Things you learned as a DM about being a Player

[gooddragon1]

What things does being a DM help you to understand about being a player?

Personal Experience (to get started):
I used to always think about countering every situation I could potentially come across as a player or making builds that would survive nearly everything (like a crystalline troll since sonic damage is rare). However, when I DM'd a game, I realized that the DM has access to all the material they need to tell the story (and even things not in print). So I learned to be versatile rather than trying to counter everything.

[Seto]

Being a DM made me better at building characters, because I had the occasion of building multiple different NPCs each session and explored a lot of options, instead of sticking with the same character session after session.

[kestrel404]

Being a GM has made me a more pro-active player.

There is a lot of talk about Railroading GMs vs Permissive GMs. And while there are certainly GMs who want to tell THEIR story while the 'players' watch in relative silence (if they insist on a GMNPC joining the party, that's a strong hint) - I've never run into that personally. But what I have found is that an entire group of players will sit back and let 'plot' happen to them, waiting for plot hooks they're interested in, and avoiding story opportunities which they don't think they'd like - essentially, limiting the GM's story options to only those the players are familiar with and are obvious, or else 'tricking' them with misleading plot-hooks.

I'm not saying that the players are 'wrong' or anything like that if they do this - it's their game too! But if you're going to be picky about the story you're participating in, don't sit back and wait for the GM to figure that out! Tell him! Either OOC, or by actively seeking out something IC. I choose the latter, simply because I like to be surprised.

And if you suspect the GM is offering you a plot-hook? Grab onto it! If you end up not being comfortable with that series of events, a few words OOC is probably enough to 'cut you loose' from that line.

[Anonymouswizard]

And while there are certainly GMs who want to tell THEIR story while the 'players' watch in relative silence (if they insist on a GMNPC joining the party, that's a strong hint) - I've never run into that personally.

I've run into the weirdest type of GM possible, the one who wants you to tell their story. Normally they are okay, they give the plot hooks that make you happy to go along with the railroad because it's interesting, but as soon as you start to go off the rails slightly they'll start to get upset and try to guilt you with the fact that they didn't get to use the cool stuff they had planned and have now had to turn the one sided fight into 'roll initiative' to die just to get the story where it was supposed to be by the end of the session.

For thing I learnt as a GM about being a player? Be willing to compromise on tone with your GM, they have put in far more work than you into this, the least you can do is let them decide if it should be silly or serious (and what most player don't realise is that most GMs are fine with silliness, as long as it doesn't overtake the game).

I'll second the 'be more proactive in accepting plot hooks'. I've personally played with a GM who has essentially groomed me to a point where I can repurpose plot no matter where the party goes, to the point that I don't even bring notes to a session, just all the NPCs I need. But GMing my own games has taught me that it can be really frustrating when a player insists that they have no reason in order to participate in the plot. In short, most GMs roll with you doing anything better than you doing nothing, even if it's only spending the entire session preparing for next session.

[MintyNinja]

I learned how important the pre-game conversation is. Everyone involved needs to know and agree on tone, setting, scale, and various other aspects of the game. To many times did I write up a character intent on starting his own business or guild just to have a GM take us on a cross country adventure. To many times did I work out a cool concept with another player only to have them drop the ball when it comes to play time (really, who makes a masked, mute bard with 18 charisma?!). But talking to my players about Out of the Abyss before it started helped create characters that could be ruthless and unforgiving if they needed to be, and not just spider bait.

[Deepbluediver]

Being on the other side of the table drastically alters your perceptions, even without the "this other guy is my enemy and I need to beat him" mentality. Things that seems blatantly obvious to the GM often get missed by the players, frequently because they were focused on something else entirely. For being a GM (IMO) this means leaving plothooks everywhere so it's impossible for players to NOT stumble over them, or get real good at improv and think of ways to link every path back to main plot. For players, it means to be careful about getting tunnel-vision and to be flexible when it comes to plans and the direction the party is heading (both figuratively and literally).


And as an example, story-time!
As we all know, dragons come in a variety of shapes and sizes suitable for almost any adventure. In one such case the DM wanted to use a dragon for an encounter. However he only owned the figurine for a huge-sized dragon because this was college and we aren't made of money, and this was a low-level campaign; we were level 3-4 or something like that. So when we entered the room the DM made a casual off-hand remark about the something seeming "not quite right" about the dragon's size. The DM was worried about someone metagaming that the dragon was way out of our weight class, and he was trying to hint that it WOULDN'T slaughter the entire party outright in the first round of combat if we tried to fight it.
The wooshing sound you hear is all but the the last bit going right over our heads.

After beating the dragon, the party wasted at least half a game-session's worth of time (spread across several real-world weeks and several in-game days) trying to investigate who would have enchanted the dragon to appear larger than normal and why. It was only dropped when someone finally asked the DM point-blank (and out of character) what was up with that and the DM told him essentially "nothing, why are you all still on about that?"

I learned how important the pre-game conversation is. Everyone involved needs to know and agree on tone, setting, scale, and various other aspects of the game.

Hell to the yes!

I fully advocate the GM sitting down with players and either asking them what they want or telling them what kinds of things to expect during character creation. We could avoid so many hurt feelings or people feeling useless this way if GMs and players were less obsessed with trying to surprise each other.
For any game-world, I specifically require this for anyone who wants to play an RP heavy class such as a Warlock or Paladin.

[Honest Tiefling]

I learned how important the pre-game conversation is. Everyone involved needs to know and agree on tone, setting, scale, and various other aspects of the game

OH GOD YES. I cannot stress this one enough, and it's gotten to the point where I insist on having a session 0 or I don't feel comfortable DMing. Because in every party, even without intending it, two characters really should be murdering each other instead of the bad guys.

[RazorChain]

I learned how important it is to get along with the other players and have the characters work together.
No more "I'm not going to compromise my character concept" but just go with the flow and see where the plot or the story takes you. I also learned not to block other PC's.

But most importantly I learned to compromise.

[Darth Ultron]

To play the game.

As a player most people think they are ''playing'' the game just by making a character and showing up. A lot of players think that ''doing nothing'' is playing the game. Though most players can't see it. A lot of players will sit there and ''pretend to get drunk at a tavern'' and wonder why ''nothing interesting has happened in the game'' and ''why are they not having any fun yet.'' Even worse are the players that just sit there and do nothing in character, no matter what happens in the game.

As a DM it gets very annoying just watching the players sit there and do nothing. No matter what the DM has happen in the game, they just sit there and barely react at all. And as a DM, you wonder why the players don't want to play the game.

So, when it comes back around to being a player you now know to not be ''that'' player. Don't just sit there, play the game.

[goto124]

I learnt not to transfer video game conventions into a free-form roleplaying game.

... yes, I was that type of Railroady DM, because I could not imagine a plot where *gasp* players have choices in how to go about an investigation, instead of having to search for completely illogical 'plot points' and following them through. The 'completely illogical' bit was probably the worst.

[RazorChain]

I learnt not to transfer video game conventions into a free-form roleplaying game.

... yes, I was that type of Railroady DM, because I could not imagine a plot where *gasp* players have choices in how to go about an investigation, instead of having to search for completely illogical 'plot points' and following them through. The 'completely illogical' bit was probably the worst.

Luckily for me I'm so old that computer games couldn't taint me...even though Curse of the Azure Bonds came out a year after I started playing.

[RazorChain]

To play the game.

As a player most people think they are ''playing'' the game just by making a character and showing up. A lot of players think that ''doing nothing'' is playing the game. Though most players can't see it. A lot of players will sit there and ''pretend to get drunk at a tavern'' and wonder why ''nothing interesting has happened in the game'' and ''why are they not having any fun yet.'' Even worse are the players that just sit there and do nothing in character, no matter what happens in the game.

As a DM it gets very annoying just watching the players sit there and do nothing. No matter what the DM has happen in the game, they just sit there and barely react at all. And as a DM, you wonder why the players don't want to play the game.

So, when it comes back around to being a player you now know to not be ''that'' player. Don't just sit there, play the game.

That's what happens when you play with mannequins

[King of Casuals]

I've run into the weirdest type of GM possible, the one who wants you to tell their story. Normally they are okay, they give the plot hooks that make you happy to go along with the railroad because it's interesting, but as soon as you start to go off the rails slightly they'll start to get upset and try to guilt you with the fact that they didn't get to use the cool stuff they had planned and have now had to turn the one sided fight into 'roll initiative' to die just to get the story where it was supposed to be by the end of the session.

YES. I had a gm who was like this once for a One Piece D20 campaign that I was in for a while; and its friggin infuriating. He specifically made it so that all of the enemies were way over our effective CR so that if we didn't do exactly what he wanted (which we always had to guess at because it would be impossible to know what he wanted from us) all of our characters would end up getting killed. Most of the combats were something along the lines of "This enemy is way too strong for you to fight! Looks like my cool DMPC has to come in and save the day by effortlessly killing the baddies while you watch!". Worst DM ever. My advice as a long time player and GM that I always give to new GMs: Your job isn't to create a story for your players to experience, that's their job. Your job is to create a world that the players interact with. The players should never have to feel like they have to try and follow your story, because it's their story.

[OldTrees1]

From being a DM that was willing to work with players to create their concepts when the rules did not, I learned to try to recognize such willingness in the DM.

[Anonymouswizard]

YES. I had a gm who was like this once for a One Piece D20 campaign that I was in for a while; and its friggin infuriating. He specifically made it so that all of the enemies were way over our effective CR so that if we didn't do exactly what he wanted (which we always had to guess at because it would be impossible to know what he wanted from us) all of our characters would end up getting killed. Most of the combats were something along the lines of "This enemy is way too strong for you to fight! Looks like my cool DMPC has to come in and save the day by effortlessly killing the baddies while you watch!". Worst DM ever. My advice as a long time player and GM that I always give to new GMs: Your job isn't to create a story for your players to experience, that's their job. Your job is to create a world that the players interact with. The players should never have to feel like they have to try and follow your story, because it's their story.

Actu he was alright at telling a story, and while he had his GMPC she was kept out of the action, he was setting it up so we were going to be the heroes once she had been taken down. Also, the one place he could excel was in fights, when he didn't throw an enemy at us who could only be defeated by the psychic (the rest of us had a different enemy). There was this one fight that was legitimately difficult, he used a plant user for crowd control and damage who got taken down quickly and a 'demonically empowered' flying brick able to weaken us. We only used that one because our 'Knight' could control his armour magnetically and kept the fact he was out of the room secret until he had been grabbed, piercing him with his armour, and my air-controller's backup being grappling, so I didn't care when I was grabbed (yeah my wind blasts were only half as powerful, but I still had a good enough grapple and flight 10). It just occasionally became apparent that he should be writing a comic series and not a game when he accidentally gave a more interesting plot hook.

[SirBellias]

I learned that actually role playing doesn't happen unless the players meet you halfway. And now I try to be one of those players that makes it easier for the GM by actually interacting with NPC's and having a clear, obvious drive or goal that they can work around. Based on my experience, players who have that, or understand the basic concept of role-playing, are few and far between.

So, what I've learned:

Be more proactive in character.
Be genre savvy.
Give credence to the thought that most GMs (besides me) make original content, or have good ideas they want to explore, and it may be courteous to take a look at it, as opposed to doing random things for the funnies like most of my players.

[Quertus]

Luckily for me I'm so old that computer games couldn't taint me...even though Curse of the Azure Bonds came out a year after I started playing.

Noob. I burned through more characters than I can remember before Pool of Radiance came out.

As to what I learned by being DM... hmmm... mostly metagaming - and that certain types of metagaming aren't always bad.

Also that a lot of my old DMs had been real jerks.

[RazorChain]

Noob. I burned through more characters than I can remember before Pool of Radiance came out.

As to what I learned by being DM... hmmm... mostly metagaming - and that certain types of metagaming aren't always bad.

Also that a lot of my old DMs had been real jerks.

Well they didn't publish Pool of Radiance for sinclair spectrum so I never got to play it

[goto124]

Be more proactive in character.

Why have I not learnt this lesson?

Oh right... because the first and second (and third?) time I GM'd, I was railroady. I even ran a module I myself did not understand the logic of. The player said she enjoyed its weirdness, but I had to stop it before she realized what was really going on.

Lately I went more hands-off and let the other player pull the reins mostly. It's been slow-going though, due to RL busy-ness.