D&D General Why do you prefer DMing over Playing?

[Stormonu]

* glances left and right * . Okay, you have to promise not to tell anyone else. * glances left and right again *.

It’s because whenever I see others DM, I say to myself, “I could do that better.” …And I’m generally right.

Whew. Glad I got that off my chest. Sad, but true for me at least for most of the DMs I’ve run across. Watching and learning from their mistakes - as well as what they do well - has made me better as a DM and made me confident that DMing is one thing in my life that I do well.

Also, getting to be half a dozen people instead of one - and knowing all the answers behind why such-and-such is happening and watching the faces of the players as they figure it out … is priceless.

 

[Guest 7034872]

For the class in general, on average, who is more important to them to show up sober that hour? The teacher or one of the students.

More necessary to smooth conduct of the class? Sure. More important of a person? Hogswallop.

 

[Jack Daniel]

1) As a DM, the more I focus on the players, the more fun I have. I've run campaigns based on my own preferences, and they're just not as fun as when I let go of my ego and base the game on the players' preferences. My game is just so much more successful and fun when I sit down and ask myself (or the players), 'What would the players enjoy?'

2) As a player, the more authority over the game world the DM gives up, the more fun we have. I recently wrapped up a three-year-long D&D game in which the DM, for various reasons, gave a lot of authority over lore and game direction to the players. It was great! Here are some fun things we did without DM approval:

Ah, the zeal of the converted in combination with the rebellious feeling of countering the mainstream. It makes for a heady brew that compels us to preach the Good Word.

The indie RPG movement has its pet issues ("the mainstream is GM authority and combat-focused sim, but distributed authority and mechanics that act directly on narrative are the countercultural New Way! Preach it!"). The OSR does too ("the mainstream is play-acting protected protagonists through the GM's plotline, but lethal sandboxes and pawn stance are the countercultural Old Way! Praise Gygax!").

I even recognize the exact same feeling in myself — that need to testify based on my very personal experience — that my games became noticeably more fun for me (and, as near as I can tell, for anyone I play with) when I switched from a heavily plotted and in-character play-style to hex-crawls, mega-dungeons, and not really giving a crap about whether the players "role-played" (in the vulgar sense) or not.

Amazing how that works. It should make us all feel considerably more skeptical of our own biases, I should think. It's certainly doing a number on mine.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Ah, the zeal of the converted in combination with the rebellious feeling of countering the mainstream. It makes for a heady brew that compels us to preach the Good Word.

The indie RPG movement has its pet issues ("the mainstream is GM authority and combat-focused sim, but distributed authority and mechanics that act directly on narrative are the countercultural New Way! Preach it!"). The OSR does too ("the mainstream is play-acting protected protagonists through the GM's plotline, but lethal sandboxes and pawn stance are the countercultural Old Way! Praise Gygax!").

I even recognize the exact same feeling in myself — that need to testify based on my very personal experience — that my games became noticeably more fun for me (and, as near as I can tell, for anyone I play with) when I switched from a heavily plotted and in-character play-style to hex-crawls, mega-dungeons, and not really giving a crap about whether the players "role-played" (in the vulgar sense) or not.

Amazing how that works. It should make us all feel considerably more skeptical of our own biases, I should think. It's certainly doing a number on mine.

Huh?

 

[Retreater]

For the most part, many games I've played are DM power-trips. They control all elements of the story, run gritty realism to torture characters, give the best moments/treasure to favorite players (or DM PCs) while sidelining others, focus on minutiae and shopping excursions, think they're the next Matt Mercer, inject their own political/racial/sexist beliefs, etc.
The only control I have over the quality is to DM myself (or walk away from bad games).

 

[Asisreo]

For the most part, many games I've played are DM power-trips. They control all elements of the story, run gritty realism to torture characters, give the best moments/treasure to favorite players (or DM PCs) while sidelining others, focus on minutiae and shopping excursions, think they're the next Matt Mercer, inject their own political/racial/sexist beliefs, etc.
The only control I have over the quality is to DM myself (or walk away from bad games).

There does seem to be alot of those on the internet and in gaming stores. Too often will the internet go into sadistic adjustments to items, plots, or characters just to screw with the players when they don't go where they want to when they want to.

 

[fba827]

I enjoy both for different reasons.
But referring to DMing specifically
(1) It allows me to play different characters rather than just one the whole campaign
(2) it lets me work my creative muscles
(3) it helps me work on some social anxiety issues in a controlled environment

 

[Thomas Shey]

There are a number of things: I like the creative aspects, it gives me an opportunity to roleplay multiple characters, I can do tactical play no one character could do--

But honestly compels me to say I've concluded in the last few years that I'm also far less likely to get bored if I'm actively involved in the vast majority of events. I have talents as a player, but I'm not really a good one because I'll lose the thread if I'm not involved for a bit.