DMing or Playing?

[Teapot Salty]

Hey guys. After having my first couple shots at dming, I'm having trouble deciding witch I like better, playing or dming. Thinking about it inspired me to ask you guys: which do you prefer? And as always, go nuts.

[toapat]

theoretically id personally enjoy DMing moreso then Playing, because any character i truly want to play is too complex for a story told between more then just a narrator and protagonist, where as telling the story of a world is the main part, so character consistency is less important.

granted, properly telling the story of one of my characters would still be amazing

[BrokenChord]

DMing is easier, but playing is more fun.

No, that wasn't a typo or an accidental switch.

That said, as to which I prefer more... Depends on the group, but usually player.

[BWR]

I like both. I wouldn't want to give up either in favor of the other. There's just too much fun to be had on both sides of the screen.

[ElenionAncalima]

I like both. I wouldn't want to give up either in favor of the other. There's just too much fun to be had on both sides of the screen.

I totally agree with this.

[lytokk]

I prefer to play. Its just a bit more fun for me. But, my group prefers I DM. I have a tendancy to spotlight-hog when I play, and while they don't mind it for a 3-5 session period, playing in a 1-20 campaign it can get a little old. Oddly enough, when I run a DMPC in a game, thats never been a problem.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I like both. I wouldn't want to give up either in favor of the other. There's just too much fun to be had on both sides of the screen.
This one, aye.

[DrBurr]

I barely ever play, I find DMing far more fun. Each week slowly weaving a story and seeing it pay off makes it worth the slog and sometimes frustration. Of course I'm also prone to burn out so Its great to sit back and play for a couple weeks of course about 3 weeks into any game I'm already itching to work my creative and manipulative muscles which is why I'm no longer allowed to have maps.

[Zavoniki]

Both. They trigger completely different areas of enjoyment for me.

[Jay R]

This is a question whose answer cannot help you, and might annoy you when you are doing the lesser of the two. I strongly urge you not to answer it.

[Yora]

I'd play more if there were more people who can run games. But so I end up doing that part 95% of the time.

[hymer]

I like both. DMing builds my desire to be a player, and being a player builds my desire to DM. I probably like DMing a teeny bit more, but it fluctuates.

[Prince Raven]

I like to have 2 campaigns going, one where I'm a GM and the other as a player.

[W3bDragon]

Personally, I find that DMing is more rewarding, but those rewards are less frequent. Whereas being a player may be less rewarding, but it doles out its rewards more frequently and consistently.

When DMing, my biggest enjoyment comes from pulling off well executed Big Reveals and bringing NPCs to life with interesting RPing. My favorite moments tend to be at the end of the session, when I can look back and say "that went well, thankfully." I also enjoy the Big Reveals that leave my players reeling, in a good way.

When DMing, what I enjoy the least is having to prepare for the session. Its fun dreaming up awesome scenarios and concepts, but filling in all the details for encounters, NPCs, cities, etc, feels a bit too much like homework.

When playing, my biggest enjoyment comes from having a deep understanding of the story and the NPCs and using that understanding to do something unexpected, but unarguably justified, that takes the story to a whole new level. Mechanically, I also enjoy creating non-standard builds and using the full extent of the build's toolkit to have an answer to every situation, even if the answer sometimes is "I can run away faster than you".

When playing, what I enjoy the least is having an "easy" DM that lets me get my way far too often, or a "hard" DM that never considers my ideas. As for the party, I don't enjoy playing alongside timid players, or players who are reckless for the sake of being reckless. Its difficult to find players that understand the fine balance between being passive and hogging the spotlight.

[DigoDragon]

because any character i truly want to play is too complex for a story told between more then just a narrator and protagonist

I have yet to find a DM who shares my level of complex characters, so I know that feeling. When I DM I demand background on my players' characters so that I can tailor the world around them where their past has influence on what goes on. When any of them run it's usually a straight up sandbox where backgrounds don't mean a lot. Its fun to play in the sandbox anyway. I just wish I could have my complex ides shine through the characters I made. :3



I'd play more if there were more people who can run games. But so I end up doing that part 95% of the time.

Same here! I love DMing and my campaigns are quite fun to run, but I do get tired of listening to my players banter at how their 18th level Whatever has found the +4 MacGuffin when the farthest any of my characters have reached in adventures they ran is like... 3rd (with a +1 dagger). :smalltongue:

[toapat]

I have yet to find a DM who shares my level of complex characters, so I know that feeling. When I DM I demand background on my players' characters so that I can tailor the world around them where their past has influence on what goes on. When any of them run it's usually a straight up sandbox where backgrounds don't mean a lot. Its fun to play in the sandbox anyway. I just wish I could have my complex ides shine through the characters I made. :3

well the character who is the current basis for my avatar has itterated something like 10 times since i originally drew it out and color tweeked it. the current version is willing to march a thousand miles over snowy mountains just to get somewhere people dont know she is blind (even though shes a paladin, its a measure of pride (functioning within society without showing weakness) and fear (of how society reacts to her disability) of hers)

[ArendK]

Personally, I tend to flip-flop more than I probably should. There are times I absolutely love trying to craft a campaign and create a fun session full of the encounters my group will enjoy, but challenge them.

However, the biggest flaw is that I tend to reflexively think that my players think and enjoy things like I do.
For me, I create challenging encounters after I get a feel of a party; to the point that if a party doesn't adapt, they are in serious trouble. I'll challenge their weaknesses just as quick as I play to their strengths in combat.
I typically don't pull punches once the campaign is in full swing, so that can lead to catastrophic results sometimes (miscalculating and accidentally killing the rogue with no chance of return typically).

I DM as though my party was full of players like I am built (an error on my part, but it's unfortunately integral to my nature). I like role-playing, but don't necessarily need an NPC to do it. I am not a min-max player, but I believe a character should be reasonably proficient at their role (all in all, I play low-op games where fighters can do damage and not feel slighted by the rest of the party for out-shining them in their own department). A well-designed character built around the world can be moving (a hobgoblin samurai in Eberron dedicated to peace and unity amongst the nations across Khorvaire? Not the most optimum, but working with the party as I played it and role-playing more of the interactions with them made it memorable). I try not to be a spot-light hog, and if a character is involved in their own plot/specialization, I'll slide back to a support set-up unless for whatever reason I'm needed.

However, not all players are like me. Sometimes, people's personalities don't mesh. Gaming styles don't mesh sometimes. There's no getting around it. I love playing intricate characters that are dependant on me to properly play without stopping the game and is fun for everyone else. I believe that playing a character is an exercise in psychology (both in an out of character), and theater. A little bit goes a long way.

Over the course of my gaming career, I'd like to think I've built a fair stable of success from experience as both a player and DM. Characters that were remembered for being unique in how I played them both stat wise and role-playing quirks.
A good-hearted necromancer?
A favored-soul dedicated to a god of flame and rebirth, but also destruction?
A Frenzied Beserker with a heart of gold and gruff nature?
A Silver Flame Paladin/Farmboy with a bow?
A vengeful exotic weapon master?
A drunken monk who epitomized physical perfection and compassion?

All characters that I've built and loved. My children are named for two of the above. my fellow players enjoyed the characters for both their flaws and weaknesses (especially the battlefield issues of the Frenzied Beserker; it was always a running gag that the party just had to stay alive during a fight, then prepare for me to turn around).

As a DM, I love creating RP oppurtunities for the group. I love mechanical challenges for them to overcome. My group has a lot of fond memories from the encounters, and it gives me a slight twinge of satisfaction of a job well done when a player comments how they'd like me to DM a session.

As for my personal preference? I have to pick? Usually 3-4 sessions in, I'll have desires of switching out roles.
But simply because I've DM'ed more than play, I think I'd rather play.

[Calen]

I enjoy both DMing and playing. Right now I DM more than I play and I love utilizing the players backgrounds and weaving together the whole plot with all the crazy shenanigans that they attempt. I also like the playing aspect of trying to solve the problems we are given and exploring someone else's world. I think that if I had to choose one though that I would choose DMing over playing.

[nedz]

I have DM'ed more than I've played, but I enjoy both. I have found that doing more playing in recent years has improved my DMing — it's good to see things from both sides of the fence.

[Remmirath]

I enjoy both, really.

DMing wins out somewhat, because while I enjoy them both equally with my normal group, I prefer DMing with other groups. I'm not sure entirely why; perhaps because my preferences while playing are very strongly for a long campaign where I have plenty of time to build up and develop characters, and that tends not to be what other groups do, while I can enjoy running a greater variety of campaigns than I like playing in. I'm also fairly fond of running one-off, difficult dungeons, and those work out pretty well for the other groups I play with.

[ddude987]

I like DMing but the prep work to make a good story is just so much. Between school and work, I just barley have the hours to spend planning. That said, I love DMing. I find it so fun because I love creating new worlds and trying to make them detailed and living, see my campaign setting. I'd say I enjoy playing more to an extent, only because it is less taxing and less work.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I really haven't decided. When I'm playing, I can just do my thing and make things happen and it all comes together. It takes effort to make the characters come together, though.

When I'm GMing, I get to be the Maestro of Chaos, letting the players throw their stuff together, and figuring out what happens. It's a bit like throwing knobs and levers in the TARDIS; you're going to get somewhere, but you're never quite sure that it's going to pull together the way you think it will.

[Totema]

I've been DMing exclusively for over a year, and I gotta say I really, really miss playing.

[sktarq]

okay, I love DM/ST/GM-ing hugely....but I do miss a good game as a player....Have not been a player in a couple years now and it grates....and the last couple games I was a player in the GM/ST/etc wasn't all that good. Same issue I have with most ST types of a great big grand arc and no idea of what to put in front of the party NOW which was kinda disappointing overall.

[nyjastul69]

I greatly enjoy both, but I prefer DMing.

[valadil]

I love both.

GMing is more rewarding, so in that sense I prefer it. But it's not something I can just turn on. As a plyaer I can roll up a character for any system in a couple hours if a seat at the table opens up. It takes very little overhead for me to play in a game.

When I GM, it kinda takes over my life. The first time I ran a game I spent 10-20 hours planning each session. I didn't have to do it that way, but I got so involved in it that I just let it take over. When I'm done with a campaign, I'm totally spent and will take a couple years off before doing another one.

In that sense, playing is like a random hookup, but GMing is a serious relationship. They're both fun, but GMing requires both a commitment and recovery time.

[lytokk]

In that sense, playing is like a random hookup, but GMing is a serious relationship. They're both fun, but GMing requires both a commitment and recovery time.

I don't think I've ever heard it put better.

[ericgrau]

I prefer playing... which means I prefer it if others DM. I think I would like to DM, but I don't understand how anyone makes the time.

[Brookshw]

For myself, dming. Satisfies more creative impulses.

[Talar]

I enjoy both as well. But for me it completely depends on the group of people I am playing with if I want to DM or be a player. It makes a big difference for me based on the other players.