Master of the Game
- Thread starter Archon
- Start date
A good DM/GM/ST does have to wear several hats, and they are all equally important. I personally wouldn't rate story, rules or arbitration above or below the other things a good DM/GM/ST needs to do in order for the players to have a fun, interesting and immersive experience.
You can run a game without a story, sure. Demos at conventions can go this route. And sometimes you can have a session that's almost all story and no game, as players build their characters and get to know one another. Focusing entirely on one aspect of it, however, at the expense of another feels like it's diminishing the experience for everybody involved.
I think this is a great article that sheds some light on everything that's involved in running a tabletop role-playing game. And I don't think that the story should necessarily overtake the other aspects of the game. But to call the story the least important aspect, or implying that it's an insignificant one, doesn't feel right to me.
That's just my personal opinion on it, though. Feel free to save vs. aspiring novelist.
You can run a game without a story, sure. Demos at conventions can go this route. And sometimes you can have a session that's almost all story and no game, as players build their characters and get to know one another. Focusing entirely on one aspect of it, however, at the expense of another feels like it's diminishing the experience for everybody involved.
I think this is a great article that sheds some light on everything that's involved in running a tabletop role-playing game. And I don't think that the story should necessarily overtake the other aspects of the game. But to call the story the least important aspect, or implying that it's an insignificant one, doesn't feel right to me.
That's just my personal opinion on it, though. Feel free to save vs. aspiring novelist.
I look at the DM as a living simulator. Their job it to provide a compelling environment with consistent rules with which the players can tell their own story. I made the mistake of scripting out my first campaign down to the NPC dialogs in advance. Now a days I draw up dungeon maps and give NPC's names, hit points, a few character traits, and just wing it from there.
The winging it is what keeps pen and paper alive in a world of next gen video games. All content for a video game is made prior to the start of a game play session, but with pen and paper I can react to completely unexpected player actions, like hacking your way through the wall next to an obviously trapped front door.
The winging it is what keeps pen and paper alive in a world of next gen video games. All content for a video game is made prior to the start of a game play session, but with pen and paper I can react to completely unexpected player actions, like hacking your way through the wall next to an obviously trapped front door.
Ah-ha, the debate begins already! I'm sure my position here will be controversial, but I'll expand more in later installments. The short version is that I think story is exceptionally important, but it doesn't require the DM to be a storyteller. I'm discussing what the role of the DM is, not what's important to a game.
And you hit the nail quite nicely! (Did you crit?Archon said:
)I look forward to reading your thoughts on what's important to a game. I'm sure even more debate will be sparked!
As someone who's been gaming since I could read (literally, I started playing warhammer when I was three and started on dnd when i was seven) I like to think I have a fairly strong base for my knowledge of DMing and I personally think, there is no such thing as a truly bad gm, just maybe one who is not suited for his players, or perchance a touch new at the whole thing and a little overwhelmed.
I had to start GMing really early for my friends, and my entire style has been ended up being built around six other people, which has resulted in me having built giant map on a hex grid for them so they don't get lost, and a massive population, so when our beserker can't actually kill off whole towns in one go. No one can be a good GM straight away, but I think that if set up with the right players anyone can be a good gm eventually
I had to start GMing really early for my friends, and my entire style has been ended up being built around six other people, which has resulted in me having built giant map on a hex grid for them so they don't get lost, and a massive population, so when our beserker can't actually kill off whole towns in one go. No one can be a good GM straight away, but I think that if set up with the right players anyone can be a good gm eventually
As a GM (I generally prefer the term GM to the alternatives, because it's more neutral - Dungeon Master and Storyteller have strong ties to a specific system) I realize that there are many roles to play, and many of them are similar to the roles a wargame judge plays. However, the most important rule for a GM is something that isn't really an issue for a wargame's judge: Make sure everyone involves is having a good time.
After all, an RPG is a game, and games are meant to be fun. Sure, the players can (and should!) contribute to that as well, but as 'master' of the game, the GM is chiefly responsible for what goes on, and before anything else he needs to make sure that the game is fun. Being a judge is an important factor in keeping the game fun (for example to prevent one player from dominating the game, or to defuse arguments before they escalate), but it's just one factor.
The other roles can certainly add a lot to the fun, but aren't necessary at all. If you're a GM without imagination and you're running a pre-written adventure by the book, and your players are having a great time? You're a great GM! If you're being a lousy adversary and just indulging the players all the time, and your players are having fun? You're a great GM! If you're running a dungeon-crawler with zero storyline, and your players are having a blast? You're a great GM!
After all, an RPG is a game, and games are meant to be fun. Sure, the players can (and should!) contribute to that as well, but as 'master' of the game, the GM is chiefly responsible for what goes on, and before anything else he needs to make sure that the game is fun. Being a judge is an important factor in keeping the game fun (for example to prevent one player from dominating the game, or to defuse arguments before they escalate), but it's just one factor.
The other roles can certainly add a lot to the fun, but aren't necessary at all. If you're a GM without imagination and you're running a pre-written adventure by the book, and your players are having a great time? You're a great GM! If you're being a lousy adversary and just indulging the players all the time, and your players are having fun? You're a great GM! If you're running a dungeon-crawler with zero storyline, and your players are having a blast? You're a great GM!
I think you could have been clearer in your point about storytelling to avoid a lot of unnecessary debate. Based on my own experience, and the few hints you've dropped about what is coming, I think that what you mean is that storytelling is less important for the GM, because it's the only one of the four roles that the players get to help with.
Aside from that, I really appreciate this article. As a fairly experienced GM always on the lookout for opportunities to get even better, I look forward to future installments. You seem to have a good grasp of what things are foundational and what things are variable.
One thing you didn't mention, that I'm curious if you plan to touch on later, is the out-of-game role of the GM as a mediator of player dynamics.
Aside from that, I really appreciate this article. As a fairly experienced GM always on the lookout for opportunities to get even better, I look forward to future installments. You seem to have a good grasp of what things are foundational and what things are variable.
One thing you didn't mention, that I'm curious if you plan to touch on later, is the out-of-game role of the GM as a mediator of player dynamics.
I'll be following this with great interest over the coming weeks. I've been roleplaying for about 6 years or so, and wargaming for nearly 15, and the only time I've ever really been on the GM side of things was running games of Inquisitor [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisitor_(game)] which is an interesting half-way house. Its not a skirmish level game per se, more a heroic, narrative-driven wargame. Creating campaigns and stories for that is interesting but also fundementally limited; the vast majority of what goes on in a story revolves around the battlefield. Given that most of the players are wargamers, what they're interested is the table-top conflict side of things. In comparison to a 'regular' RPG the whole thing is basically a dungeon crawl with shiny figures.
I've written a couple of rule articles for Inquisitor in my time, including both a vehicle combat/chase system, and an advanced close combat system too, so I'm on side with the 'know the rules, explain the rules, don't make your players feel like they're in a maths exam' bit, though I'll be interested to see what you have to say on the issue.
Last week, for example, our plan to unmask a phoney witch doctor resulted in three of the party having mescaline trips, a fourth almost ODing on Opium and our witch doctor dead on the floor with no face. Whereupon we decided to murder half the New Orleans police force on our way out.
When the game was done the GM confessed that actually the witch doctor was looking for an excuse to get out, and would happily have confessed to being a fraud if only we'd asked!
One last thing before this post turns into an epic, I'm curious to hear what you have to say about Paranoia? Given that the rules are to some degree optional, and so long as everyone is having fun, there really is a sense of 'us versus them' between the GM and Players, how does GMing a game of Paranoia differ from regular GMing? I guess the focus is on telling a compelling story and making sure that everyone gets a good game out of it, but since the game is largely spent trying to undo everyone's hard work and subvert the mission, its difficult to see how it fits in.
Any thoughts? Or perhaps tips for someone who's GMing his first game of it in a months time!
I've written a couple of rule articles for Inquisitor in my time, including both a vehicle combat/chase system, and an advanced close combat system too, so I'm on side with the 'know the rules, explain the rules, don't make your players feel like they're in a maths exam' bit, though I'll be interested to see what you have to say on the issue.
QFT, the game I'm playing in at the moment generally disolves into in-game anarchy and an almost complete disregard for the plot, but everyone including the GM has a great time. Why? Because its fun; even in the face of near certain death, everything has a fun ring to it, we laugh and joke and make enough double entendres to make a hooker blush, but most of all we just enjoy ourselves. The rules we use are pretty simple, and don't require too much working out so everything runs smoothly. Except for our plans that is; our GM refers to himself as a rope merchant, not because his adventures are ropey; far from it, but because whatever he gives us, we always find enough rope to hang ourselves with!Hurr Durr Derp said:
Last week, for example, our plan to unmask a phoney witch doctor resulted in three of the party having mescaline trips, a fourth almost ODing on Opium and our witch doctor dead on the floor with no face. Whereupon we decided to murder half the New Orleans police force on our way out.
When the game was done the GM confessed that actually the witch doctor was looking for an excuse to get out, and would happily have confessed to being a fraud if only we'd asked!
One last thing before this post turns into an epic, I'm curious to hear what you have to say about Paranoia? Given that the rules are to some degree optional, and so long as everyone is having fun, there really is a sense of 'us versus them' between the GM and Players, how does GMing a game of Paranoia differ from regular GMing? I guess the focus is on telling a compelling story and making sure that everyone gets a good game out of it, but since the game is largely spent trying to undo everyone's hard work and subvert the mission, its difficult to see how it fits in.
Any thoughts? Or perhaps tips for someone who's GMing his first game of it in a months time!
In all my experience with the Storyteller system with WoD, I can't think of an example of a GOOD Storyteller that didn't cut their teeth in another system or system(s). There are some pretty universal lessons learned that are independent of the gaming system you patron.
Also, to be fair, White Wolf did have various Storyteller guides as part of their library. WoD was by design more story driven and bucked a lot of the core concepts of other traditional game systems like loot, "leveling", etc etc. I always thought it was simply an alternative path a gamer could take if they wanted to depart from their comfort zone.
Also, to be fair, White Wolf did have various Storyteller guides as part of their library. WoD was by design more story driven and bucked a lot of the core concepts of other traditional game systems like loot, "leveling", etc etc. I always thought it was simply an alternative path a gamer could take if they wanted to depart from their comfort zone.
I thought I might add my own opinion after I finished reading the article so I came over to the comments section only to find all my own points already addressed.
My first experience with pen and paper RPGs was as a DM of D&D 3e (yes, I'm young). Those first few sessions were pure hack and slash, I knew ALL the rules and the plot for each quest was basically "Fetch". I have only rarely played as a character since then and I never enjoy it as much as I do when Mastering (my preferred term). Today, however, I focus more on plot, atmosphere and making interesting NPCs, whether friend or foe.
The ultimate goal of a Master is, as has already been stated, to have fun and how you do that is entirely up to the group. Which is one part of why it is always difficult to start Mastering a group with a bunch of people you have never played with. I've played with groups where dice were cast only once or twice during the entire campaign and I've played with groups where all they did was kill things. It just depends on what the group, as a whole, finds entertaining. And that is the number one responsibility of a Master:
To provide a means for everybody to have fun for a few hours.
...oh, wait, you mean the system... yeah, never played that. Sorry.
My first experience with pen and paper RPGs was as a DM of D&D 3e (yes, I'm young). Those first few sessions were pure hack and slash, I knew ALL the rules and the plot for each quest was basically "Fetch". I have only rarely played as a character since then and I never enjoy it as much as I do when Mastering (my preferred term). Today, however, I focus more on plot, atmosphere and making interesting NPCs, whether friend or foe.
The ultimate goal of a Master is, as has already been stated, to have fun and how you do that is entirely up to the group. Which is one part of why it is always difficult to start Mastering a group with a bunch of people you have never played with. I've played with groups where dice were cast only once or twice during the entire campaign and I've played with groups where all they did was kill things. It just depends on what the group, as a whole, finds entertaining. And that is the number one responsibility of a Master:
To provide a means for everybody to have fun for a few hours.
Paranoia? I love it! If I can get the players to do stupid things with a correctly timed cough or smile I consider my job done.John Wedge said:
...oh, wait, you mean the system... yeah, never played that. Sorry.
I used to wing it a lot but I have found that causes a quick slam into the wall of writers/creators block. While winging it makes sure that your ideas are not undo by players at the same time it can cause a lack of interest and a lack of consistent story if there is not some story that is for the base. Now, planing out dialogue is never a good idea becauset dialogue is a fluid thing that needs to have a level of off the cuff. The best way is to establish a personality for your npcs so that you get into your head how the npc thinks and that way you can have adaptive dialogue no matter what comes from the players.hamster mk 4 said:
Another way to help this process is to learn your players. No matter what you play your players are going to have a base level of personality that they will display in every character. For example: In my usual group I have a few players that have some base archetypes that I can plan around. One players loves to play the leader/center of attention type, another loves playing the mischievous/fae type characters, and the other like to play the smart, intellectual combative type.
If you can start out with such archetypes and then adapt them once the new character comes more into focus then it is a lot easier to have a written story path that is still adaptive and evolving to the story and the players needs
Now I keep getting lost between being the evil trapmaster or the help you along your way person trying to make as little boob referances as possible...
seriously if you play with immature players the first thing they will say when they find a girl is either "Is she hot?" "Can I sleep with her?"Also when playing with players expect nothing, for example:
a really powerful wizard who attacks your friends that is obviously a "secret ally" is not so obvious to the players. I shit you not we have 6 people really low level and this REALLY powerful wizard semi-hurts one of us and we attack him all head on without doing any dialogue, and ironically we manage to kill him with a broken beer bottle shard and my characters head. The DM resurrects him and sadly we were not aloud to loot him -.-
seriously if you play with immature players the first thing they will say when they find a girl is either "Is she hot?" "Can I sleep with her?"Also when playing with players expect nothing, for example:
a really powerful wizard who attacks your friends that is obviously a "secret ally" is not so obvious to the players. I shit you not we have 6 people really low level and this REALLY powerful wizard semi-hurts one of us and we attack him all head on without doing any dialogue, and ironically we manage to kill him with a broken beer bottle shard and my characters head. The DM resurrects him and sadly we were not aloud to loot him -.-
Me and some friends are just starting playing DnD for the first time from scratch, including the DM!
Luckily our DM is a big fan of RPGS and totally gets what DMing is all about, your right. It isn't just story telling, there are many roles to fill and more often than you'd think she has to settle arguments!
This was a great article, thanks!
Luckily our DM is a big fan of RPGS and totally gets what DMing is all about, your right. It isn't just story telling, there are many roles to fill and more often than you'd think she has to settle arguments!
This was a great article, thanks!
A helpful tip to new DM's out there. If you already have a game going with someone else DMing, try playing a spell casting manipulator. Check with your DM before you do because it tends to hijack story arcs as your character turns the plot to meet his own ends. The hijacking aspect allows you to slowly take greater control of the game and think outside the box while staying with in the rule set. By the end you should be controlling all aspects of DMing aside from World builder (and maybe adversary if your characters motivations stray from that of the groups).
Overall a good article. Most players don't realize how much work actually goes into running a game, especially when you play with clever players that also DM. The first game I ran was an evil campaign and it was way more than I could chew, but it made me get better fast.
Overall a good article. Most players don't realize how much work actually goes into running a game, especially when you play with clever players that also DM. The first game I ran was an evil campaign and it was way more than I could chew, but it made me get better fast.
Hmmm, I would agree with the premise of non-StoryTelling GMs, and follow on that it is players who should be Storytellers, since they want to tell the story of their characters. The GM needs to provide a consistent setting and set of NPCs, and perhaps seed a few ideas or create an environment of tension so that players pro-actively engage, but I think it falls to the players to weave the tales they want to weave.
I've also run an infinity of sessions with no backstory, just a setting and a some PCs, and telling them "right, what do you want to do?". Seems to me most players already know what they want to play and will tell you
hamster mk 4 said:
I'll say that both you guys have points - it's important for the GM to have a firm setting with NPC motivations, and also an overall story perspective (e.g. "Evil Mage goes grocery shopping in town and causes chaos") but "winging it" serves the important function of allowing players to influence story and events in an organic way. Having planned encounters, for example, is fine but you have to willing to discard them if the players go a different way with the story, rather than "railroad" them there.findelhe said:
I've also run an infinity of sessions with no backstory, just a setting and a some PCs, and telling them "right, what do you want to do?". Seems to me most players already know what they want to play and will tell you
I tend to write out the core storyline and then see what the Players do. I know where they are starting each week, and I know where I want them to get to, and I might have a couple of ideas for the middle, but mainly I try to let the Players choose what they are doing. Keeps it interesting for both sides.
On a sidenote, the DnD 4th Ed GM guide is a pretty good tool for aspiring GMs. If you ignore all the DnD specific rules it does have a lot of information about how to form a game, how to adapt to different playstyles, stuff like that. I would have appreciated a guide like that when I started GMing.
On a sidenote, the DnD 4th Ed GM guide is a pretty good tool for aspiring GMs. If you ignore all the DnD specific rules it does have a lot of information about how to form a game, how to adapt to different playstyles, stuff like that. I would have appreciated a guide like that when I started GMing.