View Full Version : Player or DM?
02-27-02, 08:12 AM
Which do you prefer?
I've always, always preferred to be a player. I not sure why exactly; maybe it's the immersion factor, where you can picture yourself (your character) in his or her role in the setting.
I don't like knowing everything that's going to happen. I would rather take part in the story, rather than have full knowledge of the story from the very start.
In my current group, I am stuck as a DM, GM, whatever, depending on what game we play. It's not what I really want to do, but it's the only way I get to RPG anymore. I'm a terrible, terrible DM - I admit it. I'm the kind of DM that makes up the adventure on the spot; the only pre-planning done is "Hey, I bet the player will think this'll be nifty."
All you DMs with your detailed jorunals, notes, maps, etc...you impress the heck out of me. That's a hell of alot of work for a game. But, if it works for you, go with it.
02-27-02, 08:21 AM
Well, I've never DMed before, but I think I'd much rather be a player because I too like the immersion factor, that and I'm lazy.
DMs have a lot of work to do to run a decent game, and it'd just bug me to death if I felt uninspired for new material.
02-27-02, 09:06 AM
I used to GM (Can't stand the term Dungeon Master), but I don't anymore. Our current Gamemaster is sooooooo good I'd feel bad even trying to run anything for our group. I mean he does NPC's down to the voices, etc...
I do both, out of the 4 people i usually play with 3 of us DM. My campaigns tend to bend the rules a lot, and they play out like an action movie, although with a very developed plot. I also interject tons of comic relief. They lean towards melee with only a little empasis on magic. They tend to be present day campaigns.
My friend Troy's campaigns follow the rules more closely, and most often take place in the future, but other than that our campaign styles are the same.
Nelson, the other guy who DM's tends to underestimate the players a lot, so we kill his most badass villain earlier than expected, but he has a good way of painting vivid backrounds, better than me or troy. His campaigns tend to take place in the D&D setting and are heavily reliant on magic.
Sometimes we all have campaigns going. Anyway, I like to DM and to be a player.
いいいいいい mojo injiJo-Jojojo いいいいい
The Lord of [B]Scary!
02-27-02, 03:00 PM
I am a good player, and when inspired a good DM. Without inspiration (which happens, oh, about once a decade) I pretty much suck as a DM. In general, I stick to playing. Telurinon Aelvenborne, 50th Rogue of Black IsleMangore Orcsplitter, 39th Warrior of Black IsleDewin gan'Bran, 24th Wizard of black Isle
Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
02-27-02, 03:18 PM
I've G/DM'ed a bit, but I'm really not good at it. So many reasons, but most importantly to me, I'm just not hard enough to push players at all.
(Of course, my favourite GMs are usually the ones who most everyone else considers jerks or "too hard on players".. )
02-28-02, 03:33 AM
Always know what's going to happen? your GMing style must be different from mine....
I set up the situation, the NPCs and their motives and let it flow. The PCs do what they want... and rarely do they not surprise me.
02-28-02, 06:08 AM
Quote: Always know what's going to happen? your GMing style must be different from mine....
I meant in the 'Grand Scheme' of things. In other words, I know the story - it has a begining, middle, and end. PCs are of course free to get there however the want.
I guess a better analogy would be to reading a novel. To me, Gm-ing is like reading the last chapter of a novel before you hit the prologue. Sure, you'll enjoy the story, but there's no surprise or kicker at then end.
I like the sensation of being a player. The PC's are heroes, but they're still little fish in a bigger pond.
My campaigns are so huge that usually there is at least 10 different possible endings. New possible endings may pop up as the campaign goes. I create NPCs and their motives. But only players actually decide where the campaign goes.
02-28-02, 11:27 PM
I GMed a game of Hunter: The Reckoning once.
I felt bad.
My next GM venture is gonna be a WoD campaign set in 1600's caribbean.
03-01-02, 02:33 AM
yes. I have a beginning and a bit of middle but the end is open.
As for deaths... I once played in a campaign where we had 28 PC deaths in the first session.
03-01-02, 02:44 AM
Personal note: Be careful when playing with Kintire as GM.
03-01-02, 02:57 AM
Hey I was a player! and it was Paranoia to be fair.
Five player party. Briefing. Off to equipment room. weapons issued... four red barrelled laser pistols (bottom end peashooters) and one Plasma Generator (top end kickin' hardware)
Question... who gets the plasma generator?
Answer, The last man standing. And this in a game where each PC is one of six clones.....
03-01-02, 04:42 AM
Bah, nothing unusual for a Paranoia game... you should have said that right away!
03-01-02, 02:28 PM
If you're gonna kill pc's. kill em a lot, decreases the dissapointment factor
I have DM'd and played. I love playing because i like being a character and doing 'character things'. I am a great role player, but role playing only goes so far if your fellow characters aren't into it.
But then i love being a DM because i can create and mold and 'play' many characters. Most of my DM sessions haven't been as fun as i would like, mostly because my players were morons.
I want to play a campaign some time with an 'elite role player' group that take the game seriously (but not too seriously).
Being a DM really affirms that people mainly think about nothing but sex. "Are there any girls in the tavern?" :/
Sounds like it's time for the frontier town where there are no women at all. But that doesn't mean the various hunters and lumberjacks aren't interested...
Yup, it's a less sting to lose a char when casualty rate of PCs is high. Only time I've gotten really pissed is when I'd just finished rolling up a new char, not a short task with the house rules, and he died in 5 minutes. If yer gonna kill off a lot of PCs it's just good form to make people roll up new ones between or before the session. Nothing is as irritating as spending majority of the session rolling up a char while others get to play.
03-05-02, 01:30 PM
about half and half.
When I GM I tend to generate NPCs and a dilemma (or three or five) then interject the players into it and let them decide what to do and how to do it. It takes a good deal of making NPCs with individual motivations and personalities to make it work, and more work to set up a somewhat complex political web that provides lots of gray areas and intrigues. I don't like to run campaigns where the PCs are the toughest or most important people in the world or even in the local area. Having the PCs be largely immune to being killed is a bad idea as it promotes them to hold themselves hostage, ie do foolhardy and stupid things, knowing the GM will not kill them for it. Conversely, they shouldn't be too vulnerable (if not revivifiable) as that prevents the players from identifying/caring about their character. Its a balancing act.
As a player there is a lot less to keep track of, so if i am in the mood for more relaxation, its great.
03-08-02, 02:47 AM
I've pretty much played all my life until recently, aside from a few stints with world of darkness and like one other d&d. just spent two days running some friends through monte cook's return to the temple of elemental evil, you can read about it if you want.. was rather disastrous due to outside influences.