Dealing with a Bad DM

[PrinceOfMadness]

So I see a lot of posts about dealing with bad players in these forums, but nothing really about bad DM's. I see lots of threads detailing bad DM's and the problems they cause, but nothing about how to deal with them - besides walking out of the game, of course. So I was wondering if anyone else had thought about this issue, because I've seen it crop up once or twice when playing.

So to get to the point:

What were some of your worst DM situations, and how did you deal with them?

[Glimbur]

I had a bad DM once. He was running an epic level D&D 3.5 game. He didn't really understand what the PCs were capable of. We still went on dungeon crawls and stuff to keep him from being so sad, but we eventually figured out that we were recreating the adventures of Elric of Melnibone. I missed one session, and his girlfriend showed up playing as Elric of Melnibone. I still haven't heard exactly what happened, but the game ended after that.

tl;dr DM got in over his head, game fell apart. That doesn't really help you, sorry.

[ClockShock]

First step is usually the same. Talk to the guy/gal.

Speak to your group, do they agree or are you the one with different expectations?
They agree? Great. Now you can politely discuss the issue and work out the best way to continue.

[Kaun]

Dealing with a DM who you like but whos game isn't fun can always be hard. You don't want to hurt their feelings but you find yourself playing in their games even tho you don't really want to.

You got to talk to them, even if its just telling them the kind of things you would like to see more of in the game.

DM's who can get their heads around the rules can be a problem if it has big negative effects on the game. We have tried having co DM's to help them for a few session. It improved things some what but finding some one willing to co DM can be hard.

[SowZ]

Sometimes there are certain ideas they have about a certain game system they just can't get past. Or the system is too complicated for them. Or the system is too rules lite. Talk to them without pointing at a bunch of specific, 'this is wrong' but maybe start with some general things you would prefer. Maybe suggest everyone doing something fresher. Maybe, though, it isn't lack of skill or experience but they just have a different style of play then the party. In this case, letting someone else be DM may be the solution.

People tend to have more variation, (can work with different playstyles,) as players then as DMs, so just because the players can't jive with the DMs DMing style doesn't mean the DM can't play a different style when he is a player and someone else is DMing.

[Techsmart]

Usually, in my situation, bad DMs just have their games dissolved very quickly.
In one situation, I had a DM who had a good knack for stories and hooks, but did not follow the "keep the party together" concept (out of five 6-hour sessions, I only met 2 of our 4 party members for 2 hours, and the other for a net of 3). As he kept the party separated a lot, he also spent about 90 minutes on one person, then switched to the next, but pretty much expected the entire group to be there when he wanted to switch. His dungeons were also designed to be able to be solved by one member of the party, while everyone else kinda... watched or waited. Halfway through the first dungeon, everyone lost interest and just... stopped showing up. It was kind of a unanimous decision, since several of us had to miss 2 sessions in a row, and nobody was interested enough to keep going.
Another DM we had tended to repeat unimportant information and attempted to draw scenery that was unnecessary ( I mean seriously, how many different ways can you describe the same sensation? Double that, and you might be close). His campaigns tended to crawl along very slowly. He also had multiple groups in the same setting. The problem was that my group could only meet an average of once per 2 weeks. This meant that most dungeons had already been hit by the time we went through them and we got shafted a ton of loot (our first item not bought was when we were level 5, and we only had about 2000 gold from out group's employer). Again, the group I was with lost interest and fell apart.

Now, assuming you don't have that kind of luck, I would do as other people said.
1) talk to DM
2) talk to other players, if they agree, have the group talk to DM.
3) leave the group or offer to DM yourself.
You can't force a DM to change how they do things (somewhat unlike a DM, who can ban materials they see fit as long as they will still have players), so if you aren't happy and the DM refuses to change, just stop having him as your dm.

[Tyndmyr]

So I see a lot of posts about dealing with bad players in these forums, but nothing really about bad DM's. I see lots of threads detailing bad DM's and the problems they cause, but nothing about how to deal with them - besides walking out of the game, of course. So I was wondering if anyone else had thought about this issue, because I've seen it crop up once or twice when playing.

So to get to the point:

What were some of your worst DM situations, and how did you deal with them?

Don't feel like posting the whole story, but my favorite method of dealing with it involves taking over the group, then kicking the original DM out of his own group.

[SowZ]

Don't feel like posting the whole story, but my favorite method of dealing with it involves taking over the group, then kicking the original DM out of his own group.

That seems vindictive, but of course you didn't tell us the story so it is tough to say. I think this was either handeled poorly, or the wording of the sitution was not the best. There is no reason to resent someones inability to DM well. Unless he was trying to emotionally blackmail people into staying in his games that the players didn't enjoy or was sabotaging the game after he became a player to get revenge, I see no reason why a DM who can't DM the group becomes a player.

[Tyndmyr]

That seems vindictive, but of course you didn't tell us the story so it is tough to say. I think this was either handeled poorly, or the wording of the sitution was not the best. There is no reason to resent someones inability to DM well. Unless he was trying to emotionally blackmail people into staying in his games that the players didn't enjoy or was sabotaging the game after he became a player to get revenge, I see no reason why a DM who can't DM the group becomes a player.

I don't think it was motivated by revenge...he was just a player that did not work out with the group whatsoever. I'd rather not get into details because he's also on this forum, but sometimes DMs don't work out as a player either.

[Sipex]

I believe I've heard this story before, it was well warranted from what I remember.

And I'm the type of guy who advocates the "TRY TO WORK THINGS OUT" angle to death.

[valadil]

Depends on how bad we're talking. Some GMs can be talked out of their bad habits. Some can't. Talking to them about it should always be your first choices. It lets you know how reasonable they are. A GM who doesn't respect his players opinions is probably just in it to entertain himself.

A GM who is boring is more easily ignored. Show up to be social but don't invest in your character. I can have a good time with a GM who isn't entertaining.

A bad GM who leaves you frustrated and won't respect your gaming interests should be avoided. Last week my GM fudged defenses on all the defenses against my spells. When a spell did finally get through he told me it was too much math so he was going to ignore its affect. I switched to melee, since magic was never going to work, and he called me an idiot. Screw that guy, we're done here.

[LoneStarNorth]

My group started a 4e game wherein we would all take turns DMing periodically, but the guy who came up with the idea would be the "overDM" who would be responsible for the greater plot and most of the world-building.

The "overDM" delayed the second session of the game twice (someone else stepped up), then showed up three hours and forty-five minutes late to a session he'd PROMISED to run without ANY of his D&D stuff.

So we stripped him of his "overDM" status and now there's pretty much just three of us players who take turns running adventures. He is not one of them.

Actually the campaign itself is a lot of fun. It's just that the one guy is laughably unreliable as a DM.

[Mikeavelli]

A fair amount of the time (maybe 50%), a "bad DM" doesn't even enjoy DM'ing, they're just doing it because everyone else in the group either doesn't want to, or is even worse at it.

I've had a fair amount of luck taking over the reigns in groups like this.

When the DM actually wants to be the DM and enjoys it, chances are they're open to suggestions for improving their craft. Most of the time I give these suggestions by mercilessly mocking all the ridiculous things they do.

Note that this is not at all effective, or even a good idea. I don't recommend doing it.

[sdream]

Obviously, this question only matters if you want to improve the DM (how you handle quitting the game or switching DMs really doesn;t matter as either eliminates the issue entirely).

I have a couple of suggestions:

- If they are bad at coming up with plots, buy them or download (and don't read) some modules, and tell them a freind of yours said it was really good, could they read it and run your group through it. (Get other players to ask also)

- If they are bad at coming up with NPC names + descriptions, ask them to use an online NPC generator, or print one out from a list of random words and names, for them to use as each new NPC is introduced (then keep notes).

- If they forget what happens, volunteer to take notes for them, and print them off for them to use later.

- If they are terrible at giving out reasonable loot amounts (too much or too little) insist they use a loot generator (either via rolling or online).

- If they are bad at controlling a troublesome PC, help out, remember that the DM controls the world that the characters meet, but you and your fellow players have to police each other in meat space

- If combat is slow, suggest using mob templates rather than many foes, roll damage at the same time as attacks, and make people skip turns if they do not know what to do.

- If you spend too much time looking up or arguing about rules, appoint a rules lawyer (does not need to be DM)

- If your DM has a hard time drawing, an artsy player could be appointed as official sketcher to handle drawing layouts and interesting scenes

[Lord Vampyre]

I'm sure I've been called a bad DM at times. The problem typically comes to a difference in play styles. The problem is I originally started playing back in 2nd edition, players got xp for when they actually played, and not because the party got a lot some of xp that they got to share.

Now, the players I had were used to leveling up with the rest of the party even though they weren't there for the last game where xp was given. I considered adjusting my play style closer to that of the players. Unfortunately, by the time I had made this decision it was too late and the game dissolved. In the end it was probably for the best. I was getting irritated with how a number of the players kept whining about every little detail.

On the other hand, when I had a group of dedicated players everything went smoothly. The point is that it is essential that the DM and the players be on the same page as to how the game is going to run. Eventhough, I had informed the previous group on how I ran my games, it didn't start to sink in until they were actually affected by it.

[Sipex]

I'm sure I've been called a bad DM at times. The problem typically comes to a difference in play styles. The problem is I originally started playing back in 2nd edition, players got xp for when they actually played, and not because the party got a lot some of xp that they got to share.

Now, the players I had were used to leveling up with the rest of the party even though they weren't there for the last game where xp was given. I considered adjusting my play style closer to that of the players. Unfortunately, by the time I had made this decision it was too late and the game dissolved. In the end it was probably for the best. I was getting irritated with how a number of the players kept whining about every little detail.

On the other hand, when I had a group of dedicated players everything went smoothly. The point is that it is essential that the DM and the players be on the same page as to how the game is going to run. Eventhough, I had informed the previous group on how I ran my games, it didn't start to sink in until they were actually affected by it.

Truer words have not been spoken.

Just like any other social situation, a lot of the problems come from communication problems and most of the time there is no one person at fault.

[shadow_archmagi]

I find this works most of the time

Seriously though, unless you've got a really great group, a bad DM is worse than no DM at all.

[Firechanter]

Some of the worst DM situations I've had involved the DM being on a power trip, turning the game into a "DM vs Players" thing. In this kind of game, you can only lose because the DM can and will throw outright ridiculous stuff at you to keep you from winning over his pet NPCs. Your character will most likely die, or at least be humiliated so that he wants to die of shame.
My time is too precious for that kind of crap; when I realize I've landed in such a kind of game, I just walk out.

However, what's just as bad are GMs that let their players get away with anything. Once I snooped into a game where the players had hijacked a sailing ship, killed off the captain, took over the ship _and_ the original crew (who did absolutely nothing about it), then decided to sail to the ship's port of call, a small island, which they decided to take over. The islanders did not bother to ask what happened to the captain, and none of the crew bothered to tell.
It was truly ridiculous. Needless to say I played only one session with them.

Those are the extreme cases, however. A more typical case of Bad DM is the type that wants to keep the players/PCs small. He's not out to kill you, but he doesn't want you to rock the house, either. Symptomatically, this type is incredibly stingy with treasure. You're often expected to work for free, because you're "the heroes", you won't find decent loot you can use, you'll get screwed over when trying to sell loot that you can't use, and anyway you can't buy the gear you want.
In this case, discussing your grievances _can_ actually work, but the odds are about five against.

Another annoying DM type is the one that does not understand the system so well. This is the kind that will announce a D&D game to be "Core Only" because "Splats are overpowered", for instance. Specimen of this type have been witnessed to hand out extra boons Wizards and nerfing Fighters.

One particular DM I have played with has actually been a permanent member of our gaming group, where we rotate DM positions. The first couple of adventures we played with him were great, but then the paint came off and we realized it was all just illusionism. The worst part - for me - was that our characters' skills and abilities did not have any real influence on the adventure. When the DM wanted you to fail a check, you failed, and if he wanted you to succeed, you did that. And you never really aced anything. Even if you had an awesome skill value and rolled really well, he'd squint and say "Uuuuh, weeeell... okay you somehow make it". Nor did he really allow you to fail; he'd _always_ roll covert, and sometimes you could tell from this face when the enemy attack must have been really good, and again he'd squint and say "Errr, umm... uuuh... ah whatever, he misses".
In short, I'd sum up his DMing style as "By the Grace of God". I lost interest in this pretty quickly, and then we rotated DMs again.

[Oracle_Hunter]

What were some of your worst DM situations, and how did you deal with them?

My worst DM situation involved a "story first" DM who was only interested in telling his own story. As the group was large and seemed to be having fun despite that, I simply dropped out.

To do so, I sent a message to the DM saying that I wasn't enjoying the game and would therefore be leaving. He civilly asked if I had any criticisms and suggestions; I responded with three broad points and suggestions as to what to do with it. And that was that.

From talking to other Players, he didn't change his style after I left and the game collapsed shortly thereafter.

Now, if you want to deal with a DM, here's what I suggest:

Spoiler

Show

(1) Figure out what exactly is bothering you about the game
A little time distilling the essence of your irritation is a great way to make sure you don't make trouble for yourself. Often, a problem you have with a game is something about you and not the DM doing his job badly. If this is the case, you can simply ask the DM to do you a favor by altering the game in a particular fashion; phrased that way, it is a personal request rather than an act of criticism. Easier for both parties.

(2) Consider whether the DM is open to criticism
A good DM will regularly check-in with his Players to see if they have any complaints about the game. Creating an open atmosphere helps to check bad habits and keeps the DM in tune with his Players. Sadly, most DMs that are "bad" are also not likely to take criticism well or productively. Correctly identifying whether the DM is likely to listen to your concerns before you raise them is essential to avoiding unpleasantness.

(3) Consider whether the problem is bad enough to leave the game over
Like any relationship, poorly timed criticism can sour things quickly. If the problem isn't bad enough to leave the game over, you might want to not say anything to the DM. Keep an eye on the general atmosphere of the group, of course; if your issue with the DM is causing the whole group to sour then it might be time for the Players to stage an intervention.

(4) Talk to the DM or Gracefully exit the game
After you've thought through these three factors, make your choice. If the DM is open to criticism, talk to him politely about it. He is unlikely to change -- bad habits are hard to cure -- but at least he may pay more attention to it in the future. Never grandstand or "start a coup" to unseat him from the DM's chair. That's just rude.

In most cases, it is better for everyone if you either keep playing and mention your issue to the DM between campaigns or simply excuse yourself from the game. One unsatisfied Player can ruin a whole party and if you're not having fun, there's no reason to keep playing. Just be polite and only offer specific criticism if asked.

[RandomNPC]

I've got one now, we were getting in over our heads, getting shafted by NPCs, and getting overall crazy from innkeepers.

He mentioned the party being 5 people, at 2nd level made a level 10, and 2 CR4 mimics should be an easy fight. That's when it hit me, he skimmed the DMG and just goes for what looks good from the monster manual.

I explained CR and what it was intended to be, and how off it is on some critters, and there's hope for him yet, we'll see what happens in a few weeks.

[BiblioRook]

My last two DMs were pretty horrible; largely for the same reasons as they had simuler DMing styles, though they had nearly opposite intentions.

DM #1

Spoiler

Show

The first DM got it into his head that he had a story to tell and that was far more important then trivial things such as what roles the players might have had in it or even fundamental rules of the game. To say we were railroaded was making light of it, it was more like playing a video game that was mostly cutsceens. It got worst when he gave us a DMPC to 'help' us out (even though we were in no way unable to handle the campaign) that he utterly adored and from there it was then more like watching cutsceens staring someone else dispute we supposedly being the main characters. It wouldn't have been so bad if the story was alright, but it wasn't (it was quite literally us trying to kill an evil version of Banjo the Clown on the behave of various Real World gods of various pantheons, despite being in the Forgotten Realms). Basically he would constantly try to claim that he wanted a serious game while at the same time provide nothing but a never-ending stream of really badly thought-out inside jokes and references.

For this one the rest of the players disliked how the game was going about as much as I did, but since I was the one that brought it up and no one else was feeling inclined to speak up about it (except behind his back) I basically had to try talking to him about it alone... which he confidently ignored, largely on the count that since I was the only one coming to him complaining I clearly was the only one that was having a problem with the game. After several attempts to talk to him about it with zero success, I basically unofficially withdrew from the game while staying in the group (I wanted to see just how bad it got while also didn't want to leave the group suddenly without one of their party members).

DM #2

Spoiler

Show

Where the last DM was obsessed with getting his story told, this one couldn't keep a plot together to save her life. In her defense she at least said from the beginning that she didn't expect a serious game (unlike the last one where we had to figure that out ourselves), but there gets a point where it becomes less along the lines of a weekly one-shot using the same characters and setting and more an inane sandbox where no one is given sufficient reason to do anything (including the villains apparently). This one ended up getting slightly personal though as the DM clearly hated my character. I didn't really do anything wrong, but I ended up finding out on accident that the thing I was going for anyways had a potentially exploitable flaw. Knowing this I kinda made sure not to exploit it, but the DM would always accuse me of such because I happened to just be really competent as a player and would constantly out-shine the players who were supposed to be the 'main' characters (the game had an in-game mechanic for that). She never actually accused me of cheating (thank goodness), but she was very frank on how she was certain my character and playstyle was ruining her game for her. Everyone else in the group never had a single complaint (if anything they thought my character was hilarious, I was a bird that knew how to pick locks and hack computers).

For this DM I also tried talking things out. But unlike the other group, with this one no one had any real complaints about how she was running things (more out of having zero expectations then thinking she was running the game well), so again I was the only one confronting the DM about how they ran the game and since I was seemingly alone in that regard I was just quickly labeled 'the complainer' and promptly ignored.

Strangest thing is, they were both English majors and both would go one about how much they knew about how to run a story... yet neither could tell one. I sincerely hope that was something just limited to the two of them.

Part of the problem is that as a fairly experience player I'm pretty well versed in how to run a game as I've helped run multiple games before (though never ran one solo). In both cases they were kinda newbie DMs (though in the second case she's been claiming she was 'new to DMing' despite running that game were joined for almost a year). Being new to DMing wasn't the problem but rather they also turned an utterly deaf ear to any criticism, not just from me (though certainly especially from me) but from other people as well.

[Tyndmyr]

(4) Talk to the DM or Gracefully exit the game
After you've thought through these three factors, make your choice. If the DM is open to criticism, talk to him politely about it. He is unlikely to change -- bad habits are hard to cure -- but at least he may pay more attention to it in the future. Never grandstand or "start a coup" to unseat him from the DM's chair. That's just rude.

Meh. It is no more the DM's group than it is anyone else's. The coup thing is clearly not going to work unless dissatisfaction is more widespread than just you...and if that's the case, you're all perfectly justified in deciding "hey, we won't let Bob DM anymore. Who wants to take over?"

Grandstanding...I also make an exception for. Humor. There is endless humor to be had making fun of a truly terrible game. And hey, it's often a lot better to point out shortcomings with humor than to be the guy who's seen as the whiner.

[shadow_archmagi]

Meh. It is no more the DM's group than it is anyone else's. The coup thing is clearly not going to work unless dissatisfaction is more widespread than just you...and if that's the case, you're all perfectly justified in deciding "hey, we won't let Bob DM anymore. Who wants to take over?"

Grandstanding...I also make an exception for. Humor. There is endless humor to be had making fun of a truly terrible game. And hey, it's often a lot better to point out shortcomings with humor than to be the guy who's seen as the whiner.

Yeah, it's not like the DM chair is really a very magical place. It can very easily become the least fun chair, even if it is a throne.

Talking to other members of the group, and seeing if they are also unhappy, is one of the best things you can do. If everyone in the group comes up and says "Hey, we're sick of not getting treasure and having to be nobodies." then the DM is much more likely to change his ways.

[Sipex]

Remember, if your DM isn't measuring up, don't just cut him/her out if the party agrees. Use your judgement.

Is the DM a jerk who won't listen? Then everyone leaves.

Is the DM simply burnt out or never wanted the job? Maybe just make him/her a player instead. Talk to them.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Yeah, it's not like the DM chair is really a very magical place. It can very easily become the least fun chair, even if it is a throne.

Which is why it is extremely rude to engineer his replacement.

It's one thing to say "hey, I don't like this game so I'm going to go do something else." It is something else entirely to say "hey, I don't like your game, so we're kicking you out of the group. Thanks for all the hard work, jerk."

Being the DM requires a lot of extra effort that Players simply don't have to do. Even people who like to DM (like me) know that it is easier to just be a Player and even need to take "vacations" from DMing to recharge. Often it is the DM who arranges the group to play and helps to coordinate everything. To take all that and throw it in his face is rude, IMHO.

[Tyndmyr]

Which is why it is extremely rude to engineer his replacement.

It's one thing to say "hey, I don't like this game so I'm going to go do something else." It is something else entirely to say "hey, I don't like your game, so we're kicking you out of the group. Thanks for all the hard work, jerk."

Being the DM requires a lot of extra effort that Players simply don't have to do. Even people who like to DM (like me) know that it is easier to just be a Player and even need to take "vacations" from DMing to recharge. Often it is the DM who arranges the group to play and helps to coordinate everything. To take all that and throw it in his face is rude, IMHO.

No more rude than it is to replace a player.

Putting in more does not entitle you to special rights.

That's like making the player who wrote the terrible, terrible 20 page backstory more special because "oh, he worked so hard on it".

[Firechanter]

If you're afraid of appearing rude, you can wrap it in gift paper with ponies and rainbows. Offer to rotate DM position and let another volunteer do the job; maybe yourself. Of course the previous DM gets to play a PC now.

If however the person as such is a jerk, and you don't want to play with him but do want to keep playing with some of the other persons involved... and if the others feel the same... then I don't see why you shouldn't remove him from your group.

Generally, I have adopted the stance "Bad gaming is worse than no gaming".

[Sipex]

Oracle has a solid point and I think you guys misunderstand. DMing often comes with a lot of extra NEEDED responsibility the DM doesn't ask for. Not only is the DM in charge of managing the campaign (which is a lot of work in itself), they tend to also be put in charge of scheduling & working around schedules, arranging meeting places, training players and policing players.

In this sense, you at least owe the DM the respect to come forward about your problems first if the group has them. The worst case scenario is the game falls apart anyways which is no worse than everyone leaving for a different group.

Now, use discretion of course. If your DM has psychopathic tendencies (like Lanky's infamous DM) then maybe it's safe to skip this step.

[Oracle_Hunter]

No more rude than it is to replace a player.

Putting in more does not entitle you to special rights.

That's like making the player who wrote the terrible, terrible 20 page backstory more special because "oh, he worked so hard on it".

You really don't think that treating people with respect is a good idea? I would no more support a DM calling all the Players together and saying "Joe, we all think you're a terrible Player and you should leave" before kicking him out.

I guess we'll have to part ways here, but when one individual is essential for an event to occur, I am willing to give him some degree of deference. If someone is giving me a ride, I don't make demands about what music we listen to even if I don't like what is playing; when someone is running a game for me, I don't conspire with the other Players to replace him.

EDIT: Also, what Sipex said

[Tyndmyr]

You really don't think that treating people with respect is a good idea? I would no more support a DM calling all the Players together and saying "Joe, we all think you're a terrible Player and you should leave" before kicking him out.

You can take over DMing and kick him out respectfully. I never said it was necessary to add tons of rudeness to it. Sure, he probably won't enjoy being kicked out, but neither does a player.

Same, same.

I guess we'll have to part ways here, but when one individual is essential for an event to occur, I am willing to give him some degree of deference. If someone is giving me a ride, I don't make demands about what music we listen to even if I don't like what is playing; when someone is running a game for me, I don't conspire with the other Players to replace him.

No. The ROLE is essential for the event. Not the individual. You can pick someone else to DM.