PDA

View Full Version : Nervous to start DMing



Sajiri
2017-02-04, 04:03 PM
The title's a bit misleading, as I'm not exactly new to being a DM by this point. I wrapped up the 45th session of the campaign I've been running recently, but I was never able to start on the 46th. It was a campaign that I've had 0 interest in since day 1, and overtime it's become something that I grew to hate with a passion, and the only reason I had for running it, was that the player is my usual DM, and I wanted to give him the chance to be a player. I briefly tried running a pokemon tabletop adventures game, which I was far more interested in, but I found pretty quickly it was just as stressful as the other, and the player soon wanted to go back to the original game instead.

Now, after I explained I really needed an extended break from the old campaign as I just couldnt bring myself to run it for now, I pitched a new setting in it's place, one that I've been tossing around in my head for years for fun. I have been writing notes, coming up with rules, gathering art for NPCs and areas, but at the same time Im feeling overwhelmed just in the planning stage. The player is excited for it, which is great, but when he starts spamming me with potential art he's found for his character, or starts asking me a whole lot of questions about the setting Im not sure how to answer yet, I start to feel a lot of stress. When I do run sessions, I can usually only go for 2-3 hours before Im burned out for the day and need time to go over what's happened and come up with the next session.

I think DMing is just not for me, I love worldbuilding and designing characters, but actually running the game is something I feel like Im just bluffing my way through with no idea of anything that's going on, and trying to steer the player away from anything Im not prepared for while trying not to railroad him at the same time (it pretty much always goes the direction Im not prepared for though anyway). I want to run this new campaign, but I'm worried it will just break down into something I cant bring myself to complete again. Anyone have anything similar, or advice on how to, I suppose, keep myself organised and motivated better without getting overwhelmed as the DM? The player always offers to help me brainstorm ideas and such, but that feels rather silly when doing so would give him spoilers

Koo Rehtorb
2017-02-04, 04:12 PM
What do you mean by "not prepared for"? If it's a question of mechanics then a simpler system might make you feel more comfortable improvising on the spot.

hymer
2017-02-04, 04:28 PM
You have over 45 sessions under your belt, and you still feel DMing is not for you? I'd go with that notion, I think you've earned by now.

Feeling a duty or responsibility to DM can get you past some rough spots, but you're virtually torturing yourself there. And I certainly get why you feel your regular DM has earned their time as a player, but would s/he really want you to force yourself to do it? There must be some way to get a game going without that level of discomfort for you.

That said, it might be possible for you to DM, perhaps as a co-DM. That way you could use your world building skill and interest, and maybe someone who's stronger in the other aspects can do most of the main sessions. You might even learn the skills to do stuff by yourself, though Iw ouldn't pin a lot of hope on that.

Sajiri
2017-02-04, 04:30 PM
What do you mean by "not prepared for"? If it's a question of mechanics then a simpler system might make you feel more comfortable improvising on the spot.

Typically thats just when the player does something really unexpected. I dont try to plan out everything he'll do, but there will be certain things I will expect he's likely to do and he does something completely different. I get stumped pretty easily then and Im not so great at changing or having to come up with something new on the spot.


You have over 45 sessions under your belt, and you still feel DMing is not for you? I'd go with that notion, I think you've earned by now.

Feeling a duty or responsibility to DM can get you past some rough spots, but you're virtually torturing yourself there. And I certainly get why you feel your regular DM has earned their time as a player, but would s/he really want you to force yourself to do it? There must be some way to get a game going without that level of discomfort for you.

That said, it might be possible for you to DM, perhaps as a co-DM. That way you could use your world building skill and interest, and maybe someone who's stronger in the other aspects can do most of the main sessions. You might even learn the skills to do stuff by yourself, though Iw ouldn't pin a lot of hope on that.

We tend to take turns DMing for each other in seperate games. It began with me working in a session here and there when I was capable of it, but then changed more recently to he runs one game for me, then another day I'll run a different game for him. What really made it harder was recently he started keeping track of how long each session lasts and while he can go for 6+ hours, if I only manage 2-3 Im expected to run another session after before he does, to make it even. Co-DMing isnt really an option as we rarely do groups now (every time we try its usually too difficult to get everyone to show up each week), and I'd feel too self conscious to have others players I might know less playing in my setting

hymer
2017-02-04, 04:45 PM
We tend to take turns DMing for each other in seperate games. It began with me working in a session here and there when I was capable of it, but then changed more recently to he runs one game for me, then another day I'll run a different game for him. What really made it harder was recently he started keeping track of how long each session lasts and while he can go for 6+ hours, if I only manage 2-3 Im expected to run another session after before he does, to make it even. Co-DMing isnt really an option as we rarely do groups now (every time we try its usually too difficult to get everyone to show up each week), and I'd feel too self conscious to have others players I might know less playing in my setting

Then I honestly think you should stop DMing. You're doing it out of a sense of obligation, and you don't really want to - and now you're being pushed to do more? No.
Or, if your DM/player will only DM for you if you DM for him, you'll have to make up your mind whether it's worth it. Even if it is, you should be clear to your DM/player that you're beyond the edge of your capabilities already, and further pushing will only make things worse for you.

Quertus
2017-02-04, 04:48 PM
The first campaign I ever ran, I was in many ways not prepared. I mean, I'd probably been working on the world for over a decade, but I had only signed on for a 1-shot, and it was (intentionally) set in one of the least fleshed out regions of the world.

I quickly learned the following trick: at the end of the season, I would ask the players, "so, what are we doing next session?". This gave me time between sessions to prep the details I'd need: maps (yeah, right :smalltongue:), NPCs (a few major, a few minor), what they knew of and how they were responding to recent events, and any details I knew these particular PCs would ask for.

Another thing you may want to consider is to scale back. Just run some random one-shot adventures. See if that doesn't reduce your stress significantly.

Because if you're ran, what, 45 sessions, and they're coming back for more, it sounds like it would be a waste for you to hang up your hat. But, if, at the end of the day, you hate everything about it, no matter what you try, well, I at least can understand, and won't try to convince you to do something you hate.

EDIT: and this concept of tit-for-tat fair play... it feels wrong, somehow. Like... paying someone to be your friend. Someone with a better grasp of this aspect of human psychology care to comment?

Freed
2017-02-04, 04:55 PM
Well, for starters, I would listen to the player helping you brainstorm the ideas. For example: If he has an idea for an interesting murder mystery adventure, he can flesh out the setting, victim, suspects, so while he helps with the ideas, you can keep the killer and details a secret. He could also mention that his character would be interested in looking for a new magic sword or the like, which gives you possibilities that you could use. When a player does something unexpected, (and you can't figure out how it would work) ask him some questions about the action. Occasionally, after further reflection on some of those questions, that player now thinks that maybe that isn't the best plan. More often however, they're stalled for a moment which gives you (some) time to make mental changes to the adventure. Hope this helps!

Darth Ultron
2017-02-04, 05:27 PM
Well, short game sessions should be obvious. Maybe just two hours. Or maybe have a break in the middle.

Try to only run what you really, really like. It's after all easy to run a game you like.

If the player *always* does the unexpected....well, then you can expect that, right? And you can plan for it.

You can also distract the character. Just drop something happening so they can't ''go off all unexpected'' . It does not need to be ''oh no the world is going to end'', the character might just get a letter from home asking for a visit.

If you like making things, then you might want to make some mini adventures, ones like five pages long to ''side trek'' the game if you need it.

Sajiri
2017-02-04, 05:31 PM
I feel like I should explain a bit more. I dont like the taking turns and running equal session lengths, it makes sense but it doesnt go so well when he has a lot more experience DMing than I do, but overall the player is very encouraging and often asks me what would make it more comfortable (but if its less sessions, it means he will do less as well). I've asked him if he will help me planning some rules for the actual setting we're going to start up and he's always willing to do that. Its not so much that I dont want to DM at all, its just that I feel Im not very good at it and I've had a lot of negative feelings associated with the previous campaign I was running. Aside from the expectations of how often I should run it, the player isnt a problem, but I started thinking of it a bit more after posting the OP and I think there are two major issues that I have with taking the role of DM.

1. We have different expectations and comfort levels. There are plenty of themes we're fine having show up in the single player games between us that we probably wouldnt include when we play with a larger group, but we have different thoughts on how they should be handled. When he's the DM, he's really good at offering subplots and such that I would want, but when it comes to him being the player, the sort of things he wants are different, and often times things I am less comfortable with. He's never actually said I owe it to him or I should run a game in a specific way I dont like just for him, but it was myself feeling obligated to do so that I havent really been able to break out of that mindset.

2. I unintentionally compare myself to him as a DM a lot. I have played a few games with larger groups in the past, but he has been the DM each time so I obviously emulated his style a lot. He tells me that I'm great at it, and that I "DM on a level it takes most years to reach," I don't really know if that's true or if he's just saying it for my sake. He does tell me very often I shouldnt compare myself to him but again, it's a mindset I suppose I'm not really breaking out of. He is very good at making combat exciting, interesting plot twists, traps etc, and when I try to do the same things they feel far less impressive or he sees through them depressingly easy. He tells me the things I do better are making interesting NPCs and personal subplots for them, and an interesting setting, but I feel like that only goes so far if I focus on it.

The previous campaign I ran was one I didn't want to do from the beginning. I was brand new to it, but had been talking about trying to run something for him, and one day in the middle of a conversation I jokingly suggested I'd run a game based on a specific video game setting which was something he was a big fan of and I was considerably less of a fan. He took it seriously and got excited, so I then felt compelled to give it a try but after maybe a dozen sessions I just couldnt stand it anymore. We agreed to make big changes to it, so that it would be based more around my own ideas rather than the original video game, and it was better for a while but it was still hard to work up the motivation for it, and running it was always a chore. The new one I have is something entirely of my own creation, I am far more interested in it, but I worry the same issues are going to come up- I'll get burned out trying to run longer sessions, I wont handle combat well, I'll get disappointed at unimaginative twists and traps and so on.

Quertus
2017-02-04, 10:15 PM
He is very good at making combat exciting, interesting plot twists, traps etc, and when I try to do the same things they feel far less impressive or he sees through them depressingly easy. He tells me the things I do better are making interesting NPCs and personal subplots for them, and an interesting setting, but I feel like that only goes so far if I focus on it.

Play to your strengths. He has way more experience, so if you try to emulate his strengths, even if you are a natural, it often won't go as well as you'd like, if you're constantly comparing yourself to him.

Make your own style, that focuses on your strengths. Sure, crib from his style whenever you need to, since it's what you know. But I love the fact that different GMs have different styles.

WbtE
2017-02-05, 12:23 AM
Typically thats just when the player does something really unexpected. I dont try to plan out everything he'll do, but there will be certain things I will expect he's likely to do and he does something completely different. I get stumped pretty easily then and Im not so great at changing or having to come up with something new on the spot.

Try these techniques:

Take five. It's fine to say, "Hold on, I hadn't really expected you to do that. Let's just take a five minute break so that I can come back and rule on it with my full ass." This works well when the player has a novel solution for a problem and you're not sure if it should work or not.

Can we do that next time? Sometimes players want to go and explore an area that you only have sketched out. If you don't feel comfortable with an ad-lib, just say that you haven't prepared that area yet but you'd be happy to run it next session. If that means cutting a session short, there's often a lot of "house-keeping" business that players put off because they want to get the most from a game session, so there should be something to do.

Freed
2017-02-05, 01:46 PM
Personally, I feel that a lot of your problems could be solved by simply shortening the length of your sessions. Just because he can do 6+ hours doesn't mean you have to. I think most people would rather play 3 hour sessions of a more fun and interesting game than 6 hours of a boring and cliche game.

hicegetraenk
2017-02-06, 03:13 AM
I think this pretty much boils down to:

Are you still having fun running a game, regardless of feeling exhausted at times?

But maybe you can connect to my situation:

I've been running campaigns for many years now, and usually had no problem with that at all. At some point we moved to roll20 and had everything digitally, which put a lot of stress on me I felt. I love the possibilities to directly include art, music, etc - yet I also felt obliged to have those ready at all times. All kind of assets like (important) NPCs, maps, encounters and you name it had to be prepared ahead of time with tokens, stats in digital sheets and so on. Things that just didn't have to be when playing at a kitchen table if you are good at improvising, as the whole game took place in people's minds anyway.
Anyway, I noticed that I had to put in way more hours to be prepared for our weekly sessions. And when we're playing, I always have this nagging 'fear' in the back of my head, that my players want to do something I cannot deliver to them. If, for example, they decide to go to a place somewhere else entirely than expected, I'd hate to say "please don't", as I like to make anything possible to play. On the flipside, if I have to come up with everything on the fly, there is a sudden shift from an adventure that has tons of assets ready to a blank white site in your browser. Players notice this and know that, even if I manage to paint a sound picture into their heads, that this is somewhat separated from the rest of the campaign. I find it incredibly tough to just improvise something that interconnects well to the general plots that are going on - I need time to think that through.
Besides that, I feel that DMing can be very taxing in general. It depends on the session, the players and kind of stuff you play. In comparison to playing a campaign, being the head of it all can leave me exhausted at times. Sometimes even to the point of me thinking about ending my DM career.

But...

...I also really enjoy what I am doing. Just like you like to create worlds, stories and plots, I do too. And even if it is exhausting, I like creating and playing it out. Often things don't turn out the way I imagined (most of the time, really). But please put an emphasis on imagined, as it is not planned. I think that is the big big big plus of P&P roleplay - the story can go anywhere and is directly influenced and written by players and DM alike. I do not plan plots to go in set paths, because I know my players come up with other ideas while playing and will try to push it into a direction they like anyway. Yeah, there might be stuff happening anyway, that is kinda out of their sphere of influence, but most stuff I just 'prepare' somewhat losely, as I expect it to not work out with what they'll do. And this works just fine. And this gives me also the sensation of exploring a new story, even if it was my story I am exploring. But it becomes our story on the go.
Playing is a joined effort by all participating parties, and while it sure can be demanding, it can also be rewarding at the same time. Think of it like building something manually. You put in sweat and tears, but when you see the thing you're building grow and finally even being a complete creation, you're happy you've done it.

That's the kind of feeling I'd look for in your situation. If that's not there, well, maybe then DMing really just isn't for you.

Zombimode
2017-02-06, 05:37 AM
He took it seriously and got excited, so I then felt compelled to give it a try but after maybe a dozen sessions I just couldnt stand it anymore.

From your opening post, I was going to write a Reply concering the issue of Players going off-Trail.
But reading your clarification post I don't think any shortcommings on the technical side of DMing on your part are the issue here.

The Feeling of getting caught unprepared that you've expressed are probably more a symptome of the root problem rather then an something lacking on your part.

The line I've quoted from you Expresses the actual Problem in my view. It is twofold:

First, you are running a campaign you're not interessted in. This is something you should never do: as a DM you're something like an Artist. You need a Vision, something YOU want to express, to explore. In less haughty Terms: the DM is a Player, too, and Needs to have fun. If you don't, stop.
I know from personal experience how draining the act of running a campaign you find no joy in can be. That you've kept it up for 45 sessions (holy crap! that would be over 2 years of gaming at my table...) is a recomendation to your stamina.

Second, you commited to something very big with very Little gain for yourself out of a felt "need" to do it. From your Posts I gather that your Player has never expressed, verbally or non-verbally, such a demand and no true friend would ever do so.
Ultimately this lies outside the scope of DMing, so the following are my personal opinions on that matter and should be taken with a grain of salt.
I think that your felt need to run this campaign is an imagined one, and no-one would expect you to do it. Yes, being a friend means that, sometimes, you do something for that friend that you would rather not. But there are Limits. And I think the Situation you've described lies way past those Limits. A reasonable Person will not hold it against you to quit the game if you explain the situation. Likewise no-one will hold it against you if you decline such request in the future.

Quertus
2017-02-06, 03:25 PM
First, you are running a campaign you're not interessted in. This is something you should never do: as a DM you're something like an Artist. You need a Vision, something YOU want to express, to explore. In less haughty Terms: the DM is a Player, too, and Needs to have fun.

Although you've said a lot of good things that I agree with, I want to make sure you don't have too narrow of a focus on this part, and that, if you don't, that no-one takes it that way.

Because, taken the wrong way, this piece of your advice could lead to controlling, railroading GMs.

Yes, the game is a lot more fun, especially for the GM, if the GM has something they're getting out of the game. But when the GM is forcing the game towards something specific that they want, that's often when things go bad.

kyoryu
2017-02-06, 05:31 PM
I feel like Im just bluffing my way through with no idea of anything that's going on, and trying to steer the player away from anything Im not prepared for while trying not to railroad him at the same time (it pretty much always goes the direction Im not prepared for though anyway).

Well, yeah.

I think that's pretty common. If you're giving your players any real decision-making power, then you're going to be making stuff up on the fly, and some of that's gonna feel a bit like bluffing. You're not doing it wrong.

Now, if you don't like that... don't do it. But that's pretty normal in my experience.

Sajiri
2017-02-07, 11:23 PM
I appreciate the advice everyone :smallsmile: Ive had talks with the player and he's acknowledging I just cant DM as much as he does, while offering me alternatives to help too. He went ahead and started running his games for me as well again saying he doesnt mind doing so instead of taking turns if I need time to brainstorm and plan which has taken a lot of the pressure of it off I suppose.

hymer
2017-02-08, 03:11 AM
I appreciate the advice everyone :smallsmile: Ive had talks with the player and he's acknowledging I just cant DM as much as he does, while offering me alternatives to help too. He went ahead and started running his games for me as well again saying he doesnt mind doing so instead of taking turns if I need time to brainstorm and plan which has taken a lot of the pressure of it off I suppose.

Hallelujah! :smallsmile:

Mmagsgreen
2017-02-13, 10:31 AM
I'm glad to hear that the issue seems resolved, but this got me thinking about a format that I wonder if anyone has tried: one player, one GM and one 'vizier' who does the brainstorming and background-fill that the GM simply executes to the best of their ability. Has anyone tried anything like that?