Why all players but no DMs?

[scourger]

It's an issue for me & my group--past & present. Everyone says they like to play D&D but nobody wants to DM it. Personally, I just find it too much extra work for not enough extra reward than other games that are easier for me to run. Even the other GMs haven't offered to DM very often. One player/DM even quit because he really only wanted to play D&D, not other games people wanted to GM; and he was the only other long-term DM we had (besides me).

What's the deal?

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

Same here. Too much work, not enough reward. It's a lot of fun to play though. Whenever I get the opportunity to play, I take it (even knowing sooner or later the DM is bound to crash).

 

[harmyn]

Me, I love to DM. Been running games for 20+ years now. All sorts of games. D&D (all incarnations), GURPS, Vampire, In Nomine, Stars Wars d6, TMNT, all sorts of games. D&D 3.5 is the hardest for me to prep for at higher levels because of the crunch level involved (found it easier to make GURPS Supers than 15th level D&D characters). Still I love to D(G)M.

 

[paradox42]

The amount of work needed to run high-level D&D3.X is certainly an issue, probably- it also explains why so many people seem to prefer low-level games and evangelize about their preference. What I've found, regarding the level of work needed to pull off high-level games of D&D3.X, is that less can be more if properly presented. Do as little work as possible while still retaining enough details to allow you to run the game, and aggressively take advantage of averages and "standard packages" of skills and feats (for example, no melee Fighter above level 9 or so will willingly be without Power Attack and the Cleaves, and most will have them long before that level).

You can often get by on "good enough" without optimizing every last detail, and really at truly high levels (including Epic) the most important thing from a player perspective is gear- enemy NPCs will rely on it as much as PCs do, plus you'll need to have a treasure list handy if the PCs succeed in killing the enemy (to take its stuff).

High-level D&D becomes more like a superhero comic book than a traditional sword & sorcery fantasy, and if the DM takes this to heart and runs with it then running the game at such levels becomes much easier, IMO. Adapt to the game and you can make the game adapt to you.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

Have you tried running pubished adventures? Our group has had similar problems, and found that a premade adventure makes the DM's job a lot easier.

 

[Piratecat]

If I had to rate my preference of DMing to playing by dividing ten points, it'd be DM 6 / Play 4. I love playing, but I have a passion for running a game. It's always a delight, and never a chore. My campaign has been going for more than a decade, and I can't think of one game I didn't look forward to.

 

[dpmcalister]

I enjoy GMing/DMing more than playing, but haven't got the opportunity to do either at the moment

 

[ZombieButch]

I like playing every once in a while, but I prefer GMing 99% of the time. I did stop running D&D because of the amount of time it was taking to set up to a degree I was comfortable with. (That's even after abandoning things like calculating XP's.) Fortunately, I have a whole raft of other games that are, for me at least, a lot easier to just pick up and run with.

 

[blargney the second]

I'm with Piratecat - I love to play, but DMing is just a bit more fun for me.

 

[Mycanid]

I have to admit that I always LOVED dm'ing more than playing - primarily because I found more satisfaction in being the primary catalyst for other people's enjoyment of the game.

But you all are right - most like to play instead of DM. DM'ing is tough work and doing a good job, putting a lot of work into it is even harder and more time consuming than playing.

Later Edit: 7:3 by Piratecat's scale.