Will Learning to DM Make a Better Player?

[Camelot]

Thanks to everyone for your advice!

Be careful; this sounds like a case that your own expectations may have tarnished what the player was really wanting/expecting. In this case, I think the player may have really wanted to using a ranged character instead of a up-front melee character (being able to deal good damage but avoid taking it in the first place). You, on the other hand were expecting that a fighter should be *required* to be someone who is in the front ranks going toe to toe with the enemy; I don't think your expectations matched the players, nor does it sound you were willing to bend your expectations to consider how to help the player meet his expectations of what the character should be like.

The player built a fighter wielding a two-handed weapon who looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger with high Strength and Constitution. I let him choose from every class, telling him what each meant in a roleplaying sense. As we made the character, he asked me to help him choose feats that would maximize his damage as well as toughness, so he had plenty of hit points. He definitely wanted to be a melee character, no doubt!

In retrospect, maybe he was just commenting on the fact that the monsters were rolling particularly well against him but not against any other party member. He said it jokingly, and we laughed about it, but it only stuck with me because he said it often and I knew that statistically the monsters should be rolling better against him, since they're attacking him more. It was not a big deal, but just an example of how my inexperienced players don't get what DMing really entails.

Not sure if it really fits or not, but your group may be playing a game that is more complicated that you actually would like. If the players are not interested in learning the rules, then this is probably the case. If the players are just inexperienced, then this might not be the case.

Speaking of which, my players are definitely inexperienced. We play 4th edition D&D since it came out; I guess I should have mentioned that. None of us, myself included had played any TTRPGs (besides typical board games) before D&D, but I learned it first and taught it to them.

I know all the rules in the game, almost by heart. My players only know the rules that they need to know for their characters. This isn't what annoys me. What annoys me is that they sometimes act as if the only rules they know are the only rules there are, not understanding that I need to know more than they do while running five times as many creatures as them at once. Like I've said, it's not a huge problem, just a small annoyance that sometimes crops up, and I know that it is also half my fault. That's why I want to switch roles with them, so we can all see the game from a different vantage point.

I am not going to force this on any of them, no way. I'm not an evil DM! My main concern is always fun, and if they're sure they wouldn't have fun as the DM, then they won't have to try. But so far all the players I've mentioned this to have said something along the lines of, "Yeah, sure, that sounds cool." One in particular is excited to learn, and has begun planning a storyline (though she won't tell me what it is, since I am going to be playing it!). But I'm going to guide them each individually through what they need to know, one on one, before they actually run a full game.

Sorry I talk so much. =P Thanks again for your help!

 

[Camelot]

It sounds like there might be some disconnect between what you and your players are looking for in the game. The best solution to that is to just talk about it, rather than trying to figure things out.

That actually brings up another annoyance that caused me to want to do this. When I ask my players what they want in a game of D&D, I'm thinking along the lines of the DMG advice on player motivations, trying to categorize them and then use that category to give them what they want. But when they try to tell me what they want, they give me vague ideas that they end up not liking when I try to execute them.

One player wanted more roleplaying because she was bored during combat, so I made a social encounter that required more than just talking facts, but actual problem solving. She was still bored. I tried asking her why she didn't like it, but I couldn't get a straight answer. I'm wondering if maybe she read through the DMG, she'd understand what I'm looking for and be able to give me an answer that I'll be able to turn into a fun game.

 

[Hussar]

To be honest, I think it does everyone good to be on both sides of the screen from time to time. I know I've learned a lot about how to be a better DM as a player (both what works and what I don't think works) and players who have been DM's sometimes make better players since they'll generally be more sympathetic to the difficulties of running a game.

OTOH, I find that players who've been DM's can be more cognizant of the rules, which might be a problem if you play fast and loose with the rules. It can cause some friction when the other players know exactly when you're changing the rules.

 

[radmod]

Simple answer: yes, because, as others indicated, the players may discover what is involved in DMing (it ain't that easy!)

Simple solution:
As others have hinted at, but I didn't see, consider the old fashioned multi-level dungeon (of Doom!) John does level 1, Judy level 2, etc. You handle transitions between each level (or put in your own level or mini-level). Likewise, you could have this bit of land is John's 'world', this other Julie's, etc.

That said, I apparently suffered from momentary (usually permanent) stupidity because I thought the title was asking "Does DMing make you a better player?" as in "should a DM play every once in a whle?" I've solely DM'd almost straight since 1988. Recently, I joined as a player in a group which had been together for a while. What I discovered is that I didn't know how to play anymore!
Sure I vaguely knew this feat or that power, but if it didn't really apply to my monsters I never really bothered to learn it (unless a usage of it sounded hinky). Since playing again, I am now more aware of the capabilities of the other players which means I can make it more interesting and more challenging.

 

[fba827]

I see this as a case of either a lack of appreciation and/or understanding, or lack of agreement of expectations.

In my opinion, "the other side of the screen" a great way for anyone to braoden their perspective and appreciation. However, I would not qualify that as "better" since everyone's expectations for what they want out of a game differs.
* I know some players who would be bored and frustrated as a DM, and some DMs that are bored and frustrated as players.
* Conversely, I know some players who have grown as players after having tried DMing a few times and some DMs who have grown as DMs after having tried to play a few times.

In this case, based on what you wrote here, it sounds as though none of the players are actually interested in being more involved. So you'd probably just be heavy-handed forcing the DM situation which doesn't sound like it would be very fun for a _game_

Perhaps slowly get them more involved in a nonobvious way to test the waters.
Examples:
-Next time you have to think up some inconsequential setting detail, ask a random player who isn't involved in the conversation for the details (i.e. going to talk to the barkeep for rumors around town, ask one of the players who isn't talking to the barkeep what the barkeep looks like, then ask another person or two for some rumors that might be floating around town).
-Or the next time during a fight, ask another player which PC it might target and why (pointing out which PC has been hitting it the most, which is closest, and which are bloodied). though this one is tricky since it might lead to resentment among players who pick each other back and forth for targetting as revenge for being picked as the target.
-or even just send out an email, asking in a non-forceful way for any plot ideas (either new or extensions of previous plots), or if there are any monstsers that they want to fight, and so on.
-if all else fails, just ask flat out "anyone want to try DMing for a session so I can play? We can do it a month from now so you have time to prepare. it isn't too hard and i can help with some basics, just keep some things secret so that i can be surprised"

 

[IronWolf]

While I think having experience on both sides of the table can certainly help from both the DM'ing and playing side of the table you really can't force people to DM. Well, I guess you can try, but I suspect the game will be less than enjoyable for all involved.

Now you can certainly encourage folks to DM and offer up the opportunities, but forcing one to DM is sure to cause issues.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

DMing is not something you do because you are ASSIGNED to do it; REQUIRED to do it. DMing is ONLY something you should do because you WANT to do it.

I have a set of statements. I call them my D&D Manifesto. Statement #3 is:

"Communicate DAMMIT! If you aren't having fun as a player, even though you may think it's very obvious, it's quite possible the DM or other players aren't going to know unless you say something. If you’re not enjoying your experience as DM you don’t have to put up with it. Nobody can force you to run a game. Sometimes you become the DM just because everyone else wants to avoid the job more than you do, but remember that no one can take advantage of you without your permission. If you have a problem with ANYTHING in the game: rules, behavior of a player, etc. then SAY SO. ESP is not a standard human ability."

REQUIRING players to act as DM - even for ONE GAME - is not something ANY player has to tolerate. Invite them to try it. Encourage them to try it. Tell them why you enjoy it - as well as what you don't like about it. Explain to them your reasoning behind even small rulings without them having to ASK first. You don't have to shove them into the chair in order to educate them about what you do and why you do it. If I were a player being TOLD that I had to DM - even if I were interested I'd likely walk away. You choose to DM. The players choose to play. They also get to CHOOSE to DM if and when they genuinely desire to do so - just as you have the same choice as they do to be a player.

 

[MortalPlague]

I was in the same boat for the first while I played D&D. It was a good ten years before I actually got to play in a campaign. And it really opened my eyes to the players' side of things, and has made me a much better DM. I learned lots of little things, like letting players get away with cheating an encounter every now and then, or running a really satisfying encounter.

It's not for everyone, though. I've had a few players who just have no desire to DM, and I've had a few who tried their hand at it and weren't all that great. But that's part of the fun... you never know, you might find someone who's a natural at DM'ing!

 

[S'mon]

D&D 4e is a complicated game with lengthy combats.

I think you sound a bit burnt-out and I suggest that for a few sessions you try running a simpler game, like one of the D&D retro-clones: Basic Fantasy RPG, Labyrinth Lord (both Classic B/X D&D), and OSRIC (1e AD&D) are all great, among others. They are also simple enough that a rules-averse player can take a hand GMing. This will (a) be fun and (b) give you and your players a fresh perspective on 4e, what you like and don't like, what works and doesn't work. It should also stretch your DMing muscles and get your players thinking differently about the game.

I suggest house-ruling max hp at first level, though - not much fun being a Fighter with 1hp!

 

[DragonLancer]

Don't force your players to DM. Some players just don't want to and others are happy to remain players. Of course ask, see if there is any interest but if not don't worry about it. If you feel there are problems then I recommend that you just sit down with everyone and talk about what you and they want, and come to a suitable mix.