different adventures at the next session because I discovered a short way into running them that I just didn't care. And it's a problem I've had for decades, too - I remember similar occurrences all the way back in the mid 90s.
My argument has always been that the game has to be enjoyable for all participants, including me (always DM). And I strongly believe that's true. But it also true that as DM, I wield a disproportionate amount of power in the game/group. If the fighter quits or the wizard checks out, we can keep going. I'd the DM throws in the towel, it's hard for the game to move forward.
Last edited:
hopeless
Adventurer
I'm amazed at times when the players own efforts provide ideas for where to focus the game on.
Unfortunately trying to pursue that course I think scares them, which is why they seem to want to limit what they tell me despite the fact I'm trying to discuss these details and they later turn around to claim I'm rewriting their character when they're the ones who gave me that information.
In retrospect I believe I was trying to establish the game when all they wanted was to do was blow off some steam and not worry about such details.
Unfortunately trying to pursue that course I think scares them, which is why they seem to want to limit what they tell me despite the fact I'm trying to discuss these details and they later turn around to claim I'm rewriting their character when they're the ones who gave me that information.
In retrospect I believe I was trying to establish the game when all they wanted was to do was blow off some steam and not worry about such details.
Generally, voices and in-character stuff, but that's also as a player. Keeping good notes, organization, but that's also a life issue, lol.
As a DM, sometimes table management is an issue, pacing.
As a 5e DM, balancing combat. I dunno, it seems to me that combat encounters are either so deadly that I have to reign in or TPK, or complete cakewalks. I'm not sure I'm getting that sweet spot where I am challenging the PCs without overwhelming them. Now, this might be my party as well, my current campaign has a Paladin, Druid, 2 Rogues and 2 Warlocks. The Druid player is the least available, so often the party is in combat without a lot of support. So, the party itself feels glass cannon-y.
As a DM, sometimes table management is an issue, pacing.
As a 5e DM, balancing combat. I dunno, it seems to me that combat encounters are either so deadly that I have to reign in or TPK, or complete cakewalks. I'm not sure I'm getting that sweet spot where I am challenging the PCs without overwhelming them. Now, this might be my party as well, my current campaign has a Paladin, Druid, 2 Rogues and 2 Warlocks. The Druid player is the least available, so often the party is in combat without a lot of support. So, the party itself feels glass cannon-y.
