PDA

View Full Version : I'm a Good GM, and a bad player.



draken50
2015-01-04, 10:32 PM
So, I've come to terms with the fact that my players think I'm a really good GM, which is nice, though to be fair they may not have much experience with others. Yet, I also happen to be a really bad player. Are there any other GMs on here who are better GMs than they are players?

I also see a lot of folks who GM because no one else does, and they would rather be players. Any going the other direction. At this point I have to admit I'd rather run the game than be a PC in it, is that a norm? Is there kind of a GM/Player divide in that regard?

Phoenixguard09
2015-01-04, 11:10 PM
Due to experience, I would be astounded if I am as a good a player as I am a GM. I get no opportunity to actually play, so it would be pretty amazing if I were as good.

I do know that I would love to play a campaign I was running though. Weirdly enough, I am a big fan of my own GM'ing style.

God that looks conceited. :P

Knaight
2015-01-04, 11:17 PM
I GM way more than I play, and while I'd be happy to slide the balance a little more towards playing, I don't want it anywhere near 50-50. 85-15; maybe.

jedipotter
2015-01-04, 11:29 PM
I also see a lot of folks who GM because no one else does, and they would rather be players. Any going the other direction. At this point I have to admit I'd rather run the game than be a PC in it, is that a norm? Is there kind of a GM/Player divide in that regard?

I think it's fair to say most DM's do it as ''someone has too'', and they see being DM as a bit of a burden and a lot of work. They just want to sit back and play. I'd also say this type of DM is more then willing to give up all their power and ''be like a player'' and they love having the ''Co-DM players'' take control of things.

Some like to cycle between DM and player.

And then there is my type: Always DM, Never Player.

I find playing boring and too slow. Playing is also annoying if the DM knows less about the game then I do. But maybe worst of all, I can't stand other people that ''make the wrong call''. For example: A DM that is constantly distracted by the text/calls from his girl friend, every couple of minutes.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2015-01-05, 01:03 AM
For simplicity I'll divide gamers into two groups: Natural players and natural GMs. Natural players are simply gamers who would prefer to play, while natural GMs would prefer to GM. If you'd prefer to do something, you tend to be better at it.

Sometimes a gaming group is comprised only of people who prefer to be players; in this case everyone's a better player than they are GM. Games GM'd by natural players tend to grant a lot of player agency but at the same time don't come with the same level of effort and preparation. Rules lite and improv-heavy games where narrative agency is meted out to everyone can work quite well in this environment; so can a more game-oriented dungeon crawl where everyone agrees to achieve a very linear goal beforehand. Sprawling epics less so.

Groups tend to have at least one natural GM, and this preference is often due to the control GMing offers. Natural GMs tend to be more prepared and have a single unfolding story in mind. This can be rich and entertaining until you (attempt to) go off the rails, in which case it can be frustrating. It is the rare GM that has the time to run a real open-ended sandbox and has the players who can thrive in that environment. Natural GMs tend to chafe in the player seat where they lose most of their control. I've seen plenty of backseat GMs, rules/setting lawyers, and Miko-esque party policing types in the hands of natural GMs, rarely in the hands of natural players. Others just declare that they only GM, which can often be the superior solution, but harder to do in a group with many natural GMs.

Milodiah
2015-01-05, 01:43 AM
I mostly GM, but not so much by choice as "it ended up being me that preps stuff". Another member of the group sometimes runs one-offs and the occasional short campaign, but I tend to be the only one who keeps a game going.

I like to play, but I've noticed that sometimes I tend to dominate the game as a player...you know the kind, my decisions end up being listened to the most because I'm usually the one talking...pretty sure it comes from being the GM 90% of the time.

draken50
2015-01-05, 01:56 AM
Yeah, I started as a player in another gm's game, and I definitely do my best not to back-seat gm. Which I don't believe has happened at all...yet.

I think one of the main thing that annoys me is how other gms handle new players. I basically spell out expectations and general guidelines... stuff like, "make characters that may have conflicts, but generally get along with each other." "This is a city based intrigue game, make your character accordingly," or "I expect you guys to become and work as a team to overcome obstacles."

So I get really frustrated when GMs make new players who deal with every other pc or npc by threatening them the "primary plot mover." Or with new players not getting the "everyone plays together or someone is sitting out bored" meta-game, because they don't know yet and the gm didn't tell them.

So yeah, mentally I'm backseat GMing like crazy. It's extra annoying because I'm not super confident as a player and now I'm having to steer things around pitfalls and such, and I've got fellow players doing the "lets be secret and take extra time to pass notes and not share info with all the other players" which basically leaves me thinking I've got better stuff to do. That and my plot hook was "Your roommate got a job involving travel... now you're uneasy...", so I really want to give the GM the chance but I don't want to be Mr. High and Mighty whiny player who actually GMs too. As a player I do intend to tell the others to drop the "secret, secret" B.S. but one already stated it's her preferred gaming style, so I'm not hopeful.

Really though that "natural GM" theory may have some substance. I honestly enjoy GMing more than I have being a player, but I haven't been a player often.

jedipotter
2015-01-05, 02:21 AM
Really though that "natural GM" theory may have some substance. I honestly enjoy GMing more than I have being a player, but I haven't been a player often.

A ''natural DM'' is just a ''natural leader''. And some people can lead....most can't, it's that simple.

During a social event like a RPG game, it really works best if the DM can stay ''in control''. Just something simple like the ''dinner break'' can take hours if everyone just randomly does whatever.

And in game stuff can be worse. Like where a player does a rule wrong (''my acid orb does 22 damage!'') and the DM just ignores it (''oh your orb killed the dragon''). Or even just the player or DM not knowing a rule and spending way too long looking it up.

Knaight
2015-01-05, 03:25 AM
A ''natural DM'' is just a ''natural leader''. And some people can lead....most can't, it's that simple.

During a social event like a RPG game, it really works best if the DM can stay ''in control''. Just something simple like the ''dinner break'' can take hours if everyone just randomly does whatever.

It's a different set of skills. Some level of ability to impose social organization is necessary, but that's not sufficient. There's also a bunch of specific stuff, from juggling lots of setting elements, to watching for levels of player interest.

It's that stuff that keeps me in the GM seat, personally. Having just the one PC seems really limiting when I'm used to having the setting, and while it can be nice occasionally, I wouldn't want it as a norm.

Peebles
2015-01-05, 04:18 AM
I agree somewhat with Knaight. GMing and playing utilise a different set of skills, and it's actually fairly unlikely that anyone's skills in both areas will be on a similar level.

I actually DM only 10-15% of the time, but I know I'm way better at it than I am at being a player. I'm better at organising and creating a story/world than a single character in somebody else's. My own characters always feel a little one dimensional, and I'm awful at optimizing.

aspekt
2015-01-05, 04:30 AM
In my case I'm a crappy player because I tend to create characters not stat sheets while my group can do nothing but op everything they play with little thought to story at all.

So on the rare occasion I get to play I'm typically disappointed.

Knaight
2015-01-05, 04:32 AM
I agree somewhat with Knaight. GMing and playing utilise a different set of skills, and it's actually fairly unlikely that anyone's skills in both areas will be on a similar level.

Maybe I should clarify. While I agree that playing and GMing have a lot of skills specific to them, I was saying that GM skills and the skills in being a "natural leader" are different, beyond some organizational skills and herding people.

Kalmageddon
2015-01-05, 04:34 AM
I'm a pretty horribile player.
Due to having an almost uninterrupted 14 years experience as a DM and basically only a few hours as a player I tend to keep the same DM mentality even when I'm a player.
Oh, you want to surprise us with a plot twist? Seen it coming a mile away.
Oh, you fudged a dice to save us from an obviously overpowered encounter? I'll notice and start taking advantage of it.
Oh you put NPC X in your campaign? I can see exactly what his role in the story will be from the moment he's described to us.

Basically, I have a very "seen that, done that" attitude when playing, which I try my best to tone down but I'd guess drives my DMs crazy. I also have the bad tendency to answer questions about the lore or the rules directed at the DM, because 99% of the times I know more about both.

Finally, I hate rolling dices. I am good at coming up with plans and I dislike having my perfectly crafted plan depend on a single dice roll when in my mind it should automatically work. So I get stuff like
Me: "I sneak behind the guard and cut his throat"
DM "Roll to hit"
Me: "But he didn't see me coming. How hard can it be to stick a knife in someone's neck?"
DM "You also need to roll for damage"
Me: "But I don't have sneak attack, I'll do only 1d6, there's no way that will be enough to kill it! Come on, just let me coup de grące him!"
and so on...

To be fair, I do my best to keep all these horrible defects hidden away and I get better at it all the time. Still sometimes I can't help but roll my eyes at my own behaviour at the table.

Peebles
2015-01-05, 04:44 AM
Maybe I should clarify. While I agree that playing and GMing have a lot of skills specific to them, I was saying that GM skills and the skills in being a "natural leader" are different, beyond some organizational skills and herding people.

Fair enough, should have read better. Head no worky. Maybe I'm still hung over from new year. :smalltongue:

To be fair, my group loves me as a GM, as me rolling above an 8 on a d20 as either a player or a GM is a newsworthy event thanks to it's rarity.

mephnick
2015-01-05, 07:46 AM
I always DM'd through necessity, but now I can barely play when I have the opportunity. I constantly double-guess the DM and decide how I'd do something differently. I hate thinking "Man, it'd be cool of the NPC did this right now" and then not have it happen. I miss having the authority to tell people to shut up and pay attention if the conversation has gotten off track too long.

I still enjoy the social aspect and will never turn down playing as a break, but I don't enjoy it nearly as much, I'd rather play a video game.

DireSickFish
2015-01-05, 10:28 AM
I make a better player than GM, but I have learned to appreciate GMing more after running two campaigns in 3.5 and 5th ed over the past year and a half. After a session DMing I often found things I should have added, or stuff I should have done differently, or I forgot about this or that encounter to include. Which can be frustrating as it makes me feel like I didn't run the session well enough.

One of my favorite prepped adventures beforehand that I thought was interesting. It had a few twists but nothing you couldn't see coming if you were clever. A couple of re-occurring mercs just to make things a little more difficult. I think I've got this thing nailed to the wall and it's going to be a great adventure. Then it is the first session I've ever had a player walk out on me. As a DM I'm feeding off my players constantly, if they are having fun and excited so am I. Him walking out really took the steam outa my sails for a bit.

I am a roleplayer and like to get into the mindset of my characters. As a DM this means I often won't know what all my NPC's are going to do until they do it, but it also means that I only get a shallow brush as each NPC. As a PC I can delve a bit deeper and have some development. That's why I like to have recurring NPC's, helps ground the plot and gives me someone to develop.

Frenth Alunril
2015-01-05, 11:31 AM
I love playing! I LOVE it! But, most people either run horrible games, or aren't ready for me to rp with them...

I really get a kick out of being a character in a reactive world. I dm because I can't find a game to play that is ready for me, and when I do, they are one shots, which is no fun.

Solaris
2015-01-05, 01:42 PM
I GM because I enjoy it.
The fact that every time I've tried to be a player has resulted in a horrendous experience with a terrible GM who barely knows what he's doing - or who's simply a terrible person and only mediocre as a GM... well, that's just an added bonus. I like to think I'm an alright player, but the fact that I'm smarter than most, know tactics like I lived and breathed it for most of my adult life, and have great rule mastery to go with the kind of cocksure attitude that comes from being a sergeant with the stripes to prove it means I tend to dominate the game.

Even without that, I have this problem where I can pretty much pick apart a plot and figure it out rather fast. For example, with Big Hero 6, knowing nothing other than the trailers, I'd figured out who the villain was by the time the fire happened (because nobody introduces a goody-goody mentor and then kills him without letting anyone get attached to him). With TV mysteries, it's maybe the first half of the episode before I figure out who did it. Maybe. It's a curse, you see, because I have this problem where if the GM lets my character anywhere near the villain before the final showdown, the villain has a pretty good chance of winding up dead and I have to explain why my character with a high Intelligence would be able to figure out something so patently obvious.

We're all just happier if I'm the GM. Plot lines tend to last a lot longer that way and dungeons don't have to survive the application of small-unit tactics. Also, players are supposed to be stupid, while I can't stand a stupid GM.


Maybe I should clarify. While I agree that playing and GMing have a lot of skills specific to them, I was saying that GM skills and the skills in being a "natural leader" are different, beyond some organizational skills and herding people.

Yes. I've been the military's equivalent to management, and utilized practically none of my GM skills for it except for when I've given classes.
A GM isn't a leader. He's a storyteller and a showman. He doesn't have to motivate the unwilling to do the impossible, he has to herd players to do what they already want to do and keep them entertained while they're at it.

Mr.Moron
2015-01-05, 01:59 PM
I prefer to run games than play them. That might be in part due to the fact that everyone else I know that runs games only like to run things I either feel pretty "Meh" about (40k RPGs) or downright despise (White Wolf Products, particular Vampire).

I also think I'm pretty awful player too, being a player brings all the worst parts of my inner neck-beard.

I can't claim to be the world's best GM either, in fact I probably feel like I screw up more than not. Still I must be doing something right as I usually get positive feedback, and one of my games still has regular attendance some 3-years into the campaign.

Beta Centauri
2015-01-05, 02:18 PM
I'm a good player, but only for a narrow range of GMs and groups. Otherwise, there's a clash of styles and I find myself trying to get the GM or players to change some of their more tiresome behavior.

For that matter, I'm a good GM, but only for a narrow range of players. Outside of that, I don't prep enough, and I don't have enough patience for whack-a-doodle character concepts.

On the whole, I prefer to GM.

ComaVision
2015-01-05, 02:32 PM
I'm a DM by necessity. I originally got into it because we had too many people wanting to join our D&D game so I started DMing a second. Now, the first game has ended so I don't get to play any more.

I miss playing. I have to hold back as a DM or I'll kill the party. As a player, as long as I don't pick a T1 or T2 class, I can pretty much do whatever I want. I tend to end up leading any group I play in, and I've always organised the groups (as far as play times, who is invited, etc).

I'm really hoping my group messes up too badly and a TPK is inevitable so maybe I can get someone else to start up a campagin. I have like two dozen builds I want to play set up in excel sheets (and I've never died in an on-going campaign so I don't get to go through them very quickly).

draken50
2015-01-05, 02:46 PM
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.

In the same vein... would any of you be insulted of someone didn't want to join your game simply because they prefer to GM?

ComaVision
2015-01-05, 03:00 PM
In the same vein... would any of you be insulted of someone didn't want to join your game simply because they prefer to GM?

I'd be excited and try to find a way to rapidly end the campaign I'm running lol

gom jabbarwocky
2015-01-05, 03:09 PM
Good GM, bad player? Guilty. I guess I'm a decent GM, but my PCs are almost as bad as cancer. They kill games slowly, from within. This is because I usually give them at least one significant flaw (anger issues, drug addiction, being a moron, ect.) in exchange for making them the "best evar" at one thing, but it's always the flaw that ends up defining them. This critical failing turns into a black hole that draws in the rest of the PCs and eventually kills one or more of them. Once, it was a TPK. I don't know why this always happens, but it does.

As for Gming, I see it as basically being a cross between a director and a roadie. You want to set the stage to draw out the best in your PCs, and give the players the opportunity to rock out as hard as possible. It is a philosophy that has served me well, and keeps me from getting too swelled a head about it.


In the same vein... would any of you be insulted of someone didn't want to join your game simply because they prefer to GM?

Probably not. On the other hand, if they started to GM a game and stole my players away from my game.... yes, but I'd save face by not showing it. I'd just request to join their game as a player, and things will eventually go their natural course and implode.

jedipotter
2015-01-05, 03:38 PM
Even without that, I have this problem where I can pretty much pick apart a plot and figure it out rather fast.

I have this curse too. Most plots are just too easy. It's hard, almost impossible, to be a player when you can see the plot. As then you have to pretend you don't see it for the game to roll on.



A GM isn't a leader. He's a storyteller and a showman. He doesn't have to motivate the unwilling to do the impossible, he has to herd players to do what they already want to do and keep them entertained while they're at it.

It does work best if the DM is the leader, both of the social group and in the game. Everyone just gives the leader a bad name, and some how wants to think everyone is just a perfect saint for no reason.

Take: Showing up in time for the game. A good DM leader says ''the game starts at 7pm, be here on time or don't come''. Just letting people ''show up whenever'' does not work. And having no penalty for showing up late does not work.

The DM also needs to take the lead with all the other social things, and often tell the players what to do. People need to be told what to do, it's that simple. Take the case of: A female gamer. She showed up to play the game, but not get hit on, objectified, leered at or insulted. Yet, some players think all of that and worse, is OK. And this is where the DM has to take the Leader role(or the Adult role) and tell the player how to act right...or else.

And the DM also has to lead the players in the game too. Players can often just ''wander'' without a leader to tell them what to do.

LibraryOgre
2015-01-05, 06:34 PM
My high school GM was like that. As a DM, he was inventive, with good stories and fun NPCs. As a player, he was a whiny power gamer who tended to put whatever political philosophy he was currently clinging to into his character.

Algeh
2015-01-05, 07:47 PM
I tend to be a good GM and a bad player too. I have a nasty, lazy tendency to give my characters some kind of one-dimensional quirk or bizarre habit (that may or may not have been on their character sheet anywhere) at some point in the game when I got bored and that habit takes up more screen time than it needs to thereafter and sometimes kind of takes over the whole character concept if I'm not careful.

In the right kind of campaign, this can be a handy shorthand to make a somewhat more memorable NPC that shows up once every month or so in real time and wanders off again after their latest plotty bit ("right, the guy who wears the newspaper hats and talks like a pirate, I remember him from last time we ran into him - he was looking for his lost pig, did we ever find any leads on that?" or whatever), but is tedious in a PC that is constantly interacting with the group (I've never done a DMPC that travels with the group - it's just not something I'm interested in dealing with so I write challenges for the party I have rather than make them fill obvious role gaps with characters I'd then have to keep track of). I generally run silly campaigns to start with rather than serious ones. I would have to work a lot harder on NPC personalities (among other things) if I were running a serious, more immersive campaign rather than a humorous one. Basically, I'm writing closer to sitcom rules rather than action serial rules in some ways, so my NPC character notes can be a little different. If anyone else I gamed with also ran those types of campaigns, I'd probably do better as a player in them, but most groups I've joined as a player have been much more typical "adventure serial" types.

Honest Tiefling
2015-01-05, 08:26 PM
I imagine I'm quite bad at both. I love world-building, but I want the players to appreciate what I have built to...Probably a controlling extreme. For instance, a player wanted to be a noble character of a certain race, I told her exactly where that would work.

As a player, I want to explore the setting and probably spend too much time faffing about with NPCs and not enough trying to do the plot. I had a character where I wrote out his family tree to his great-grand parents and he tried to chat up a new race he never heard of quite a lot.

Drynwyn
2015-01-05, 09:28 PM
I enjoy DM'ing and playing about the same amount, but overall I GM more than I play any more. For the most part, I'm a good player with two major flaws:

1. I tend to optimize my build a little more than I should. Generally in ways that don't directly interfere with other player's fun (battlefield control, debuffing, buffing), but enough that it grates on some peoples nerves.

2. I have issues when I know more about the rules than the GM, which I usually do, from a lot of time gm'ing. It's hard for me to sit back and say nothing when I believe a GM is using the rules wrong.

Peebles
2015-01-06, 04:14 AM
In the same vein... would any of you be insulted of someone didn't want to join your game simply because they prefer to GM?

No, but with a caveat. I prefer to GM, but am happy to play to give others a chance to when they want. I think I have a rare group, in that all but one of us is eager to GM at various points. In my case, it's common courtesy to play their games when it's their turn in the hotseat, even if I'd rather be there myself. Also, if a GM is struggling for players, and wouldn't be able to run a game without someone's involvement, the 'I'd rather GM' excuse wouldn't fly.

sktarq
2015-01-06, 11:41 AM
Well that depends on your definition of a bad player.
I often drive my DM/ST/GM nuts by using an alternate path to a goal. Not on purpose, half the time the fluff I'm basing it on I was taking as a DM intended glowing neon arrow of "plot goes this way" and was going along. Also the number of non combat uses for spells that seem obvious to me but are not planned for is...staggering. This tends to throw games for a loop. It is also why I tend to run pretty open ended games myself- I find the problem of directionless players more easy to deal with than the problems of trying to predict my players.
I also have tendency to take over parties of adventurers. Mostly because I come up with ideas on how to solve problems and have a big personality. I am aware of these things and try to create characters to compensate. Playing a dumb character is the hardest-so I usually have to make them slow-they will come up with a solution given time but everyone else gets a shot first type stuff.
So all told being a DM/ST/GM is easier on everybody. Also I love world-building so I have more fun in downtime with that.

As for leadership/management being a DM skill set. Yes - it is very much like managing a small conference. The GM generally has to deal with screening the appropriateness of new players, figuring out how much rule layering, screening splats, setting times, food/drink/etc (often by delegation), making sure everyone has time in the spotlight, and managing player conflicts. These skills are the background to running a high functioning game rather than a fun one though a high functioning game is often a prereq for a fun one.

YossarianLives
2015-01-06, 01:16 PM
I would also say I enjoy DMing and playing equally. I'm not a great roleplayer though so I won't say I'm a good player even if I'm not a bad one.

Knaight
2015-01-07, 05:47 AM
It does work best if the DM is the leader, both of the social group and in the game. Everyone just gives the leader a bad name, and some how wants to think everyone is just a perfect saint for no reason.

Take: Showing up in time for the game. A good DM leader says ''the game starts at 7pm, be here on time or don't come''. Just letting people ''show up whenever'' does not work. And having no penalty for showing up late does not work.
There's no need for a penalty for showing up late, as those generally don't exist for just about every other social thing, and yet those other things function just fine. Moreover, this one is more on the organizer than anyone else, and while that might be the GM it could be someone else. There's the idea that the GM also has to be the host and out of game logistics person; that's nonsense. That's not to say that they can be completely uninvolved in logistics, but that doesn't apply to anyone.


The DM also needs to take the lead with all the other social things, and often tell the players what to do. People need to be told what to do, it's that simple. Take the case of: A female gamer. She showed up to play the game, but not get hit on, objectified, leered at or insulted. Yet, some players think all of that and worse, is OK. And this is where the DM has to take the Leader role(or the Adult role) and tell the player how to act right...or else.
Again, this doesn't have to be the GM. Anyone can step in and tell someone to stop being a douchebag, and in all honesty this sort of thing is generally not a particular issue if the game is within a group of people who are already friends.

Jay R
2015-01-07, 10:45 AM
We currently have three games going, because there are three of us who are competent GMs but would rather play. So I'm currently playing 1E and 3.5E, and running 2E.

GoblinGilmartin
2015-01-08, 06:47 AM
I'm a pretty bad player, I'll admit that. My RPG experience began with me DMPCing. I did it very well. Any time I'm a player, I get bored easily. What I love about DMing is that I'm constantly engaged, interacting and improvising.

There's one incident where after a Roll20 session was over, I got bored after all the players had left, and I drew phalluses on the map.

Then I forgot to remove them before the next session...

SgtCarnage92
2015-01-12, 10:14 PM
Started out as a GM and while I enjoy being a player, I realize that I can't divorce myself from the GMs mindset to do it particularly well.

I tend to notice the problems in other GMs games a lot more than other players, and I also tend to take advantage of the weaknesses of those GMs and their particular style.

Unfortunately, I also tend to be a fairly distracting player when I'm not forced to keep everyone else in line. The hypocrisy here is painful.

I have a couple of people in my group who I can happily play under with the right circumstances. These are also the people I go to when I need to bounce ideas off of another GM. They are invaluable resources and some of my best memories in gaming have been during their games.

I also have the tendency to play my PCs somewhat suicidal as self-preservation only goes so far when you're running monsters all day. :smallbiggrin: I've clocked the most character deaths with the lowest amount of "player time" in the group.

ddude987
2015-01-13, 04:03 PM
Interestingly, in my group at college, there are a bunch of the players that want to try their hand at GMing so we always have someone who wants to GM. The catch is very little experience as we change GMs and campaigns every year and only have 2 running at once. Just seemed to me to be something interestingly contrary to many groups posted about.

Knaight
2015-01-13, 07:08 PM
Interestingly, in my group at college, there are a bunch of the players that want to try their hand at GMing so we always have someone who wants to GM. The catch is very little experience as we change GMs and campaigns every year and only have 2 running at once. Just seemed to me to be something interestingly contrary to many groups posted about.

Right now this is what one of my groups sort of looks like, though campaigns don't last a year (a semester, maybe), and I'm still very much the main GM. It's also not several running as much, so much as backup games for groups in which particular people are missing.