I Do Not Pay To Play

[Pex]

I joined a new Meet Up group with the hopes of finding a new campaign to play. There were games but you had to pay a compensation fee. I refuse so didn't join. I asked if there were games that did not have a fee, and the group owner said they only use compensated DMs who spend their valuable time to run a game. Shut that I thought and left the group. I DM. I play in other games. Hopefully make new friends. You never have to pay to play. I'm not the DM's customer. He's not sacrificing anything or blessing us with his presence to deserve recompense. It's not jealousy I don't get paid. I'm offended they charge and feel sorry for those who do pay.

Before the Virus Apocalypse I had no problem with renting a table from an establishment if it was a reasonable fee the table as a whole could divide up to pay. A high price everyone paid individually I would not do. If it was a business like a deli restaurant with a seating area of course you buy their food. Free Public Areas were also acceptable if we couldn't play at someone's home.

[Tanarii]

Man, all I ever did was tell my players to bring table snacks as bribes. I knew I was doing it wrong!

(Not really, I pay my fair share of the traditional pizza.)

[OldTrees1]

Different people play the game differently. It was wise of you to not play a way that was a bad fit for you.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I joined a new Meet Up group with the hopes of finding a new campaign to play. There were games but you had to pay a compensation fee. I refuse so didn't join. I asked if there were games that did not have a fee, and the group owner said they only use compensated DMs who spend their valuable time to run a game. Shut that I thought and left the group. I DM. I play in other games. Hopefully make new friends. You never have to pay to play. I'm not the DM's customer. He's not sacrificing anything or blessing us with his presence to deserve recompense. It's not jealousy I don't get paid. I'm offended they charge and feel sorry for those who do pay.

Before the Virus Apocalypse I had no problem with renting a table from an establishment if it was a reasonable fee the table as a whole could divide up to pay. A high price everyone paid individually I would not do. If it was a business like a deli restaurant with a seating area of course you buy their food. Free Public Areas were also acceptable if we couldn't play at someone's home.

That's cool. I haven't ever paid to play either. Ppl pay for things all the time though.

I was wondering under what circumstances I'd pay to play. How about if I could be the fourth player in a group DM'd by Mercer with the blonde, the red head and the dark haired gal as the other players? Heck, Grog makes me smile, him too. Seems three hours with the group would be presumably more fun and memorable than even getting a Dan Marino autograph.

Would you pay to join that group above (if I weren't there of course).

[Fable Wright]

Paying the DM changes up the dynamic of the session. You can feel cheated if it's not up to expectations, you leave the table more easily, and the DM can find themselves well out of a group. On the DM side, you have to do more work, since a quick "I didn't prep that for this session" is a bit of an unacceptable excuse.

I don't think it's inherently bad—it's a sign of a healthy community that there are people who are willing to pay, and it means there's more of a market for niche goods like giant minis and terrain sets that you just wouldn't have in years past become produced more, driving down the price.

But I don't the stress of being judged when I'm running something for fun, I don't want a group to die because players don't think the investment of their dollars isn't worth it, and I certainly don't want to pay to play the game when it's more fun and less stressful with friends doing it because it's fun.

There are people who paint minis professionally, and people who paint minis for fun. Neither's doing it wrong.

[Mastikator]

Agreed. If the DM has some *expenses I don't mind all the players helping by paying their fair share. But I'm not paying for anyone's time. Roleplaying is only a hobby and I wouldn't want to be at the table with someone who thinks their time is more valuable than mine.


*expenses like minis or paper or whatever is needed to run the game, or food, etc.

[AvatarVecna]

IME DMing has never been an experience worth paying for. Even absolutely phenomenal games are a good deal about the social aspect hanging with friends, and money taints that for me. I'm running a game where one of the players was so excited to play through it that they bought me the book for it so I wouldn't have to, and ever since it's felt like I'm obligated to run even when I'm not really up to it.

[Kane0]

I both host and DM, all i ask is for people coming around to pitch in for food and drinks

[KaussH]

I have payed to game. I donated to charity to play with Dave Arneson once, i pay to play at some conventions ( gencon comes to mind). I ran cthulhu for childs play and so all the players paid.
I have seen pro gms who charge to run, and i have seen gms charge a table dues kinda thing ( often for table use and expendables)

While its a hobby, some gms do a Lot of work above and beyond. Props, food, prizes, maps, ect. If you dont want to pay to play, thats you, but its 100% ok for a gm to ask too.

[Seto]

I probably wouldn't pay to play either, or ask to be paid for running a game. I wouldn't go as far as to say I'm offended, though. I actually considered it. The reasoning being that GMing is a set of skills you can refine. Finding your style, prepping the game, organizing the game, managing the players' schedule, managing the rhythm and ambiance at the table, rules knowledge and arbitration, balancing encounters, improvisation, storytelling, voice acting... Of course you don't need to be good at all of those to run a game ; you can throw something together quickly and have fun with your friends. But for those of us who are perfectionists, man, being a GM is hard work, especially if you play the more complex systems out there. I've spent countless hours practicing, reading blogs and watching videos about how to be a better GM, honing the craft...
Of course, I don't do it to get paid. I do it because I love it, it's a hobby and a passion. But if all this time and effort investment could also earn me some money, wouldn't that be nice?

So, the reasons I don't do it are:
1- I don't think I'm good enough yet, for all my effort. If I'm being paid, I have an obligation to deliver high-quality content. I don't want that pressure to perform and I'm afraid of burnout.
2- I'm blessed with a gaming circle of friends. If I had no one and had trouble finding people to game with, I'd consider paying to play. Similarly, running a game for strangers requires more incentive that running it for friends.
3- I don't want to normalize it too much in the hobby. I think it's fine that some games are paid and some aren't, but if being a paid GM were to become the norm, we would see a decline in new GMs. People would think "oh, I would like to try GMing, but I don't know how to do it, and if we just pay a professional, they will run a game much better than I could. Why even bother?". And that makes me sad.

[Zombimode]

While its a hobby, some gms do a Lot of work above and beyond. Props, food, prizes, maps, ect. If you dont want to pay to play, thats you, but its 100% ok for a gm to ask too.

So? It's STILL your hobby.

[Pelle]

Not wanting to pay to play is fine, and normal. Thing is, if no one wants to GM unless they get compensated somehow, you can't force them to GM for you. Typically though, it's the person who wants to game the most that steps up to GM, so it's not an issue most of the time.

[Cluedrew]

Well if you (anyone reading this) have seen the threads I have made arguing that "easy to run" should be more of a design goal than it should be you might gather that I agree, running a game is a lot of work. And if you want to get paid to do work I am not going to hold that against anyone.

That being said I do like the "friends playing a game together" mode of play hence my thoughts that it should be made easier or at least spread around a bit. Just asking one person to pore their heart out into the game isn't a reliable way to set up a game.

[Imbalance]

No, I wouldn't either, but consider a couple of things:

First is that old chestnut: "if you're good at something, never do it for free."
Followed by: "find out what you love to do, then figure out how to get paid to do it."

We're well past a point in this hobby's swollen popularity that the Professional Dungeon Master is a legitimate title to put on a resume, especially since it bears no resemblance to what it might have meant just fifty years ago and just about everybody has a clue about what it means today. Google it. You can hire someone (fees vary) to essentially be your party planner, but for sessions of rpg's instead of, say, a wedding reception.

Why? Because there is demand. Just check the pbp recruiting here - somebody puts up a query for interest and it's flocked within minutes with ravenous players willing to play anything just to get into a campaign. I won't venture to guess the ratio of willing GMs to players, but I'll bet it's pretty lopsided. Not everyone is so privileged to have ample hosts ready and able to run games as a leisure activity / some people have more money than friends / some DM's might just be worth compensating for how well they run the table.

No, I dont need to pay a pro to run a game for me, but I'm not going to knock those who do nor those GM's who decide to turn a hobby into a job.

[TheStranger]

Well, I’m not a big fan of paying to play either. But if somebody feels like they’re happy to pay for a convenient and high-quality experience, I’m not going to tell them they’re having their fun wrong. And in this economy, I’m not second-guessing anybody who wants to sell a service and can find a buyer.

Are we still talking about D&D?

[Kardwill]

I don't get paid when I GM, and I never payed a GM either (although I sometime payed a fee for entrance at a con). And I think I would be really stressed if I tried to run "as a pro" (GMing puts enough pressure on me already ^^)

But I understand the idea, and would not be offended.

I mean, aside from TTRPGs, my other big passion is trekking. Quite often, I'm the "guide" : I'll get a few friends together, check the maps, design the trek, look for points of interest, check the weather, tell everyone where and when we should meet, and then we have a fun day, walking and talking and joking together. And I don't get paid.

But sometimes, I will pay a professional guide to organise the trek for me. And I will have a fun week, walking and talking and joking with everyone else in the group. Yet, the guide is paid for their service. Not only for their expenses, but for their time and expertise.

Sometime, I'll pay for a concert, sometime I'll just sit in the sofa while a friend grabs a guitar.

In my opinion, TTRPGs are the same. The usual is a group or friends, or GMs running stuff for fun because they like it, but it does not mean that paid GMs are a sin. As long as someone is willing to pay them, professionals GMs have their place. Especially in a time where a bunch of new players are getting into the hobby but don't have the time nor the desire of getting into the GM chair.

[Tvtyrant]

Sounds like they see it as a business. So you just move on to some other group that sees the DM as part.of the hobby, problem solved.

[Batcathat]

Put me down as another "Haven't done it myself but doesn't see anything wrong with it". It's not that different from something like writing fiction or creating music, I think. Almost everyone who does it do so because they love doing it and most never earn anything from it, but it's fine that some people do.

[Willie the Duck]

No, I wouldn't either, but consider a couple of things:

First is that old chestnut: "if you're good at something, never do it for free."
Followed by: "find out what you love to do, then figure out how to get paid to do it."

We're well past a point in this hobby's swollen popularity that the Professional Dungeon Master is a legitimate title to put on a resume, especially since it bears no resemblance to what it might have meant just fifty years ago and just about everybody has a clue about what it means today. Google it. You can hire someone (fees vary) to essentially be your party planner, but for sessions of rpg's instead of, say, a wedding reception.

Why? Because there is demand. Just check the pbp recruiting here - somebody puts up a query for interest and it's flocked within minutes with ravenous players willing to play anything just to get into a campaign. I won't venture to guess the ratio of willing GMs to players, but I'll bet it's pretty lopsided. Not everyone is so privileged to have ample hosts ready and able to run games as a leisure activity / some people have more money than friends / some DM's might just be worth compensating for how well they run the table.

No, I dont need to pay a pro to run a game for me, but I'm not going to knock those who do nor those GM's who decide to turn a hobby into a job.

Oh, I certainly understand the impulse to do this. Who doesn't have a hobby and wish they could get paid for doing it. Honestly it's probably healthier in theory than all those people that think they are going to be the next great game designer and produce Heartbreaker #3068251 or the chaff on DMSGuild. Certainly the imbalance between people who want to play and people who want to DM makes it seem that this is at least a product (more DMs available, but with a fee) people actually want.

That said, it does kind of rub me the wrong way. Or at least I think it would in other contexts*. In my heart, this is supposed to be a game that friends (or at least friendly acquaintances) play together. That's how it's always worked for me and isn't that the way it's supposed to be? I know, plenty of people game with relative strangers just like you might log onto a server for a multiplayer computer game and play with someone you don't really know.
*I'll be honest, OP's constant soapboxing on tyrant DMs kinda poisons the well of the discussion for me

I suppose I would be worried that, were the setup of paid DMing really catch on, someone who would do the thing for the love of it would be compelled to treat it as a fiduciary endeavor. However, that level of cultural shift on the matter seems farfetched to me.

I was wondering under what circumstances I'd pay to play. How about if I could be the fourth player in a group DM'd by Mercer with the blonde, the red head and the dark haired gal as the other players? Heck, Grog makes me smile, him too. Seems three hours with the group would be presumably more fun and memorable than even getting a Dan Marino autograph.

I feel like celebrity experiences or the like are a different kind of thing (possibly one a person doesn't want to pay for as well, but still different). You're really paying for someone notable to show up. Kinda like sci fi or comic cons, where people pay to be in the presence of their favorite writer or actor or whatnot and not actually be doing any given thing except interacting with them (and maybe signing something).

[Pex]

There's also a cynical side to it. If I were to pay the DM then the DM is Dispassionate, and I don't like that DMing style. A Dispassionate DM isn't a Tyrant or Killer DM. Rather, he doesn't care. He can't be a tyrannical or a killer DM then he wouldn't get paying customers. The Dispassionate DM doesn't give a Hoover about your character. I want a DM who cares about his players, who wants PCs to succeed. No, that doesn't mean being Monty Haul and of course have challenges and obstacles to overcome. I want DMs who play with their players, not against them (Tyrants, Killers) nor despite them (Dispassionate). When you slay the dragon and defeat the beholder I want the DM to cheer along with you. When you have to retreat because dice luck is making the mindflayer too powerful for you I want the DM to empathize. Dispassionate DMs don't either way. It's always move on to the next encounter/what do you do now? A Professional DM wouldn't care. Defeat the monster. Great. Go on to the next one. Fail and die, so sorry, so sad, next character please.

[Seto]

I'm not sure why you think that. I agree that a paid GM couldn't be a "killer GM" ; they have to take extra good care that the experience is satisfying to the players, because now the players are customers, and that's what brings in money. So they can't be actively adversarial to the players. But beyond that, they can be dispassionate, they can cheer for the players, they can be more or less invested in a particular group or adventure, depending on their style or personality. There's nothing about money that would make everyone "dispassionate", as you classify them.

I mean, I've run adventures for groups of strangers before. Not for money, but for fun. I was invested in it everytime, and part of the fun is seeing how each group would play the same adventure differently, in a unique way. I wouldn't call that "dispassionate", and I don't see why money would change this particular trait. Besides, part of being a good GM IMO is to cater to the players and make them feel valued: work their backstories into the adventure, regularly offer situations that will give them the spotlight, identify the players' individual style and adjust the game to it. I don't see money diminishing that either, on the contrary, I'd say it's essential to being a professional GM.

[Tanarii]

First is that old chestnut: "if you're good at something, never do it for free."
Followed by: "find out what you love to do, then figure out how to get paid to do it."

Yeah, I've found that's just a recipe for taking something that's a labor of love and ruining it.

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

Unrelated to the above, but I thought about it some more. I'd never take money to DM, if only because I'd feel guilty if I had to kick a player from the campaign.

[Tvtyrant]

Yeah, I've found that's just a recipe for taking something that's a labor of love and ruining it.

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

Unrelated to the above, but I thought about it some more. I'd never take money to DM, if only because I'd feel guilty if I had to kick a player from the campaign.

I feel the opposite. I would be much more likely to kick disruptive players from a campaign if money was on the line, because I am being paid to give people a good experience. If I am DMing for free I am less likely to do things that are stressful, like properly moderate the group. It's like getting yelled at during work vs yelled at during home life; I will smile at someone and soothe them if they are yelling at me if it is for money, at home I either walk away or engage.

[Batcathat]

There's also a cynical side to it. If I were to pay the DM then the DM is Dispassionate, and I don't like that DMing style. A Dispassionate DM isn't a Tyrant or Killer DM. Rather, he doesn't care. He can't be a tyrannical or a killer DM then he wouldn't get paying customers. The Dispassionate DM doesn't give a Hoover about your character. I want a DM who cares about his players, who wants PCs to succeed. No, that doesn't mean being Monty Haul and of course have challenges and obstacles to overcome. I want DMs who play with their players, not against them (Tyrants, Killers) nor despite them (Dispassionate). When you slay the dragon and defeat the beholder I want the DM to cheer along with you. When you have to retreat because dice luck is making the mindflayer too powerful for you I want the DM to empathize. Dispassionate DMs don't either way. It's always move on to the next encounter/what do you do now? A Professional DM wouldn't care. Defeat the monster. Great. Go on to the next one. Fail and die, so sorry, so sad, next character please.

So your logic is that as soon as a GM charges for their service they instantly stop caring? Why would that be the case? Yes, a professional GM would have some motivation beyond personal enjoyment but that's true of literally anyone making money off anything and most people still care about their job.

It's not like anyone turns to professional GMing to make a fortune, I would guess most of them are super devoted to GMing and just figure they might also make a buck from it.

[Darth Credence]

OK. Don't want to pay, don't pay. Fair enough.
But the idea that no one should be paid seems kind of strange to me. I mean, the same logic can be applied to so many things:

• I'm not going to pay that bartender to mix me a drink! I mix my own drinks, and it's fun to do, so why should I pay them?
• I'm not going to pay for someone to drive me to the airport! I drive friends to the airport, and that's what people should do, so the Uber driver should just become my friend and give me a ride for free.
• I'm not paying for that doctor to give me an exam! I used to play doctor as a kid, and I never charged anyone, so they shouldn't charge me.

Feeling sorry for people that pay someone to DM is, of course, your prerogative. But if it makes people happy, then let them be happy.

[Catullus64]

There's also a cynical side to it. If I were to pay the DM then the DM is Dispassionate, and I don't like that DMing style. A Dispassionate DM isn't a Tyrant or Killer DM. Rather, he doesn't care. He can't be a tyrannical or a killer DM then he wouldn't get paying customers. The Dispassionate DM doesn't give a Hoover about your character. I want a DM who cares about his players, who wants PCs to succeed. No, that doesn't mean being Monty Haul and of course have challenges and obstacles to overcome. I want DMs who play with their players, not against them (Tyrants, Killers) nor despite them (Dispassionate). When you slay the dragon and defeat the beholder I want the DM to cheer along with you. When you have to retreat because dice luck is making the mindflayer too powerful for you I want the DM to empathize. Dispassionate DMs don't either way. It's always move on to the next encounter/what do you do now? A Professional DM wouldn't care. Defeat the monster. Great. Go on to the next one. Fail and die, so sorry, so sad, next character please.

I feel like you're actually making a decent case for paid DMs, by articulating the emotional labor involved in running a fun game, on top of all of the actual labor. It's not as though people are giving professional DMing a run because they don't care about the game and its shared emotional experiences. Balancing ruthlessness and compassion is important for a DM, and if someone can do that really well, it's a service worth being compensated for, if the people you're doing it for aren't your personal friends.

I feel there's a little bit of sour grapes running through this thread, not to name names. For most of its history, D&D was not visible in the public eye to anything like the extent it is now; demand has skyrocketed, and making side money from Dungeon Mastery is possible in a way it wasn't before. Maybe some of the indignation at being expected to pay a DM comes from the knowledge that even ten years ago, a DM would kill to be able to make even side cash, let alone a living from the game, and that the kids today have it too good. Not accusing anyone individually, but examine your own motives accordingly.

[Democratus]

There are DMs in my home town who are paid to run games for kids. Because they are great at handling kids at the table and running the kind of stories they love.

Nothing at all wrong with this.

[Pex]

So your logic is that as soon as a GM charges for their service they instantly stop caring? Why would that be the case? Yes, a professional GM would have some motivation beyond personal enjoyment but that's true of literally anyone making money off anything and most people still care about their job.

It's not like anyone turns to professional GMing to make a fortune, I would guess most of them are super devoted to GMing and just figure they might also make a buck from it.

If the DM wasn't Dispassionate he wouldn't be charging. He would be playing casually with friends and potential new friends. Once you charge your players aren't friends. They're customers. When it's a professional setting your PC is just a character who exists, not a person in the gameworld. I dare say Adventure League is the same thing despite not paying. Sure, a group of friends can play using Adventure League rules, but inorder to work it requires methodical bureaucracy. There's no emotional connection. Your character cannot affect anything beyond the module. With a Dispassionate DM in general you cannot affect anything beyond the Campaign Plot. The Dispassionate DM doesn't care if your PC lives or dies, succeeds or not. He just runs his gameworld and in his view the players are lucky to be in it. It's an attitude.

[Democratus]

If the DM wasn't Dispassionate he wouldn't be charging. He would be playing casually with friends and potential new friends. Once you charge your players aren't friends. They're customers.

Having owned a business, I can assure you that these two are not mutually exclusive.

Having paid friends to run games I played in, I can guarantee that "dispassionate" wasn't the style embodied.

It's not an either/or choice.

[KaussH]

So? It's STILL your hobby.

A lot of people craft as a hobby, and also sell said crafts. Same kinda thing.