PDA

View Full Version : GMing a game you've never played



Mono Vertigo
2011-10-10, 03:01 PM
Alright, so I've been introduced to several systems of mixed complexity over the last months, and I like them a lot. Of course, the issue is that (newbie-friendly) games can be hard to find, so one solution is to be your own GM.
... and there lies the problem, you still haven't played it before starting.
What's your policy on the matter? Can you manage that? Do you advise playing the system as a regular player first? If pre-made campaigns are scarce, do you make your own? How about homebrews? Is it a good idea to make a full-length campaign, or would you recommend something much shorter for a start? Do the PCs start at first or higher level? Heck, how about the players themselves, should they be experienced, or not, so that they can learn along with you?
Finally, are there systems you consider better for new GMs?
And no, you don't have to answer all the questions. It's just meant to be a general discussion on the matter. :smallyuk:

tl;dr: how to you deal with doing what's indicated in the title? If that is even reasonable? Will I ever stop using the interrogative form?!

Totally Guy
2011-10-10, 03:28 PM
I've GMed several games that I've never played.

You learn a lot on the fly. A lot of games have emergent properties of behaviours they the encourage from the players. You don't see this by reading, only by playing.

So my advice is to read it through and just do it.

I mean every single system must have been GMed by someone who'd never done it before at the start. Every game that enters a new circle of players has to get over this same obstacle.

If nobody ever confronted it a whole world of potential would never be explored.

Mono Vertigo
2011-10-10, 03:44 PM
I mean every single system must have been GMed by someone who'd never done it before at the start. Every game that enters a new circle of players has to get over this same obstacle.

If nobody ever confronted it a whole world of potential would never be explored.
Obviously. :smallwink:
Still, I take another glance at a couple systems I know, and I wonder if I shouldn't at the very least playtest beforehand. I'm the kind of person who's afraid of making mistakes, no matter how small they are, and, well, I don't want to be that GM who comes up with encounters or skill checks that are vastly inappropriate for the PCs. Oh, and I don't want to be that other GM who railroads because she's not planned everything that could possibly happen. :smalleek:

Totally Guy
2011-10-10, 04:27 PM
A playtest beforehand is a good idea. You make some characters and give them to the players and run a one shot. When making decisions about making characters they don't mean anything unless they are informed decisions.

Setting difficulties is part of the game that I find difficult with some games. There are a few small press games where the GM doesn't set any difficulties at all. Lacuna and Apocalypse world come to mind. In the Fate and Fudge games an adjective ladder is used.

GM plans came up at a convention. Here we have 3 weird indie game supporters and 4 traditional game proponents. The event was to answer questions from a variety of viewpoints and philosophies.

Someone stands to ask a question. "What should I do when my players mess up my plans?"
Unsurprising answers:
Me: "Go with it."
Jason Buhlman: "Go with it."
Amber Eagar: "Go with it."
Jeff Fasenfest: "Go with it."
Sage La Torra: "Go with it."
Ben Lehman: "Go with it."
Erik Mona: "Go with it."

"Yeah, but, how do I plan, then? How do I know what they'll do?"
Unsurprising answers:
Me: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Sage La Torra: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Ben Lehman: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Surprising answers (to me, at least):
Jason Buhlman: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Amber Eagar: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Jeff Fasenfest: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."
Erik Mona: "Don't plan. Play to find out what happens."

In this case they all agreed.

DrBurr
2011-10-10, 04:48 PM
I started playing as a GM, never played a TTRPG beforehand and I still hardly get to play. Anyways I would simply tell your players that you;ve never player and keep that in mind as you GM.

I always have made my own campaigns even if they were simply you fight Kobolds. I wouldn't sweat it if you cant find a module simply write an adventure with 2 or 3 encounters and railroad your players if you must. As long as they know your inexperinced it should be fine.

At the end of the session ask your players what they thought of it and then write your second mission with that in mind

some guy
2011-10-10, 05:52 PM
If you know how to be a proper GM, you can be a proper GM for most games. System mastery is something that can be learned. Creating atmosphere and setting tone is more difficult (I still struggle to find a proper atmosphere for Gamma World games, but have no trouble doing that for D&D or Call of Cthulhu).

I've created my own scenario's, campaigns, monsters for games which I've never played (as player) with players who were completely new to the game. That's no problem.

But something I would always recommend is to start the players at first level (or equivalent) and beginning with one-shot scenario.

Kaun
2011-10-10, 06:01 PM
I do this all the time,

As above if your worried have a bit of a play test.

Get your players around for a one off session, hand them the example characters from the books or some ones you pre-gen'd and do something basic. IMHO don't waste time getting your players to gen characters just get straight to the game.

It will give you a good basis to actually start a proper game from and your players some idea on how the mechanics work so they are more likely to generate some characters they will be happy with.

Hell i do it when i have a game i know and have run/played before but i have a few players who aren't familiar with it.

Kesnit
2011-10-10, 06:04 PM
I ran a Call of Cthulhu game for my normal gaming group, never having played the game before. (I had listened to a podcast of an ongoing CoC campaign, though.)

I would have been a lot more nervous if I either was playing with people familiar with the game (none of my group had played before) or with people I didn't know. As it was, some things didn't work out as well as I had hoped, but for the most part it went OK.

Know the basics of the system. Pre-gen characters for your players (at least to start). Come up with a basic idea for a campaign. Turn the players loose.

JustinA
2011-10-11, 01:58 AM
(1) 90% of what makes a good GM doesn't depend on the game system you're using.

(2) Most of a game system will run itself -- you just need to know the rules. If everyone at the table is learning them simultaneously, this can lead to some roughly paced moments but it's all part of the experience. If you've got a player who has played before, tap their experience.

(3) The exception is stuff you have to build, which means primarily setting difficulty numbers and building NPCs. In both cases, what you want to do is get your hand on the character sheets for the PCs.

For NPCs, you generally want to make sure that their stats aren't noticeably larger than the PCs. In fact, most NPCs should probably have stats at about 75-80% of the best PC (if that) -- only bosses should have something equivalent to or perhaps slightly larger than the PCs.

Another tip for point-buy systems: Leave yourself a "fake system mastery" reserve for when you inevitably discover that your NPC should have bought the obscure Computer Security Expert skill. Dump the reserve points in there as if they had the skill all along.

For difficulty levels, you want to prep yourself a couple of cheat sheets. First, look at the highest stats the PCs have. This doesn't require any statistical rigor -- just eyeball the biggest stats. Take that info and calculate the difficulty numbers required for a 50% (difficult), 75% (standard), and 90% (easy) success rate. Jot those down. Those are the difficulty numbers to use for any task that only the "expert" needs to pass (like picking a lock).

(For 1st level characters in 3.5, this would be something like +7 for skill checks. Ergo, you'd be looking at DC 9 (easy), DC 12 (standard), and DC 17 (difficult).)

Second, do the same calculation for low-end characters. These are the numbers you use for a task when you need the entire party to pass the check (like climbing a wall that everybody needs to get past in order to proceed).

This is basically the method we used for Hazard and Monster construction guidelines in Legends & Labyrinths.

Mono Vertigo
2011-10-11, 02:15 AM
Oh, yeah, pre-gen'd characters, I forgot about that, that'll help me greatly indeed.
Thanks for the advice, guys! :smallsmile:

Totally Guy
2011-10-11, 02:45 AM
(1) 90% of what makes a good GM doesn't depend on the game system you're using.

Depending on the games in question this will vary. D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder might be about 90% the same skills. Call of Cthulhu and Delta Green might be 90% the same skills. But running something completely different like Lacuna might be as low 50% similar skills compared to D&D.

But the only way to get these skills is to do it.

This has really turned my off the GMing blogs I used to read when I realised how they were missing the point by thinking that GMing was just one skill.

Earthwalker
2011-10-11, 04:56 AM
This has really turned my off the GMing blogs I used to read when I realised how they were missing the point by thinking that GMing was just one skill.

I thought it was just one skill.
Gamemastering : Active Skill (normally linked to CHA*)

Then you have different knowledge skills you can use to improve your chances for system mastery (by system)


*- Can be linked to Dex for throwing books at players.

Totally Guy
2011-10-11, 05:28 AM
Nah. Each game is it's own GMing skill. But you can use skill synergy from other applicable games to cover the parts that are still applicable. :smalltongue:

JustinA
2011-10-11, 06:06 AM
Depending on the games in question this will vary. D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder might be about 90% the same skills. Call of Cthulhu and Delta Green might be 90% the same skills. But running something completely different like Lacuna might be as low 50% similar skills compared to D&D.

Not really my experience. Even when switching between roleplaying games and storytelling games, the skill shift just isn't that significant.

Pacing, adventure structure, effective prep habits, portraying interesting NPCs, creating interesting locales, setting stakes, evocative description, etc. -- these are all transferable skills. They aren't genre-dependent, they're not mechanic-dependent, and they absolutely make up the bulk of a good GM's skill set.

hewhosaysfish
2011-10-11, 06:35 AM
I would say that the two most important things are:
1) Be upfront with the players, tell them that you're new to the system you'll be running, tell them you'll all be learning together and ask them to be forgiving of your mistakes (and promise to be forgiving of theirs).
2) If your players give you a hard time, put d4s on their chair when they're out of the room.


Setting difficulties is part of the game that I find difficult with some games. There are a few small press games where the GM doesn't set any difficulties at all. Lacuna and Apocalypse world come to mind. In the Fate and Fudge games an adjective ladder is used.

Slightly off-topic here, but surely with the adjective ladder you still have to set a difficulty - it's just that you'll be picking an appropriate adjective from a pre-defined scale instead of picking an appropriate number from a pre-defined scale.
(And then you have to convert that adjective into a number in order to work out whether a skill of Great plus a dice roll of +1 is greater than or equal to a difficulty of Superb)

Totally Guy
2011-10-11, 06:43 AM
Slightly off-topic here, but surely with the adjective ladder you still have to set a difficulty - it's just that you'll be picking an appropriate adjective from a pre-defined scale instead of picking an appropriate number from a pre-defined scale.
(And then you have to convert that adjective into a number in order to work out whether a skill of Great plus a dice roll of +1 is greater than or equal to a difficulty of Superb)

The intent behind it is that adjectives are more intuitive than numbers. Describing the setting and situation leads to a implicit point on the scale of difficulty. Which the GM can then make explicit.

tensai_oni
2011-10-11, 08:06 AM
The problem for me is not rules but getting the setting right. So it's easier if you are GMing a setting-less system like Risus or M&M, where you have to make it all up anyway. Harder if it's Exalted.

DonEsteban
2011-10-11, 09:55 AM
When I first did this (as a one shot), I prepared a cheat sheet for my players with all the principles of the game and important options they had. I think it was less useful for them than for me: Preparing this was a good way to familiarize myself with all important rules aspects of the game and it served as a mind map for me to remember them.

Sleepycrow
2011-10-11, 10:13 AM
Consider running a retro-clone like Swords & Wizardry (see signature)! You don't need to worry about messing up because, a. the system is extremely rules-lite (it takes about 10 minutes to make a character), and b. making rules and judgement calls to fit the situation at hand is the whole spirit of old school gaming. Did I mention it's free? :)

Raum
2011-10-11, 04:30 PM
Alright, so I've been introduced to several systems of mixed complexity over the last months, and I like them a lot. Of course, the issue is that (newbie-friendly) games can be hard to find, so one solution is to be your own GM.
... and there lies the problem, you still haven't played it before starting.
What's your policy on the matter? Can you manage that? Do you advise playing the system as a regular player first? Back in the dark ages of gaming many, possibly even most, of us started playing with a group of friends who'd never played an RPG before...much less this new-fangled thing called D&D. :smallwink:

Just be honest with the players, correct mistakes rather than trying to hide them, and go for it!


If pre-made campaigns are scarce, do you make your own? How about homebrews? Is it a good idea to make a full-length campaign, or would you recommend something much shorter for a start? Do the PCs start at first or higher level? Heck, how about the players themselves, should they be experienced, or not, so that they can learn along with you?I may be an exception but I find scripted campaigns difficult to run. Anything more than a frame work setting starts to feel confining...or it would if I tried to limit myself to cannon.

For a game you're inexperienced with, I'd start out at a low power level. If nothing else, it means you'll have fewer powers and fewer rules to figure out. It will also let you grow into the game...only add power levels after you're comfortable with the current game.


Finally, are there systems you consider better for new GMs?Sure. The number one requirement is something needs to interest you and draw you in. If you're not interested in the setting and rules, it will show.

Beyond that, systems do require varying amounts of work to GM from very little prep to spending more prep than play time. That's more an issue of time available though - if it truly interests you, play it!


I'm the kind of person who's afraid of making mistakes, no matter how small they are, and, well, I don't want to be that GM who comes up with encounters or skill checks that are vastly inappropriate for the PCs. Oh, and I don't want to be that other GM who railroads because she's not planned everything that could possibly happen. :smalleek:Don't fear mistakes! Particularly not when starting a new system. Plan for them, seek feedback, and correct them.

Dr.Epic
2011-10-11, 04:33 PM
I really don't think anyone should GM a game they've never played. Even if they've read the material, It's still better for them to PC at least one game first. You don't know the rules well enough as a PC, that's okay, other people can help you. You don't know the rules well enough as a GM, you risk ruining the game. Just PC one game (maybe like 5 sessions the minimum) then think about GMing.

Totally Guy
2011-10-12, 03:46 AM
I really don't think anyone should GM a game they've never played.

Don't apply this to everyone. If everyone lived by it nobody would ever have done anything new.


Imagine how gaming would look...
"I GM now but I played under Harrolds who played under Matthews who played under McSwiggen who played under Pickles who played under Gygax." :smallyuk:

The_Snark
2011-10-12, 05:38 AM
I really don't think anyone should GM a game they've never played. Even if they've read the material, It's still better for them to PC at least one game first. You don't know the rules well enough as a PC, that's okay, other people can help you. You don't know the rules well enough as a GM, you risk ruining the game. Just PC one game (maybe like 5 sessions the minimum) then think about GMing.

But then how would new RPGs ever get played? When a new game is released, nobody has experience as a PC, and nobody ever will if someone doesn't volunteer to DM the first few games. If your gaming group finds a new RPG that none of you have ever played but would all like to try, are you supposed to shrug and give up on it because you don't know anyone who's played before?

There's no harm in trying. Sure, you might screw up a few times in the first session... or two, or three... but it's not going to be the end of the world. I'm in full agreement with JustinA; all the really important GM skills are system-independent. Making honest mistakes with the rules is not exactly a good thing in a GM, but it's far from the worst flaw you could have.

Addressing the original questions: I'd keep things simple and begin at level 1, or default character creation, or whatever the equivalent for your system is. Start with a simple scenario; not necessarily a one-shot, but don't feel like you have to plan more than a session in advance. If it goes well, you can always make up more and keep going; if not, you can start over with something else now that you (hopefully) have a better grip on how the game works.

Tyndmyr
2011-10-12, 08:11 AM
If you're GMing a system for the first time that you've never played, here's what I recommend.

1. Read the rulebook(s). You'd think this would be obvious, but I've been in games where this was skipped. They kinda sucked.

2. Grab a prebuilt module.

3. Run a trial playthrough, simulated, by yourself, to get a feel for it.

4. Allow absolutely no homebrew.


This will ensure that you understand the system, it's playstyle, and what it's about before hacking it apart. A lot of people unfortunately try to make every game into their favorite system...this should be avoided.

Totally Guy
2011-10-12, 08:45 AM
A lot of people unfortunately try to make every game into their favorite system...this should be avoided.

Been there... total agreement.

But some games just miss stuff out. I was looking for ages in one game to find out what happened if a player failed to use a skill successfully.

Tyndmyr
2011-10-12, 09:10 AM
Been there... total agreement.

But some games just miss stuff out. I was looking for ages in one game to find out what happened if a player failed to use a skill successfully.

Yeah. Some are...poorly designed. I've even purchased rulebooks and decided, after reading through them, to never run them.

Hero System, for example. I tried to whip up a sample party in it, and suddenly realized I hated everything about it.

Mono Vertigo
2011-10-12, 09:17 AM
1. Read the rulebook(s). You'd think this would be obvious, but I've been in games where this was skipped. They kinda sucked.
:smalleek:
But it's like passing an exam without having ever been to the classes! It's counter-intuitive! It's stupid! It's...
... it's exactly like half the students in my old college.
:smallannoyed:
Okay, now I can see how that happen. Must have been terrible sessions.

The Succubus
2011-10-12, 10:07 AM
Just make it up as you go along.

"These Pit Fiend things, a couple of those should be a good opening encounter for a level 1 party, right?"

CarpeGuitarrem
2011-10-12, 11:53 AM
Go for it! I've done this a number of times, for a number of systems...in fact, the only RPGs I've actually played are 4th Edition D&D and World of Darkness, and yet I've also GMed for Green Ronin's Song of Ice and Fire RP and Chris Perrin's MECHA RPG. Still GMing for, actually. I've also run a session of a weird little game called Snowball (reverse chronology RPG), and I'm planning to run a game of Greg Stolze's "A Dirty World".

All it takes is a desire to tell a story, decent system familiarity, and a willingness to learn.

You'll never figure it out if you don't try. And players can be pretty forgiving. If they aren't, then you don't need 'em.

Solaris
2011-10-12, 01:12 PM
I really don't think anyone should GM a game they've never played. Even if they've read the material, It's still better for them to PC at least one game first. You don't know the rules well enough as a PC, that's okay, other people can help you. You don't know the rules well enough as a GM, you risk ruining the game. Just PC one game (maybe like 5 sessions the minimum) then think about GMing.

Some of us have more than minimal reading comprehension skills. I've GMed a game I've never played before with a group of mixed new and old players, none of whom I'd played with before. Turned out to be rather entertaining for all involved. I recommend a cheat sheet for rules you'll need to reference often. They typically sell them as GM screens.

Delwugor
2011-10-12, 02:17 PM
I ran a Strands of Fate game and had never played any version of Fate before. Worked out pretty well, nothing to write home about but no one up and left. :smallwink:
Now I'm planning my second SoF game which will be a full fledged campaign.

Choco
2011-10-12, 03:12 PM
DM'ing D20 Modern and 4e games was my introduction to those systems, and that worked out well enough...

I guess the only thing that worked out in my favor was that it was everyone else's first time too. I imagine it would be a royal pain to DM a game you have never played before and have a powergamer and/or munchkin for that system as a player. A rules lawyer can be helpful, but can easily get on your nerves depending on the situation.

I guess my advice is basically:
1. Make sure no one else has experience in the system either, if so gently ask them to go easy on you.
2. Start at the lowest level and work up from there since in most, if not all, systems a lot of rules flat-out don't come into play until later, and this will allow you to learn them as you need them as opposed to everything at once.

As for n00b friendly systems, D&D 4e is about as n00b friendly as it gets for a rules-heavy game (even our resident "guy who never cracks open a rulebook or remembers anything" can play a decent character provided he has power cards). On the other side of that you can do something like Risus, which has a "rulebook" that is less than 10 pages long.