What are your weakest areas as DM?

[tchntm43]

A few years ago, I would had said my biggest problem was railroading. I wrote my early adventures designed around epic climactic scenes and plot twists for the party, and of course that meant I needed things to go a very specific way to get there. I've mostly fixed my approach to the game and resolved this problem. One of the things that really helped was not writing the content for an entire adventure at once. Instead I write for a single session now, so that I'm not committing myself to certain things that are 4-5 sessions away.

Now I think my biggest problem is helping the players. Not fudging die rolls. What I mean is that if I see that it seems like they don't know what to do I absent-mindedly start suggesting things. Or I sometimes remind players of abilities they have in the middle of combat. It's like not even an intentional thing and I don't know why I do it or how to stop doing it.

[No brains]

My problem is that my weakest area is probably something I haven't even conceived of yet. I like to think that I'm strong where I'm good, but I worry I get tunnel vision for my strengths.

I like to think I'm pretty good on knowing the rules, particularly when it comes to creatures and combats. I tend to think I'm okay with character interactions, but the style of those is always a YMMV thing with players. I think past that I may struggle in exploration and also treasure/ rewards.

With exploration, I like to think I'm good setting up a battle map. I can think up terrains that make the movement and ranged options of PCs and NPCs really matter. What I think I fail at is atmosphere. What's the vibe of the place? What's the smell? Why is it special that the PCs are HERE? I can't think of times when I've done that well.

For rewards... this might be another YMMV or even systemic problem in 5e. I tend to feel like my PCs have enough treasure to make meaningful decisions, but they keep lusting for more. I kind of feel like a parent saying 'We have McDonalds at home', or however the meme goes. I tend to think my players under-utilize the options they have and so I'm cautious about overwhelming them with more, but maybe I should question if their options are good enough if they aren't getting use?

There's probably other stuff that I may be deficient in, but this is what comes to mind without my PCs giving their opinions.

As for your problems, I say fudge all you want to keep the dramatic tension taut. Go ahead and batter the crap out of the PCs, but if they're still alive to act, they still get to participate and that's fun. All I can really say is think ahead about how you can realistically mask it. Think a turn ahead about why a creature might switch a target, retreat, or otherwise hold back. Maybe the monsters have bad teamwork and expect their partners to finish a PC, but the partner gets distracted by another one that draws aggro. Maybe give a monster a ranged attack with a weak damage over time effect that they overconfidently assumes will finish a PC for them. Stuff like that.

[PhoenixPhyre]

My biggest weakness as a DM is that my dice hate me and love my players. Well, some of them at least. I don't need to fudge the dice, I just roll attacks like crap. Except against one PC per game. Who just gets bodied.

Really, tactical combat and providing a "challenge". I make it quite clear to prospective players that if they're looking for an optimization challenge, one that's going to make them constantly ride the line...mine is not the game for you. I don't have a head for that, and my goldfish attention span/short-term memory tends to make me look back at monsters that are even slightly complex and go "wait...I totally forgot about XYZ." Including but not limited to
* regeneration
* legendary actions
* reaction abilities
* damage/effect auras

Basically anything that doesn't have an explicit Action line or that happens "off turn" is particularly susceptible to just being forgotten in the thick of combat.

I've basically come to terms with this, however. So I don't even try to balance the encounters numerically or police the adventuring day. I put what looks nifty, will be simple to run, and fits the narrative in there, where it fits. And somehow I haven't had a TPK yet. Probably because the dice really do love everybody but that guy.

------------

On a completely different side, I feel I'm great at weaving a "coherent" narrative even ad lib. Until you ask me what that character's name is. Naming Is Hard. And I can't remember the names I did plan on. Heck, even when I write them down and have them in front of me. Naming is hard.

[RazorChain]

Strength: Characters and story development

Weakness: Descriptions of locales


I may also be hampered in descriptions as I'm running games in my third language

[Unoriginal]

I would say I have flaws and quirks as a DM, and I do mistakes like anyone else, but not that I have one area in particular where I'm repeatedly/regularly worse than the rest.

Like last campaign I've DMed I forgot the Legendary Actions of one boss, but that was just that one fight which included a lot of NPCs to juggle with.




Now I think my biggest problem is helping the players. Not fudging die rolls. What I mean is that if I see that it seems like they don't know what to do I absent-mindedly start suggesting things. Or I sometimes remind players of abilities they have in the middle of combat. It's like not even an intentional thing and I don't know why I do it or how to stop doing it.

I don't see the problem.

[Batcathat]

Strength: Characters and story development

Weakness: Descriptions of locales

Pretty much this for me too. I don't know if I'm particularly bad at descriptions, but I'm at least not as good as I would like.

When I was younger, I would definitely have added "planning ahead" as a weakness, since I was pretty much all improvisation, but as I've gotten older I've gotten a lot more organized in general (my personality has always been a mix of improvised chaos and obsessive order, but over the years the proportions have changed from like 80/20 to like 30/70) and that has rubbed off on my GM:ing.

[Beelzebub1111]

My biggest weakness is facilitating intra-party roleplaying. I'm just not good at encouraging my players to roleplay amongst themselves and stay in character. When it does happen it's great, but those events seem few and far between.

[stoutstien]

I always think the player's are twice as clever as they end up being.

[Mastikator]

I've been told I'm too "by the book" strict about rules and don't allow any "rule of cool". That's not something I have intentions to change though. I think the game is balanced when the rules are enforced, and I think that if you're not creative enough to be cool within the box then you don't deserve to be cool. Because I do allow players to go beyond the rules at a price, and they never want to pay that price.

Also I've been told I only give out inspiration to players who make puns. And I want to give out inspiration for great roleplaying, teamplaying and when players improve the quality of everyone's experience. But I'm either bad at recognizing it or the other option. So I tend to not give inspiration (for the record, everyone starts with inspiration at the start of the session).

One flaw I've personally recognized in my games is that when players make very stupid choices that rightfully should end in their character's death I tend to hold back and deliberately use NPCs inefficiently to spare the PC.

[Derges]

Finding time to meet and play with my group.

[da newt]

Names. I have zero memory of names. If you say a name I hear the adults in an old Peanuts cartoon, and immediately have zero recollection of the name.

My games tend to be more a series of quasi related short stories / side quests and less a single overarching story line. My locations are small and independent, and my scope rather short term. My plots and NPC motives are fairly simple.

Combats and challenges are are more robust and interesting (to me).

[DammitVictor]

My biggest problem with the groups I typically play with is continuity. I don't take notes thoroughly enough and I don't refer to my notes often enough to keep a complicated game internally consistent, and I pretty much exclusively prefer to run the kinds of games where this can become a major problem.

If I ran games for strangers more often, my biggest problem is that I am way too slow to notice and address problematic behavior unless someone at the table explicitly asks me to. I like to think I am firm and decisive once I'm aware that a problem exists and requires me to resolve it, but I don't particularly "read the room" at the gaming table better than I read it anywhere else.

[tchntm43]

I don't see the problem.

I guess I worry that the players will think I am playing the game for them or treating them like incompetent children. Maybe I am overthinking.

[Amnestic]

I guess I worry that the players will think I am playing the game for them or treating them like incompetent children. Maybe I am overthinking.

This is definitely something I've wrestled with - wanting them to feel like they know their options (or at least some of the obvious ones) without also feeling like they're being spoonfed the answers is a difficult line for me to thread, at least in my mind.

[Unoriginal]

I guess I worry that the players will think I am playing the game for them or treating them like incompetent children. Maybe I am overthinking.


This is definitely something I've wrestled with - wanting them to feel like they know their options (or at least some of the obvious ones) without also feeling like they're being spoonfed the answers is a difficult line for me to thread, at least in my mind.

Asking the players if they're fine with that helps a lot, I think.

I understand why you feel that way, but IMO if I wait for them to be unsure about what they can do or if I have to ask myself "have they forgotten something?", and they haven't expressed they don't want suggestions when asked, it's not a problem.

All in all it comes down to knowing and respecting people's wishes on the topic.

[Ionathus]

It's a constant process of development, improvement, and regression for me.

Right now, my biggest issue is probably staying in character when it's appropriate. I love making OOC jokes and asides, commenting on how silly my NPCs' voices are or cracking jokes at a funny situation. Usually it's fine and the players are right there with me (our table is RP-heavy but still doesn't take it too seriously), but sometimes I definitely hurt the immersion or atmosphere of a key scene by being unable to keep a silly thought to myself.

[Pex]

Descriptions. I tend to overlook descriptions of rooms and monsters. I'll give basics, but I don't give much detail such as ceiling height or placement of objects. If a PC asks I'll think of something. If they ask if something exists in a room I hadn't mentioned I'll most likely say yes because what they're asking about usually makes sense it should exist in that place. Knowing this weakness I never punish the party with it. Nothing bad of any kind will happen to a PC because I didn't mention a detail of whatever a Thing is the PC would know just by being there.

I have at least started to be more descriptive in combat to describe a player/monster attack or defense when there's a miss. It catches players off guard sometimes. When a PC missed an attack I described it as some sort of force blocked them. They thought it was something really powerful when all it was the PC missed the AC due to the enemy spellcaster's Mage Armor.

[sithlordnergal]

I have two really major weaknesses:

1) I absolutely SUCK at making low stakes, RP heavy, narrative driven encounters. If you told me to plan for a session where the players can relax and unwind, I'd be at a complete loss. I'd be able to throw...something together. But it wouldn't be very good. As a result, all of the low stakes stuff tends to be a bit lacking. Things like every day interactions that, admittedly, help bring a world to life. Don't get me wrong, I can make decent NPCs, I'm just not good at making a session around recovering.

2) Up until recently, I'd frequently forget to reward players with treasure, and the treasure they did find was usually cursed in some way. My players would frequently do a difficult encounter and receive nothing except the joy of surviving and beating a difficult encounter. Which was not nearly enough of a reward for them.

----

My two biggest strengths are dungeon creation, and encounter creation:

I excel at making long challenging dungeons, with a deadly mixture of devious traps, mind bending puzzles, and dangerous encounters. My dungeons will frequently take multiple sessions to deal with. I think my players are on session 4 or 5 of a dungeon I made that ends with a fight against a major boss of my current campaign. They've had to deal with combat, puzzles, RP-encounters, and traps galore.

For example, my players are currently trapped in a hallway blocked by a Prismatic Wall in front of them, and a Forcecage behind them. A pair of buffed up Ropers are behind the Prismatic Wall, attempting to drag players through it. The spell casters are removing the wall, one layer at a time, and the Paladin is using Elemental Weapon to help. Meanwhile the two Barbarians had the brilliant idea to grapple the Roper's tendrils, and drag the ropers to them, that way they can deal with the Ropers.


My other strong point is individual encounter design. I am very, very, VERY skilled at making encounters that drain specific amounts of a player's resources, and I'm really good at making encounters that leave players at 1 to 2 HP by the end of it. My encounters can be extremely close, with the party just barely surviving. BUT, and here's the important bit, I have never had a TPK. Not even once. I can make those nail biting, edge of your seat, without actually going too far and killing the party.

[Tawmis]

I'd say descriptions is probably my weakest - especially when it's nearing a battle.

As a DM, you want to really immerse your players.

Like normally I might say:
"As you move through the stone passage, the cold, grey stones echoing even your most gentle steps - the passage ahead splits into a V shape. To the left, you hear the sounds of water - and the occassional skittering sound of either bats or stirges. To the right, though more difficult to hear, because of the water to the right - are sounds - that could potentially be voices talking."

So a lot of times, especially when things are moving quickly, I will often forget to really get descriptive.
Suddenly, it becomes "the passage to the left, you hear water running. The one to the left, you hear faint sounds, that could be voices."
Which is enough, really.

But when things are slower, I tend to get way more descriptive. And I lose that as things are approaching a battle.

[Catullus64]

My players have said that my biggest weakness is being insufficiently charitable to their ideas; that I need to roll with their schemes more often rather than pick them apart. It's a thing I've been trying to work on.

[Akal Saris]

Looking back, one of my biggest weaknesses as a DM has been my reluctance to boot problem players from my games. I've had a few bad eggs over the years who always barely toed the line between being tolerated by the other players and getting dropped, and I think my games would have been more fun for everyone involved if I had been more aggressive in cutting out jerks, even if it meant breaking some friendships.

On a lighter note, these days, sites like roll20, and youtube channels with professional DMs have made it so that there are higher baseline expectations for detailed combat maps and carefully curated dungeon designs, so my old school 'scribble a map on a dry erase board' seems lazier than ever these days when I see something like a literal multi-layer dungeon on a physical table.

[Witty Username]

I rely too much on improvisation,
I have poor note taking skills and am prone to brain lock during prep time. This means I more often then not have a terrible time getting a session together.
That being said, my improve is actually decent, so I rarely have the worst consequences of it.

Also I am terrible at presenting things, getting what is in my head to players in coherent fashion is surprisingly difficult.

[zlefin]

Atmospheric fluff; I'm bad, or at lesat often bad, at the sort of mood-setting and florid descriptions of scenes. I remember reading the old 3.5 free module "a dark and stormy knight" and noticing how much better than what I would've done the descriptions were. My descriptions are terse and technically accurate, but not engaging. More generally as a DM i'm not great at driving engagement; so the players kinda have to do that on their own, or rely on an AP that provides it. I can do simulation and tactics and plot in general fine though.

[Intregus182]

Describing combat.

Combat already takes so long and I get bogged down with going through all the turns and trying to figure out what the monsters would do that I just rarely describe anything during combat or what's happening and I don't know how to get better at it.

[DammitVictor]

Combat already takes so long and I get bogged down with going through all the turns and trying to figure out what the monsters would do that I just rarely describe anything during combat or what's happening and I don't know how to get better at it.

If I can offer some unsolicited advice? Lean on your players. Take a little extra care to make every right a little more important and special, so the players don't mind the fights taking longer, and then use Mercer's "how do you want to do this" liberally not just when players finish off a monster, but whenever they give or take a particularly substantial change in the flow of battle. Decide that one action by one PC/NPC per round is going to get this special attention and then just alternate between you narrating it for the players, and asking one of the players to do it.

Probably, YMMV, the players aren't going to mind the combat being a little slower because they'll dig into it but the big advantage is that or the next 2-3 sessions, your players are going to give you a crash course in the exact kind of description they want from you.

[Theodoxus]

My biggest weakness as a DM is that my dice hate me and love my players. Well, some of them at least. I don't need to fudge the dice, I just roll attacks like crap. Except against one PC per game. Who just gets bodied.

Heh, I play in a group with a DM like that. NGL, I'm usually the one getting pounded on. But it's ok, I tend to play Life Clerics, so my typical battle cry is 'bring it!'


Really, tactical combat and providing a "challenge". This 100%. It's gotten to the point where I hate running combat... or at least, running combat past 3rd level or so (one reason I HATE HP bloat is due to how poorly I run combat...) And my poor players, we'll have a meaningful combat session like once out of 4 meetings...

------------

On a completely different side, I feel I'm great at weaving a "coherent" narrative even ad lib. Until you ask me what that character's name is. Naming Is Hard. And I can't remember the names I did plan on. Heck, even when I write them down and have them in front of me. Naming is hard.

I find naming NPCs easy - remembering them, not so much. My poor shop keepers get new names all the time. I do have 'that one player' who either writes EVERYTHING down, or has a steel trap for a mind (I'm hoping the former, but jealous it might be the latter), so he's always asking "I thought NPC Shopkeeper #3's name was Tawrence D'livit, not Velici Belltron." ugh.


Also I've been told I only give out inspiration to players who make puns. And I want to give out inspiration for great roleplaying, teamplaying and when players improve the quality of everyone's experience. But I'm either bad at recognizing it or the other option. So I tend to not give inspiration (for the record, everyone starts with inspiration at the start of the session).

I have this problem too. Now I've just automated it and leave it to the players to remember: if you roll a critical failure or success, you gain 1 inspiration if you don't have one. They can also petition me if they felt they did a good bit of RP. I tend to agree after the fact, I just also don't tend to recognize it as it's happening.


I rely too much on improvisation,
I have poor note taking skills and am prone to brain lock during prep time. This means I more often then not have a terrible time getting a session together.
That being said, my improve is actually decent, so I rarely have the worst consequences of it.

Also I am terrible at presenting things, getting what is in my head to players in coherent fashion is surprisingly difficult.

This is me to a 't'. My campaign is basically a simplistic overarching metaplot "Destroy the ancient artifact located somewhere in the world." And then while that percolates in the back of my brain, I improv each session, setting up quests and filling in more of the game world at the table. I think I've done actual, serious prep, like twice. Even when I was running AL for a bit, I would mostly just grab a one-shot 3 hour module online like 30 minutes before gametime and skim it for the basics... Improv is just so much better when you're riffing off the top of your head than trying to script something meaningful instead. YMMV :)


If I can offer some unsolicited advice? Lean on your players. Take a little extra care to make every right a little more important and special, so the players don't mind the fights taking longer, and then use Mercer's "how do you want to do this" liberally not just when players finish off a monster, but whenever they give or take a particularly substantial change in the flow of battle. Decide that one action by one PC/NPC per round is going to get this special attention and then just alternate between you narrating it for the players, and asking one of the players to do it.

Probably, YMMV, the players aren't going to mind the combat being a little slower because they'll dig into it but the big advantage is that or the next 2-3 sessions, your players are going to give you a crash course in the exact kind of description they want from you.

Excellent advice. All but one of my players also DMs, so they'd be willing to do this. I'll try it next session.


All that said, my biggest weakness is needing a co-DM. Well, wanting is probably the operative word. I'd love a chance to co-DM with someone truly tactically minded. I'd be happy to generate the world, the NPCs, the quests, and then run initiative / keep the players attention while my co-DM built and ran the actual combat encounters. Someone who remembers all the little tactical things I inevitably forget, and describes the combat in ways I never do. Plus it would help immensely with RP if there were two non-PCs riffing with the players... MOAR VOICES!

[animorte]

I'm good at descriptions. I will often provide a really good one to this particular character, clearing, cave... But I get so caught up in these descriptions sometimes that I will blatantly leave out details for a much more important individual or locale.

I improvise a fair amount and take absolutely minimal notes. Although, I'm quite good at taking my little 3 lines or index card and fluffing it up to feel planned. It's just a matter of not misplacing them. So, I'm not especially notable at organizing the little bit of notes I have taken.

Oh well, that's a problem for the "5 minutes immediately before next session" me. :smallcool:

[KorvinStarmast]

On a completely different side, I feel I'm great at weaving a "coherent" narrative even ad lib. Until you ask me what that character's name is. Naming Is Hard. And I can't remember the names I did plan on. Heck, even when I write them down and have them in front of me. Naming is hard. I can provide names on a whim. Just write it down when I do. (I'll put it into chat). TBH, I think that your extensive use of your unique, imaginative and idiosyncratic languages, and names, of both places and kinds makes your in situ name creation harder than it needs to be.

[NichG]

I'd say 'keeping things street level while still satisfying'. I lean very heavily towards the esoteric and cosmic, and it's hard for me to figure out what could stay compelling over a year of play without it being some existential thing. Someone's brother was press-ganged into the thieves guild because of the family debt? Sounds like one or two sessions to resolve to me. How to make that kind of thing remain relevant for say 50 sessions? Uhh...

I've also been told I should work on 'non-transactional interactions with NPCs' which is fair. I think I have either a 'spectacle' mode or 'negotiation' mode of thought when dropping into a character. Either they're doing something that doesn't really depend on others to demonstrate what they're like, or they're trying to stay true to their goals while others push and pull.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I can provide names on a whim. Just write it down when I do. (I'll put it into chat). TBH, I think that your extensive use of your unique, imaginative and idiosyncratic languages, and names, of both places and kinds makes your in situ name creation harder than it needs to be.

That'd be great for a lot of the incidentals.


Well, yeah, probably. But even for the plain-jane "common" names (which are basically English) I struggle. I'm great at coming up with names...as long as I don't actually need them. Ask me on the spot for the name of my grandparents and I'll struggle. Heck, I can't even name all my siblings reliably. And as you've experienced, I can't even name all my player characters reliably (I get you and Kuo mixed up about 50% of the time).

I'm bad with names.

[KorvinStarmast]

My current weakness as a DM is assuming that players will, as I do when I am a player, talk to the other players about (1) stuff that happened and (2) what they want to do next and (3) compare notes to see how the clues strewn all about by the DM fit together.

For the most part, they don't, and we run into a lot of "I don't understand what is going on" by the more uninvested players.

Mitigating that is, at present, becoming a bit of a challenge.
I try to offload much of that continuity onto the players who do keep up, but two things get in the way of that:
(a) We play on line, so the feeling of connection suffers somewhat.
(b) We at best play every two weeks in the one campaign, and every week in the other, but almost never have all players at each session.

The disconnect between in-world time and RL time is exacerbated by that lack of presence, but also by lack of investment.

I post session summaries on the game forum, and in shared emails.
I don't know how many dozens of pages that amounts to over a four year campaign, but it's a lot.

One or two of the other players makes inputs or keeps notes and observations using the tools available.

The others do not. And you can't make people do that, on a practical basis. We are all adults here.

[Oramac]

Basically anything that doesn't have an explicit Action line or that happens "off turn" is particularly susceptible to just being forgotten in the thick of combat.

I had a similar issue until I hit on a solution that worked for me. I just started putting off-turn actions (legendary/lair actions, for instance) into the initiative order. That way when I'm skimming down the turn order for combat I can say, "Ok, joe bob just finished his turn, and up next is....Legendary Action!". It's worked pretty well so far.


Weakness: Descriptions of locales

This for me too.

Also, I would honestly say that another weakness of mine is, weirdly, knowing the rules. I sometimes find myself saying "no" to things because they don't fit the RAW, when in fact it's an amazingly cool and thematic idea that I absolutely should say "yes" to, and damn the rules.

[EggKookoo]

I have suffered from all of the weaknesses typical of GMs. I really think I'm getting better, though. I guess I'd have to ask my players what my biggest weakness is, since they probably have to deal with the consequences more than I do.

My biggest struggle (that I can perceive) is making combat something more than just stand-there-and-attack. I can blame my players somewhat, since they're the ones actually just standing there, but of course I'm to blame as well. I also think 5e's mechanics encourage combat to be very static (opportunity attacks are too effective, among other things).

I've tried creating complex encounter scenarios with lots of things for the players to play with. Cover, pits, elevation differences, environmental hazards, etc. Still, it seems as though the players' overall goal is to circumvent or bypass a lot of that so they can close distance and "stand there and attack."

So while I'm sure I have flaws in other areas, trying to create a "cinematic" fight scene seems to be beyond the combination of my abilities and my players' interests.

[Mastikator]

I have suffered from all of the weaknesses typical of GMs. I really think I'm getting better, though. I guess I'd have to ask my players what my biggest weakness is, since they probably have to deal with the consequences more than I do.

My biggest struggle (that I can perceive) is making combat something more than just stand-there-and-attack. I can blame my players somewhat, since they're the ones actually just standing there, but of course I'm to blame as well. I also think 5e's mechanics encourage combat to be very static (opportunity attacks are too effective, among other things).

I've tried creating complex encounter scenarios with lots of things for the players to play with. Cover, pits, elevation differences, environmental hazards, etc. Still, it seems as though the players' overall goal is to circumvent or bypass a lot of that so they can close distance and "stand there and attack."

So while I'm sure I have flaws in other areas, trying to create a "cinematic" fight scene seems to be beyond the combination of my abilities and my players' interests.

There are ways to work around players who want to just stand there/turtle.

A few scenarios I've played against the players:

1) Goblins. Goblins have nible escape and a really good stealth score, so each round the goblins opted for ranged attack + stealth, or if melee, disengage + stealth. Meaning each turn the goblins were in different position, the players had to constantly chase the goblins. They did have CC in their arsenal to hamstring the goblins but it would take more battles to educate the players.

2) Incorporeal undead. They were fighting in a castle with lots of small rooms, winding corridors, doors. They were fighting a homebrew type of undead that had incorporeal movement and had resistance to damage based on darkness (full immunity to everything except radiant if in total darkness). It took them 5 rounds until they learned to throw lit torches on the ground and spread out. Otherwise the ghosts would ambush them from the walls and then disengage on their next turn.

3) The players encountered dolgrim and a dolgaunt. They were in a corridor that turned right into a small room. At first they tried to turtle up at the entrance with cover. Two dolgrims died trying to attack them, then the dolgaunt commanded them to stay back, so the dolgaunt could grapple one with its tentacles and drag it out. THAT is when they finally entered the room.

4) The players are in a staircase into a crypt full of ghouls in caskets. They force one casket open which triggers the ghouls to start awakening. The ghouls are hungry for player character flesh, roll initiative. One of the player characters succumb to the paralyzing touch of the ghouls. What doe the ghouls do? Attack? No. They grapple (auto-succeed) and drag the player character further into the ghoul territory, forcing the players to think creatively to save that character.

The players being static is their weakness. Use it against them. Make sure there are hazards, cover and the like at the place. Exploding barrels, pools of acid, etc. Whatever you can get away with. If the players are being static, use monsters to grapple ONE away into a location of certain death if the others don't rescue them. Put death on the table. Tucker's Kobolds is a great lesson in this IMO.

[Trask]

Mine would be that I don't like to read my player's backstories. I used to not think of this as a weakness but I have come to accept that it probably is. When someone sends me a 5 paragraph message on discord or emails me 2 page docx file I just groan inside, I don't want to read this. A lot of the time the writing is really trite or doesn't gel with me and my sense of D&D fantasy. Too many anime adventurer high school themed backstories...

But you know I read more useless clickbait news articles for hours or I'll waste 40 minutes reading this or another forum, I can read their backstory, whatever. Its really not such a big deal, and a D&D game with buddies or prospective buddies is not the time to start getting all principled about things. Just read it man.

[Solamnicknight]

I feel like my weakest area is that I'm not the best at memorizing the rules. Also I feel like I'm too easy on my players sometimes, that I don't challenge them enough. I've been working on it, but killing off PCs or causing a potential TPK makes me nervous.

[Joshthemanwich]

I have plenty of issues as a Game Master.
I find that my weakest area that I am completely cognizant of is that I find really boring things fun. I like making dungeon maps based off of someone else's description, I like hexcrawls and keeping track of every ounce. I like to create budgets for paying retainers and hirelings.
I am currently running a game that I advertised as a Mega Dungeon/Hexcrawl and and when I asked for feedback a player sent me a message asking if we could skip over traveling and selling loot and also asked for a map to my dungeon since mapping and travel "Don't add much".
I don't know if this is a communication error, or perhaps something else. But the short of the long of it is that I make games that I fear my players are disinterested in.

[DammitVictor]

Mine would be that I don't like to read my player's backstories. I used to not think of this as a weakness but I have come to accept that it probably is. When someone sends me a 5 paragraph message on discord or emails me 2 page docx file I just groan inside, I don't want to read this. A lot of the time the writing is really trite or doesn't gel with me and my sense of D&D fantasy. Too many anime adventurer high school themed backstories...

My number one house rule for any game that isn't based on canon characters (like MHR) is No Backstories. Which is to say, I have my players roll their characters together, at the table, and they're "allowed" to have as much backstory (about an index card's worth) as they come up with at the table with me and the other players. I don't have to read anything, and if I don't think a backstory "fits" my campaign... either the whole table convinces the player to change it, or the whole table convinces me that it'll work. The backstories that we do get actually get used in the campaign, because everyone at the table is invested in at least some of them.

[KorvinStarmast]

also asked for a map to my dungeon since mapping and travel "Don't add much".

There's a good way to teach a lesson here. (1) Tell them no and set up some deadly encounters and (2) traps between the 'dungeon' and where they start.
A guardian keeping people from entering the dungeon. (Packs of wolves led by a werewolf, dryads and some beasts who defend her, awakened trees, earth elementals, cave bears, harpies who live on the cliffs nearby, etc).
Traps that put the party into a "we need to solve this due to the time pressure of water filling the room, rock slides filling up the pit, etc" so that they have to work together as a team to get themselves out of it.

There is a reason that the mega dungeon hasn't been looted by all and sundry. Just getting there to the fabled megadungeonofjosh kills off most prospective adventurers and treasure hunters. Make sure to have a few dead bodies / skepetons in rusted armor littered about the land scape ... maybe a few old treasure maps in their possession, with a few hints and clues as to some of the (fabled) treasures within the dangerous megadungeonofjosh ...

[Zuras]

I am terrible at getting players to run through combat quickly. I’ve had fast combats, but almost entirely in high-level games with only veteran players at the table. The rest of the time everything seems to take at least double the time it should.

I’m also terrible at dropping hints that my players pick up, but I’ve at least learned to simply tell the players what’s going on when they need to make important play-impacting decisions and they aren’t picking up the hints in-character.

[RazorChain]

My biggest problem with the groups I typically play with is continuity. I don't take notes thoroughly enough and I don't refer to my notes often enough to keep a complicated game internally consistent, and I pretty much exclusively prefer to run the kinds of games where this can become a major problem.

If I ran games for strangers more often, my biggest problem is that I am way too slow to notice and address problematic behavior unless someone at the table explicitly asks me to. I like to think I am firm and decisive once I'm aware that a problem exists and requires me to resolve it, but I don't particularly "read the room" at the gaming table better than I read it anywhere else.

Two of my players keep a campaign journal on google docs where everyone can add things. I tend to correct names and add some info to it. I find it works well to delegate responsibility to my players. One is the party treasurer, another one keeps track of initiative etc.

[Xihirli]

I do tend to falter on prep. The solution I’ve arrived on is running either from modules, or running the same campaign over and over for different players. This has worked well for me!

Another weakness I have is that I just don’t care for 5e combat. Really combat in general, though as a player I enjoy it more (and moreso with more structured systems like PF2E, or less structured systems like Fabula Ultima). Maybe it’s just that I struggle to make engaging combats, but I just don’t enjoy them. My solution for this has kind of just been not running them. Usually it’s only a final fight at the end of a quest, and at that point why am I even playing 5e (to get players, it’s to get players).
Maybe it’s just seeing so many play-by-post games die once initiative is rolled and we have to spend a month waiting for a round to finish that’s soured me to combat.

[EggKookoo]

Maybe it’s just seeing so many play-by-post games die once initiative is rolled and we have to spend a month waiting for a round to finish that’s soured me to combat.

I got into using passive initiative (as if rolling an 11) for my players, and pre-rollng init whenever possible for NPCs. A player can choose to roll for any given combat, in the hopes of getting a good result, but of course at the risk of getting a bad one. They (the players) almost always choose to just go with the 11. It makes combat "boot up" so much quicker.

[Easy e]

My weakness as a DM? I don't really know the rules of Dungeons and Dragons that well. Meanwhile, my players have a greater system mastery than I do! I also get rules from various editions/games mixed up with what we are actually playing!

[Solamnicknight]

My weakness as a DM? I don't really know the rules of Dungeons and Dragons that well. Meanwhile, my players have a greater system mastery than I do! I also get rules from various editions/games mixed up with what we are actually playing!

Yeah, I mentioned this too! And I’ve read the books multiple times. Also every time a rules update is released it’s just more gobledegook that I have to try to manage. I think part of it is that when I’m reading rpg books I get more invested in the lore and descriptions then hit the statistic blocks and my eyes glaze over. I’m a Masters level college student at this point, so I don’t need to read any more textbook style dullness than I need too lol.

[Kane0]

My weakest area has got to be scheduling. Getting the chance to play with wife, work, kids and distance is no small feat.

[animorte]

My weakest area has got to be scheduling. Getting the chance to play with wife, work, kids and distance is no small feat.
Prayers to all of us out there prioritizing responsibility over our beloved D&D.

[JLandan]

I am terrible at getting players to run through combat quickly. I’ve had fast combats, but almost entirely in high-level games with only veteran players at the table. The rest of the time everything seems to take at least double the time it should.

I’m also terrible at dropping hints that my players pick up, but I’ve at least learned to simply tell the players what’s going on when they need to make important play-impacting decisions and they aren’t picking up the hints in-character.

I get this... a lot. I just keep mentioning the same hint until a player says something. Then if they ignore it, that's on them not you.

[Oramac]

I am terrible at getting players to run through combat quickly. I’ve had fast combats, but almost entirely in high-level games with only veteran players at the table. The rest of the time everything seems to take at least double the time it should.

I’m also terrible at dropping hints that my players pick up, but I’ve at least learned to simply tell the players what’s going on when they need to make important play-impacting decisions and they aren’t picking up the hints in-character.


Then if they ignore it, that's on them not you.

Same.

In my current game, they will be going against a BBEG that uses a bunch of acid themed stuff. That'll happen probably around Christmas time, give or take. In the meantime, I'm throwing loads of acid type monsters at them, giving them rings of acid resistance, having NPCs outright tell them to be careful of acid, and just generally shoving acid down their throats (metaphorically!). If they don't get it in the next couple months of this, that's their problem.