Co DMing: Can it work?

[Kurt Kurageous]

Playgrounders, I ask you...

How could two equally capable and motivated individuals share a group of players on an alternating week or semi-alternating schedule of some kind?

What ground rules should the co-DMs agree upon?

What previous thread did I miss on this subject?

[rudy]

I've done this successfully... though with my spouse.

The number one most important thing is that the two of you have personalities, and/or rapport, that allows you to resolve conflicts in an amicable manner (which, not coincidentally is also pretty critical for a marriage).

An (obvious?) rule is that the co-DM should never argue with your decisions during the session you are running. Any disagreements should be done away from the other players, so as not to undermine authority, or invite other players to dogpile. If absolutely critical that the issue be resolved then and there, it should be taken to another room.

[Safety Sword]

I have never had a good experience with it. Usually because the plot is semi-ruined if you're involved with engineering it.

[AvatarVecna]

My IRL group is doing something like this; for the longest time, we've been running a game every other Sunday, but for at least most of the time I've been attending, any particular individual's attendance (including my own at times) has been less than ideal, making it difficult to run adventures that last more than three sessions; sometimes, it's been the DM who is unable to make it, which means somebody else needs to pick up the slack and throw something together (usually me, because I'm fantastic at improvising ****), or we play board games.

Our current solution is to rotate DMs, who each run mini-adventures lasting a single session for our group; the PCs are part of an adventurer's guild, and party members being missing for individual sessions is written off as "they're on some other quest right now", which is easier to sell than them just disappearing in the middle of a dungeon.

[Laserlight]

Our next campaign will have the PCs be members of a mercenary company. They'll contract for a mission, which I'll DM; once that's done, the next DM can run the next mission. People will be able to switch out characters--I might play a barbarian during a dungeon crawl mission, then use a bard/rogue for the murder investigation contract.

[ClintACK]

Is there a reason not to run two different campaigns in parallel?

You still share the players, you're still the same group of friends getting together and rolling d20s. And you still only have to do all the DM prep work half as often.

Plus, you can run entirely different campaigns -- like a proper high fantasy save-the-world campaign alternating with a freaks-in-space Spelljammer or Planescape mess.

It is twice the work to generate characters -- but it can be really fun to switch off between your high elven knowledge cleric/diviner wizard and "Throg smash!"

[MrConsideration]

My group swaps DMs every week, but we run two separate campaigns.

They do take place in the same world, however, and there are some characters in common between them - my PC in the other DM's campaign is an NPC in my campaign as a young man, as his campaign takes places around twenty-five years in the past (or, you could argue, mine takes place twenty-five years in the future!)

As they take place on different continents, there's not much overlap apart from concepts or big organisations, but we do a few references or homages (a magic item here or character there will be related). As we're good friends and have kept metaphysics vague or unknown in the campaign world we have a lot of scope to be effective and to be surprised by each other's campaigns.

[Scaleybob]

Yes, it can work quite well, (or go horribly wrong.) I'm currently in a group that I've run for when the main GM wanted a break. I found the main thing when splitting GMing duties is to have fairly clear areas of effect - one GM runs one group of foes/scenarios/NPCs/area on the map and the other does the same. Both decide who deals with what when it comes to PC backstories.

It can be a lot of fun doing this as a GM. Different GMs have quite different styles and ideas, and working together like this can allow you to expand and build on another persons ideas and concepts, which can make for a stronger game overall. Just be careful with someone else's NPCs.

The game Ars Magica has this as one of its central ideas - everyone in the group takes turns to GM.

When it goes wrong, it can go epically wrong - I took part in an Ars Magica game ,many years ago, which all concerned didn't really work anything out in advance. Lots of half-baked ideas, that eventually led to the island where the wizards were based getting destroyed in a massive Godzilla type fight between the Fae, and some Demons. The campaign ended after that. I was responsible for the final session that ended the game.:smallsmile:

[MrFahrenheit]

FWIW, I've only had experience with this with combat: when battles are especially large, it is definitely nice to have a competent helper who is otherwise a PC. Someone who can be objective (i.e., would have bad guys attack his PC if it makes sense, and not avoid himself for a less obvious target), knows the rules that matter for the bad guys in play, and can be a quick reference for the DM in case of a rules dispute so the DM doesn't have to take his/her own time doing it themselves.

[MrConsideration]

I always farm out certain tasks to players - tracking initiative, or running NPC allies, or anything like that.

[Falcon X]

Current experience says yes.

I am currently playing a game under co-DMs (both have been into RPGs for less than a year, mind you). One was the primary world builder and jumps into the roles of NPCs as the game progresses. The other DM handles the bulk of the storytelling, fighting, and rules adjudication.
They occasionally step to the side to collaborate, but usually one DMs while the other handles NPC dialogue and is a consultant.

Works great. However, our two DMs trust each other and have been friends for a while. Trust would be the key element here.

[MBControl]

I currently Co-Run a group. We have developed a different approach that is really quite fun.

We run different campaigns in the same world with the same characters. What ever events occur in one DM's storyline is canon for both DM's and the world.

We have agreed that we will roll with whatever happens, even if it effects the overall story of the other DM. the only concession that has to be agreed to by DM's and Players alike is a flexibility of the time line.

This is making a lot of extra fun for us DM's as we are constantly adjusting and improvising, though we do try to avoid confusing each other's major story points.

[MrFahrenheit]

I always farm out certain tasks to players - tracking initiative, or running NPC allies, or anything like that.

This.

Also, why do you and the other potential DM(s) want to co-run? Is it more because you all want to play characters, or you all want to run a game? Whoever is more in the former camp should be what I call a DM's lieutenant, handling rules lookups and larger combat issues as necessary, but otherwise acting as a PC.

[Safety Sword]

I always farm out certain tasks to players - tracking initiative, or running NPC allies, or anything like that.

My groups do this mostly too.

It's not exactly co-DMing though, it's just being a bookkeeping assistant so the DM can concentrate on the most important stuff.

It's undeniably helpful though.

It's the 2 DMs running one world/story that has never worked out for me.. although, I've never been one of the DMs in these situations.

[BW022]

Can it work? Sure.

Does it typically have as good results as having only one DM? Almost always No.


There are a lot of problems with multiple DMs...

Plot If you have multiple DMs they need to communicate extremely efficiently and typically the modules/adventures need to be written out. This typically means set or store bought modules/adventures. This immediately limits characters a lot more. Improve, custom adventures, allowing players to go off in their own direction, etc. is typically not possible or severely limited.

Player / DM Knowledge. The two DMs typically have to attend the same sessions (typically one of them playing a PC or NPC). This then has issues that one character is repeatedly being either switched off, ghosted, disappearing, etc. It also means that one player tends to know a heck of a lot about the plot, monsters, adventures, etc. Ruins most of the surprise. If the player doesn't attend sessions, this is a bad case where the players know more than the DM. If the player attends and merely observes... typically not fun.

Consistency Even if you write things down really carefully... two people can't maintain the same level of consistency. NPC traits, voices, the way they negotiate, atmosphere, pacing, etc. can't be the same with two DMs. This tends to focus games into areas which don't use them -- i.e. set combat-focused games and highly linear adventures.

Time Far more work for the DMs trying to maintain a consistent campaign. Writing, documenting, etc.


Now... times when I have seen it done...

1. Set modules. Purchased modules.
2. Open campaigns (Pathfinder Society, Living games, Adventurer's League, etc.)
3. Public game days at a comic shop or game store, conventions, etc. (typically using #2 or a home world variation)
4. Side campaigns. (DM is away for a set number of sessions and another player runs the same characters off on a different set of adventurers)

[Azreal]

Not sure if it was suggested already but a fun idea you guys could do with Co-DMing is to both use the same world and have two parties trying to accomplish different goals in said world. This would also be fun since the actions of one party could affect the other through a ripple effect.

[Safety Sword]

Not sure if it was suggested already but a fun idea you guys could do with Co-DMing is to both use the same world and have two parties trying to accomplish different goals in said world. This would also be fun since the actions of one party could affect the other through a ripple effect.

Again, not really co-DMing, just having two campaigns in the same world. Still not a bad idea.