Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM? What are the basic skills require? Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby? Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
RPGPundit
Being a GM requires a desire to take a leading role and some skills for mediating communication between people. It's special but not all that special. I don't think a game can really mitigate these things unless it removes the role altogether.
Is it a barrier? Sure, I guess. But it's a core feature of this kind of entertainment, so what can you do about it?
Yes;
it depends on the game;
no;
and yes, it's rubbish.
I think it would be best if we could first hash out (preferably for 100-200 posts) why you feel the need to have the word "master" included within the title of your preferred role.
As a GM, I don't lead anything. I think it just requires balance, reflexes, and an appreciation of speed. It's like downhill skiing or surfing.
-clash
Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
Yeah.
What are the basic skills required?
Just those required to play the game as a player.
Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
No.
Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
I think there's a lack of GMs and good GMs out there. But it's not because of matters of skill. It's simply because fewer than 1 in 5 players actually wants to do the work. They're capable; they just don't want to do it. I speculate that this is because few roleplaying games go out of their way to focus on making the GM position fun, rather than just focusing on making it 'less unfun'.
I don't think it's difficult, but I also think there's a paucity of advice, examples and structure to train new DMs to do it well.
I think the hardest (or at least most demanding) part of GMing is the time investment. Doing the work is a pleasure and running a game is too, but it requires time. For a lot of gamers that is probably a hurdle.
In terms of the skills required, I liken it to public speaking. A certian amount of natural talent helps but you become good by doing it regularly. Eventually your brain learns how to do all thst GMing stuff like thinking on the fly or jumping into a new character.
Quote from: Aos;495966I think it would be best if we could first hash out (preferably for 100-200 posts) why you feel the need to have the word "master" included within the title of your preferred role.
Because "Hollyhock God" is just too lame for words? :O
-clash
Quote from: Aos;495966I think it would be best if we could first hash out (preferably for 100-200 posts) why you feel the need to have the word "master" included within the title of your preferred role.
Yeah, I've always preferred "referee". The whole concept of "GM" could stand a dose of humility.
Quote from: Brad J. Murray;495973Yeah, I've always preferred "referee". The whole concept of "GM" could stand a dose of humility.
"Referee" and "DM" (always abbreviated) are my preferred terms.
Being a GM requires being (1) excited about the prospect of setting up and running a world of your own for their PCs to shine (or fail miserably as the case may be) and (2) committed to the players and to the game, which includes not welshing out or dropping the game at the first difficulty, rolling with the unexpected and being honest to your players (rewarding them for cleverness, establishing meaningful consequences for failure, etc.).
The rest, I suppose, just follows.
I think anyone who is interested enough can GM. And if you sticks to stuff well within your comfort zone and have supportive players it's not that hard.
It get's a lot harder if you want to be a more versatile GM able to run well different kinds of games and genres with different tone, pace and formats or if you have to manage jaded or more fussy kinds of players.
GMing, like anything really, isn't for everyone. As to whether it is a "hurdle" to the hobby, I wouldn't say the GMing role itself is a hurdle, I would say the lack of a number of "red box" products are the real hurdle. Lack of good GM's? Not from my personal experience in the FLGS's of the past couple cities I've lived in.
I would say there are a lack of good GMs that are willing to do open table stuff like JA and AM do. That is more of a hurdle then sheer numbers of GMs.
Quote from: Soylent Green;495980I think anyone who is interested enough can GM. And if you sticks to stuff well within your comfort zone and have supportive players it's not that hard.
I agree with this. I think the hobby hasn't done itself any favours by making out GMing to be this really difficult thing that only the elite can manage successfully, and also by putting such shitty GM advice in so many gamebooks.
I go by Paul, but people can me referee, GM or DM if it makes them feel good. I don't know how hard it is for other people to assume the role I do in my games. My players all say they prefer for me to deal with all the hassles that come with it-the stuff I see as entertainment really.
As for what makes a GM: I'd say a willing to try is about all it takes. To be a good GM-well that's kind of all in how you see at your table. For instance some people would say a mastery of the rules-but hell I don't even know all of the rules. (I have a player who takes care of that, the obscure and little used stuff that even I don't know.) We've had players run games, with no knowledge of the rules, where we helped them.
We have a pretty collaborative approach to our game-if you forget something we remind you. If I forget they remind me. No one needs to cheat, or be super competitive about the whole thing.
So I guess to me it's all about what expectations you bring to the table with you.
Soylent and Serious have go the right of it. Gaming is a social activity and at the end of the day how difficult a specific role is depends on the interactions of the people involved.
As to what I like to be called. I find "Your Eminence", is an accurate title for the role in question.
Regards,
David R
Leadership skills help.
There, i said it.
Quote from: David R;495996Gaming is a social activity and at the end of the day how difficult a specific role is depends on the interactions of the people involved
Very much this. Whether it's easy or hard is pretty much a function of group expectation.
There are many hats the GM can potentially wear. The most basic is the role of MC - the person who keeps things moving, adjudicates, and makes sure everyone goes home happy at the end of the night. For this function referee seems like a good name. But there there's also setting creation and the design of the actual adventure, either of which can be simple or complex, or can be replaced by someone else (i.e. an author of RPG books, or in part by the players on a collaborative effort). These things might be done on the fly or prepared before-hand, whatever you are happy with. I think that GM is the most fitting term for when it's all in - an no, I don't think it implies mastery over the other people at the table.
Personally, I like wearing all the hats at the same time and I put a lot of work into it because that's what I like. Do I find it hard? No. Would a newbie who tried to do the same thing find it hard? Probably. But then the newbie would probably start somewhere else and find his own comfort level.
Is GMing a barrier to entry? No more than the ability to read and comprehend a game book. Personally, I think that finding enough like-minded people to consistently devote one or more nights a month to gaming together in a group is a much bigger barrier.
It's really nothing. A couple of times now I've had to miss my IRC StarCluster 3 game, and the players just went ahead and played without me. I really don't have to be there it's such a cushy job. ;D
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;495972Because "Hollyhock God" is just too lame for words? :O
-clash
Hollyhock God is my new personal name for a GM.
It's not hard, but one has to want to do it. I was a GM, at least part-time, when I was 13.
Early on we used Ref, or Referee. The idea was, a person who knew how the game worked who could resolve disputes between players. The players would have to agree on the ref before the game, based on their judgement that the ref knew the rules well, ..and was impartial, i.e. not preferring one player, or one group of players over the other.
A few years down that road, and the ref became known as the GM or Gamemaster. A GM has more responsibilities than a Referee, The GM has to handle of the player interactions with non-player characters, he has to set the scenes (No matter what anyone says this requires some background work, out-of-game), and narrate some to otherwise fill, charge, or inspire the imagination of the players at the table. A GM is also charged with keeping the game moving, and keeping it interesting for all the players, so summarizes, conducts, re-phrases, throws dice, talks in funny voices, and does whatever else is necessary to keep the game entertaining, and enjoyable, for the largest group of players possible.
Anyone can do it. Doing this really well is an art form. It creates lifelong memories for the players, as well as challenging the players to get better at playing the game, in participating, and in improving themselves in the process.
By using the word "art" you reveal yourself as a swine, please kill yourself to save the hobby.
Wait, I mean, I agree with everything you said.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM? What are the basic skills require? Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
I think that:
(1) It generally takes a larger time commitment to GM than to play a traditional RPG.
(2) It's generally true that the GM needs a better grasp of the rules than the other players in order to be effective.
(3) The improvisation techniques used by the GM are generally more complex than those used by other players.
(4) A GM generally needs to be much better at multitasking than other players.
With that being said, being a GM isn't rocket science or neurosurgery. Anyone with interest, imagination, and a little bit of free time can do it. (Assuming they're not socially incompetent.)
QuoteDo you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
I think the biggest hang-ups to new GMs are #2 and #3 above. And this also means that some games (like D&D) are much better at "recruiting" new GMs than others.
I've also come to believe that a major indicator of whether or not your game will be successful is your ability to convince people to GM it. Because of #1, interested GMs will find players with relative ease; interested players will rarely manage to find a GM.
By extension, I think one of the major problems the industry has today is that it has become less and less friendly to recruiting new GMs (both inside and outside the hobby). D&D, for example, has become marginally less friendly for new players in the past thirty years. It has become
severely less friendly to DMs. And 4th Edition, despite trying to make it easier for DMs, actually made it harder. (Because most experienced gamers really have no idea what makes a game easier for new DMs to run. And 80% of it isn't mechanical.)
It doesn't help that the hobby drastically reduced the ratio of players-to-GMs post-1980.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
Yes, absolutely.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957What are the basic skills require?
An understanding of how sessions/campaigns work (can be picked up after playing a couple).
Realising that it isn't a competition between players and GMs but is rather a collaboration.
Basic knowledge of the rules used.
Consistency.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
No, it is very easy.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
Rubbish, pretty much.
There may be a lcak of people willing to be GMs, but if you have a group of players then one of them will probably agree to be a GM, even if it's on a rotating basis.
Quote from: Justin Alexander;496065It doesn't help that the hobby drastically reduced the ratio of players-to-GMs post-1980.
I think this is huge, actually. When one GM handles 20 or more players, you don't need many GMs, and the natural sorting-out means that you get the best of the several wannabe-GMs in your rather large group to be the guy. You need fewer, and the one you end up with is likely better.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM? What are the basic skills require? Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby? Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
RPGPundit
We taught ourserlves how to GM from snippets out of books when we were kids, I don't see how that can be any more difficult now.
Quote from: jeff37923;496122We taught ourserlves how to GM from snippets out of books when we were kids, I don't see how that can be any more difficult now.
You had ROCKS? We had to make the rocks ourselves from a cloud of atoms. And we LIKED it!
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;496126You had ROCKS? We had to make the rocks ourselves from a cloud of atoms. And we LIKED it!
-clash
Atoms? Luxury! We had to make our own atoms from random subatomic particles we could find by searching for vacuum fluctuations and siphoning off the necessary particles with artificial event horizons. And heaven help you if you got your hand stuck in the black hole.
Anyone can try to GM. All it takes is a willingness to put in the time to learn a game system and then a desire to run something.
Anyone that is capable of learning from their mistakes (we all make them) will become a better GM over time. There is no substitute for experience when it comes to running an RPG.
It's the GMs that think they are special snowflakes just for running games that probably shouldn't be GMs.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
Yes within limits. RPGs can handle a variety of circumstances and due to interest and personal ability referees do not handle all of these equally.
Specific setups are easier to run than other. For example D&D dungeons are very straightforward for a novice to referee and a major contributor to it's popularity among experienced and beginning players.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957What are the basic skills require?
To understand, and apply the rules of the game in respond to how the players describe their characters actions. That is the single most important skill that a referee must possess. It has some similarity to refereeing sports events.
The main difference is that sport referee are looking for rules violations and making calls on unclear situations (like whether a ball is inbounds, etc). While a referee is actively playing the game along with the players through running the NPCs and managing the campaign.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
No. But it is a subset of the general gamer population.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
The nature of entertainment and gaming has changed considerably over the past 40 years. I think the industry has been doing the wrong things in order to keep roleplaying a viable business. The hobby was likewise threatened but the rise of the open game license and the internet has ensured that the roleplaying will remain a viable hobby for a long time.
The main problem of the industry is that other forms of roleplaying have taken for themselves areas that used to be under tabletop roleplaying. The most important of which are MMORPGs like World of Warcraft, following by the background heavy miniature wargames like Warhammer and Battletech. While Euro style wargames and Magic the Gathering are not roleplaying games they do compete with the tabletop industry for gamers time and money.
In the second decade of the 21st century there is a overwhelming wealth of options for gamers to choose from. There are variety of reasons why the most popular games (WoW, MtG, etc) are on top. IMO one main reason is that WoW and MtG in particular are convenient forms of gaming that appeal to both causal and dedicated gamers.
The Tabletop industry has focused too much on either catering to the players or trying to emulate the successful elements of other types of gaming/roleplaying. Catering to the players seems logical because players vastly outnumber the referees. Emulating elements of other games is logical because they seem to be crucial to their success. The problem with both is that they try to use game mechanics to "fix" the problem of the roleplaying industry. One by giving an expanding array of options for the players the other by coming up with new rules that emulate other games.
The one crucial element that distinguishes tabletop roleplaying is the human referee. It is tabletop's strength and Achilles heel. A skilled referee can create a compelling roleplaying campaign that keeps going while a poor referee can destroy interest in tabletop roleplaying within a handful of sessions. No matter how well designed no amount of mechanics can change a poor referee into a good referee.
What can be done for the industry to start focusing on teaching people how to be good referee. Something that exists mostly outside of game mechanics. And making it easy for people to referee in the design of their product lines.
Because the human referee is the one thing that alternatives to tabletop roleplaying lack.
I realize that everyone here is trying to avoid self-aggrandizement and all, but whereas I don't think the reffing is particularly difficult, I have known and do know some dudes who suck suck suck suck at it and there is no denying that they are not alone in this regard. It's really not suited to everyone.
Can anyone be a GM? Yes.
Does it take a special skill set? It takes some skills in world-building and mediation, but I don't think of those as "special skills", just ones it takes time & effort to develop.
Is that a hurdle? Yes. Because it arises from desire, not training or assignment.
Can everyone be a good GM? That matters, much like literature, on every person's tastes.
In my experience, the worst DMs I came across over the years were typically individuals who were gung-ho hardcore about wanting to be the DM. For these particular individuals, it was all about ego and their own self-aggrandizement. They just loved hearing the sound of their own voice and/or were crappy wanna-be novelists.
The better DMs I've gamed with, were not total egomaniacs. They had a much higher tolerance for uncertainty and could improvise on the fly quite effectively.
There is literally only one skill necessary to be a good GM, and that's the ability to shut up, open your fucking ears, and listen.
Other skills can make you a great GM, but that one skill alone will make you good.
I can answer the question with a question.
How hard is it to entertain half a dozen guests, simply by talking to them?
Guess it depends on who the guests are.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
Yes, though as with all things the quality will differ.
QuoteWhat are the basic skills require?
The ability to think on your feet.
The ability to plan ahead.
The ability to throw your plans away at a moment's notice.
The ability to pay attention to one player at a time while still listening to the rest with part of your attention.
The ability to learn the game's rules OR the confidence to let someone else handle that portion.
Note that creativity is not on the list. There are more than enough campaign settings, adventures, movies, books, etc. to use that the ability to think up unique and exciting things is a useful tool, but not a necessity.
QuoteDoes the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
I don't think the skillset is a big hurdle. A lot of it overlaps with the things a good player should have. It's definitely harder work than being a player, and requires a lot of practice to get really good at it. I think that's a bigger hurdle than the skillset.
QuoteDo you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
Don't know. I've gamed with one group for over a decade and almost everyone at the table has taken at least one turn behind the proverbial screen.
Quote from: JDCorley;496138There is literally only one skill necessary to be a good GM, and that's the ability to shut up, open your fucking ears, and listen.
Other skills can make you a great GM, but that one skill alone will make you good.
I agree, actually, JD.
-clash
Quote from: Aos;496134I realize that everyone here is trying to avoid self-aggrandizement and all, but whereas I don't think the reffing is particularly difficult, I have known and do know some dudes who suck suck suck suck at it and there is no denying that they are not alone in this regard. It's really not suited to everyone.
Yeah, that's true. I've met a lot of GM that really, really suck. But I think in most instances that's really down to an attitude problem rather than lack of skill. It's something they could fix rather easily if they were willing to listen and learn.
Quote from: JDCorley;496138There is literally only one skill necessary to be a good GM, and that's the ability to shut up, open your fucking ears, and listen.
Other skills can make you a great GM, but that one skill alone will make you good.
Yup, I'd go with that.
Wow, all of the "GMs are viking hat wearing tryants!" posts here are starting to make me think I'm at TBP or even the Forge.
IME, players tend to be pretty lazy about gaming and have no clue what they actually want to do in the game.
If I took the "shut up and listen" route, I'd be hearing crickets most of the time. Or a lot of non-game chatter.
Quote from: jgants;496149Wow, all of the "GMs are viking hat wearing tryants!" posts here are starting to make me think I'm at TBP or even the Forge.
IME, players tend to be pretty lazy about gaming and have no clue what they actually want to do in the game.
If I took the "shut up and listen" route, I'd be hearing crickets most of the time. Or a lot of non-game chatter.
The "watch and listen" works even in this instance. If you spot your players are, as you say , lazy, you adapt your GMing style and take more of active lead. The point is not all groups are the same and to make the game you got to adapt.
Quote from: jgants;496149If I took the "shut up and listen" route, I'd be hearing crickets most of the time. Or a lot of non-game chatter.
Then maybe you are not putting enough in your game that interests people, or people are getting together for reasons other than the interest they have in your game. Both of those are key pieces of information you would never get if you weren't listening.
My group gets together casually and plays casually. We're cool with hanging out and yacking about stuff or talk about what we saw on Youtube that was funny or whatever. That is crucial information for any GM of my group.
I don't think GMing itself is difficult. The Preperation and devising your own adventures is what stops my local group from taking my place. Hence me slowly simplifying the GM role through my latest games.
I don't think it's 'hard' or 'special' to be a GM, but being good at it takes some creativity and a proper attitude.
And some sorts of players can definitely make it harder on you..
The guys I play with on Saturday night are all over-gamed/jaded and I wouldn't enjoy running a game for them... even though I think of myself as being pretty decent at it.
Quote from: Aos;496134I realize that everyone here is trying to avoid self-aggrandizement and all, but whereas I don't think the reffing is particularly difficult, I have known and do know some dudes who suck suck suck suck at it and there is no denying that they are not alone in this regard. It's really not suited to everyone.
Which brings up another point: A bad GM pretty much guarantees a bad game session. A single bad player, OTOH, has to work really, really hard at sucking to ruin a game session.
Quote from: Justin Alexander;496220Which brings up another point: A bad GM pretty much guarantees a bad game session. A single bad player, OTOH, has to work really, really hard at sucking to ruin a game session.
Which is why its especially strange that in my experience, anyway, bad players tend to get the shaft in relatively short order whereas a bad GM can lord over a group for years before losing players.
Quote from: Aos;496227whereas a bad GM can lord over a group for years before losing players.
I've played in games with crappy DMs, which did not last more than one session.
The longest I've ever played in a game with a crappy DM, is maybe several sessions over a month or two. These were games where the DM's crappiness was not obvious at first.
And even crap GMs have good days, and even good or great GMs have bad days. Joe DiMaggio didn't get a hit EVERY time at bat.
Quote from: Aos;496134I realize that everyone here is trying to avoid self-aggrandizement and all, but whereas I don't think the reffing is particularly difficult, I have known and do know some dudes who suck suck suck suck at it and there is no denying that they are not alone in this regard. It's really not suited to everyone.
Oh yes, one time I played with a GM who managed to make everything in the setting seem tedious and boring. He really had trouble getting to the point when describing things.
Another GM I didn't experience personally claimed that improvisation and writing your own scenarios are doomed to fail, that the result will always be noticeably flawed and inconsistent. Only the prefab scenarios from his favourite RPG (The Dark Eye :rolleyes:) were worthy of being played and only in the most linear and railroaded way possible...
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
Technically.... anybody can be a GM, but to speak more to the spirit of your question, no. It takes certain skills and attitudes to be a
good GM and some people simply can't do it.
QuoteWhat are the basic skills require?
- Good communication skills.
- Excellent and unlimited imagination.
- Ability to instantly adapt to a change of plans (eg. when the players do something completely unexpected and insane)
- Good people skills (eg. for managing disputes, dealing with late or absent players, encouranging people to play their best, etc)
- Good sense of humor (and also not taking yourself too seriously).
- Good management skills (eg. running a combat with multiple NPCs while several other things are happening.
- A sense of responsibility. In other words, if you fuck up, you admit it.
- Good familiarity with the rules and background of your game.
- Intuitional improvisation (eg. there's no rule for how far you can jump so you make one up on the spot, etc).
- Immense patience and being slow to anger but...
- ...Also being able to make rules and enforce them diplomatically if possible and forcefully if neccessary.
QuoteDoes the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
That's a fairly complex question.
First, it depends on what players want out of the game. If they're relatively new, then a half-ass GM isn't going to really make much of a difference, but if they're experienced, then that's not going to fly. Alot of players end up "settling" because they aren't willing to be a GM themselves.
Second, I would say that it
is difficult to find people who have these skills simply because many RPG players and GMs don't have great social skills. In other words, they don't know how to communicate with each other in a respectful, encouranging way. A lot of people try to GM, but fail miserably because they have bad interpersonal communication skills.
QuoteDo you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
In my experience, there is definitely a lack of good GMs. I can always find someone running a game, but about 40% of the time they are pathetic.
Hard?
I never think of it in terms like that.
It's like breathing. it just is. More than almost anything in my life. It is less of a 'doing' than a 'being.
When I played in the Marine Corps I played with a group of Infantry Men, who like myself had a lot of training in various CQB, MOUT and other assorted situations. Combat was a pretty serious thing for them-when it came around. They ran combat a lot like we trained-with small unit tactics literally torn from the book. We played at a newly built USO type structure that they'd set up for junior enlisted men and NCO's that was one part food court, phone center and a large lounge. But similar to my current group the social aspect of the game was really important to us: we all kicked in and bought pizza, we spent time hanging out before the game, and after.
Game Day now a days is kind of like an event: I always cook or prepare some sort of food. Everyone brings something to drink, mixers or food. people with kids bring their kids, and I have a machine set up in the basement for them to play games and watch movies on. Spouses sometimes attend and hang out with each other. (A lot of us with wives have great luck, our wives get along well.) One player even brings his dog from time to time, to socialize it with people, and let it play with my dog.
Now I realize not every one has this kind of atmosphere going on at the table but that's what I keep in mind when I bring someone to the table. Who am I going to let into my home, around my wife and kids; and my players wives and kids. Getting admitted to our group is kind of a big thing-because to us it's like an extended family.
Quote from: Serious Paul;496297One player even brings his dog from time to time, to socialize it with people, and let it play with my dog.
I don't know why it is, but my long-running group loves having a
well-behaved dog around when we play.
The mental faculties to handle the math and have a grasp the rules of the game you are running are essential for running a group.
Quote from: David R;495996Soylent and Serious have go the right of it. Gaming is a social activity and at the end of the day how difficult a specific role is depends on the interactions of the people involved.
As to what I like to be called. I find "Your Eminence", is an accurate title for the role in question.
Regards,
David R
this...:cheerleader:
Quote from: Ian Warner;496164I don't think GMing itself is difficult. The Preperation and devising your own adventures is what stops my local group from taking my place.
That's been my experience, too. A lot of people don't want to GM because they don't want to put in the time or can't come up with ideas.
Personally, I find the most arduous tasks of being a GM the ones that have nothing to do with game prep:
* Having to act as "event organizer" to get everyone at the same place at the same time every session and to tell you who is coming and who isn't.
* Having to act as "sergeant at arms" during a session to make sure the game actually moves along and doesn't devolve into nothing but social chat.
* Having to have the patience of Gandhi to avoid smacking people when you have to repeat something for the twentieth time because they aren't paying attention or have the memory of a goldfish.
Now, I'm not the only one who likes to run games in my group. Sadly, the couple others who do are terrible. Here are GM pitfalls I hate:
* Make sure you have something interesting for the PCs to do, particularly if they come up with action-oriented character designs (hint: playing Star Wars with nothing but smuggling missions where nothing really happens is not fucking interesting).
* Don't include a Mary Sue GMPC. Ever. And certainly don't plan the campaign plot around it.
* Be able to think on your feet. Or plan better. If you have to stop the game for literally 15 minutes or more while you sit there with a blank look on your face and try to decide what monsters are in an encounter, you are fucking doing it wrong.
* Save the boring book-keeping stuff for out of session. We don't need to waste an entire session trying to decide on which supplies to buy or how to distribute gold. That can be done outside of sessions.
* Similarly, if you are the GM, don't spend an hour or more trying to decide what magic items were in a treasure pile for the monster we just killed. Either plan it ahead of time, or do it after the session and let us know later.
* Know when to end an argument over rules. Don't spend an entire 3 hour session debating a rule with a player then trying to search online for an "official" answer.
I think the most important skill for a good GM to learn (and anyone can learn it, yes) is an awareness of pacing.
If the PCs are government investigators and going door-to-door asking questions, don't play out the Q&A at every house. It's okay to gloss over the majority and zero in on the one or two people that have interesting things to say.
GMing isn't easy - you need to know the rules, how the move the adventure forward and how to deal with players.
But it's only as difficult as the players make it. Hopefully the GM will have players that let him learn the rules and cut him some slack where needed.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;495971I think the hardest (or at least most demanding) part of GMing is the time investment. Doing the work is a pleasure and running a game is too, but it requires time. For a lot of gamers that is probably a hurdle.
In terms of the skills required, I liken it to public speaking. A certian amount of natural talent helps but you become good by doing it regularly. Eventually your brain learns how to do all thst GMing stuff like thinking on the fly or jumping into a new character.
I would say the hardest part is learning how to structure adventures, how to present them as notes to refer to (where needed), how to plot them (in terms of accomodating what the players might do or want to do) and how to file rules information (such as NPC stats and combat tracking details, where appropriate).
It requires the ability to actually turn up and run the damn game, which seems to be too hard for some people.
Other than that, not too hard, no.
Quote from: Brad J. Murray;495973Yeah, I've always preferred "referee". The whole concept of "GM" could stand a dose of humility.
Seriously, dude?
Because you are doing something where you get to create a world, fill it with people and things, and have the godlike power of making whatever you want to happen in that world happen, you have power over life and death itself... but if you call yourself a "game master" it might not be humble?
Someone has GM-issues I suspect...
RPGPundit
Yes, seriously. None of those things are real and the other players are inventing pretty hard (in a different scope in most games, of course) as well. It just smells pretentious to me.
"Game Master" evolved as a non-dungeon fantasy equivalent to "Dungeon Master". Do you have a problem with "Dungeon Master"?
(I will freely admit the two have subtly different connotations, which is why I ask).
Ah, but there you've hit on them. A referee is just a referee, mediocre at best.
A game master is worthy of the title and is NOT just a simple "referee" because he MAKES his worlds real.
That is one of the most important, and toughest, GMing skills.
RPGPundit
Quote from: daniel_ream;496662"Game Master" evolved as a non-dungeon fantasy equivalent to "Dungeon Master". Do you have a problem with "Dungeon Master"?
(I will freely admit the two have subtly different connotations, which is why I ask).
I would be less likely to use "Dungeon Master" certainly, but that's partly because it evokes images of me at age 11 demanding that the players call me "god" and otherwise aggrandizing my role at the table beyond what it was worth. It's embarrassing to me.
I don't insist that anyone else feel the same way, of course. Oddly (maybe) I find "GM" pretty natural as a term divorced from the the words "game master" -- it's become just a symbol of the role I guess.
Game master or dungeon master is fine to me (so are the numerous variations different games use for flavor). At this stage game master is pretty much the generic term. Don't think the name itself is negatively impacting GM performance.
The GM is the MC; ergo the M.
How about 'Sholari'?
Or, as in Golden Heroes, Script Supervisor (or SS!).
GM (or DM, for D&D) is what we use around here, or just mestre ("master", in Portuguese).
It's even become a neologistical verb in Portuguese, mestrar (to run a game).
That being said, referee does have a certain old-school charm, though precious few Brazilian gamers would identify this use of the term.
Wait, wait, wait....wait.
What about Storyteller?
I got nothing... :p
Quote from: The Butcher;496804It's even become a neologistical verb in Portuguese, mestrar (to run a game).
We've got that in French too: masteriser. Though I can't verify if a majority fo gamers use it or not. Also a lot of people try and avoid neologism/frenglish.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;496775How about 'Sholari'?
An excellent suggestion Mr.Whistler.
Regards,
David R
Quote from: daniel_ream;496662"Game Master" evolved as a non-dungeon fantasy equivalent to "Dungeon Master". Do you have a problem with "Dungeon Master"?
(I will freely admit the two have subtly different connotations, which is why I ask).
No, I don't really have any problem with DM; though its kind of an inaccurate term in any game that doesn't actually have Dungeons. The spirit of it is the same as GM.
RPGPundit
Quote from: The Butcher;496804GM (or DM, for D&D) is what we use around here, or just mestre ("master", in Portuguese).
It's even become a neologistical verb in Portuguese, mestrar (to run a game).
That being said, referee does have a certain old-school charm, though precious few Brazilian gamers would identify this use of the term.
There are all kinds of nealogisms like this in spanish too. In spanish (at least here in Uruguay), by the way, they don't call the GM/DM the game master ("maestro del juego") or dungeon master, they just call him "El Master".
And yes, there's "masterear", "mastereando", etc. There's also "roleando" ("playing role").
RPGPundit
So have we figured out anything beyond everyone has their own way of doing it?
Quote from: Serious Paul;497039So have we figured out anything beyond everyone has their own way of doing it?
I for one am always happy to see fellow gamers opening up their personal bags of tricks for my perusal. Who knows, I might end picking up a thing or two...
GMing a good session isn't easy. Most GMs run a mediocre game, regardless of system or number of years of experience.
Unless I am running the RPG or know the skill of the GM, I generally prefer to play a boardgame than suffer through a boring RPG session.
The only reason I stay in the hobby is that I love GMing and really enjoy putting in the effort to making a session kick ass.
I believe learning good practice in GMing is relatively easy with an open mind and sufficient imagination. It is not hard to become a decent GM. Unfortunately, bad practice is also easy to pick up, and bad practice is heavily pushed on a lot of game forums and by a lot of game supplements, often by posters/designers who don't really play anymore. So that's a threat.
On the other hand, if you are a "naive" GM - someone who is not exposed to external ideas - you may also miss out on a lot of great ideas that would improve your game and let you expand your potential. I am playing in a group like this now, and it is both a good and a frustrating experience - I see the skills and imagination, but I also see a lot of easily corrigible mistakes.
I think it is harder to GM some games than others. For example, most people think I'm a pretty good GM for the TSR-era D&D games I run.
However, I'd probably suck as a GM of 3.x games with players into charop and/or the RAW as I have no interest in wasting my time coming up with encounters truly optimized characters would consider challenging or in learning and fighting over the thousands of (just WOTC) pages of RAW. I'd likely be even worse at running 4e because it seems to revolve around set piece tactical combat encounters. Not only to I have little interest in long combats (10-15 minutes is long enough for me) but I have always been horrible at tactical level combat -- even in wargames, I do great at operational and strategic level wargames but suck at tactical level wargames. As "challenging tactical combat encounters" seems to be most of the 4e experience, I'd suck at as a 4e GM.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
RPGPundit
I think there is a preponderance of pussies out there who are too scared to step into a leadership role.
I don't think GMs are all that special. Great GMs are... but I've only seen about two of those in my whole 30+ yr gaming career.
Good GMs are a dime a dozen if they are able to have a few sessions to figure out their shit.
Quote from: Ian Noble;497146I don't think GMs are all that special. Great GMs are... but I've only seen about two of those in my whole 30+ yr gaming career.
Most of the time I'm optimistic and say shit like, "Anybody can be a great GM." Then, every so often, somebody shows up and kicks my optimism in my teeth.
Just got done having an e-mail exchange with a guy who was really enthused by the idea of hexcrawls and node-based design and megadungeons and open tables, but how could he use all that and still keep his linear plot? I tried to explain that the whole point was that you ditch the linear plot and embrace what RPGs are capable of. Went back and forth a few times. He seemed to get it. And then signed off with, "Well, I think I'll just keep the campaign short so that my players don't wander away from the plot."
You can lead a horse to water. But you can't make them drink.
Quote from: RandallS;497140However, I'd probably suck as a GM of 3.x games with players into charop and/or the RAW as I have no interest in wasting my time coming up with encounters truly optimized characters would consider challenging
It's actually a lot easier to handle those players using TSR-era techniques than it is to handle them with the fetishized nonsense that's grown cancerous in the fan community over the past decade (and then got hard-coded into 4E). Last encounter didn't challenge them? Well, I guess we make the next encounter a little tougher, then.
(Or if it's a hexcrawl, megadungeon, or other campaign structure in which the players are free to seek out the level of danger they're comfortable with, it becomes a complete non-issue for you.)
It's really only GMs who (a) think they need to be responsible for challenging their players and (b) believe there's some strict guideline they're "supposed" to follow in order to achieve that who have a problem.
I think that this thread has clearly shown that the idea that "there aren't enough GMs out there" is pretty much hogwash.
As for the rest, I think its quite easy to be a mediocre GM, but it takes years of practice to become a great one. Just about anyone who isn't utterly fucked to begin with can get there, though, its not a special-snowflake thing, all it takes is a lot of hard work and practice.
RPGPundit
I think that the really vital thing is - you just need to actually like being a GM, to be a good GM. If you like spinning the stories and worlds and watching how the players handle, interact and change them - you will enjoy Gming, GM more, ergo - becoming a better GM.
If you want to just run a story, better devote yourself to actual writing.
Quote from: Rincewind1;497396I think that the really vital thing is - you just need to actually like being a GM, to be a good GM. If you like spinning the stories and worlds and watching how the players handle, interact and change them - you will enjoy Gming, GM more, ergo - becoming a better GM.
If you want to just run a story, better devote yourself to actual writing.
I'll second that -- you need to be deeply invested in the game. The whole thing. Your creative role, certainly, but also the play at the table, the interaction between people, the pace, the objective of play (which changes from table to table). That human interaction is the core of the hobby, I think, and not the rules or the setting or the plot.
I find GM-ing very scary and I have been doing it for 30 years. Yup, 30 years. People tell me I am a good GM..
In fact, despite having fairly outgoing and people involved jobs for most of that time, my natural introversion means I can get very very fretful about GM-ing a session, so much so that at cons I sometimes just have to bug out and not run a game.
What makes a good game for me as a GM?
1: prepare, prepare, prepare
2: give the players somthing to play with, and then sit back and let them enjoy
3: players never tire of easy victories, pitch it all a bit simpler than you might think
4: write down notes and feedback your ideas and the players ideas into the game, either next week or later in the same session
5: prepare prepare prepare
6: and for me.. don't let too much time go between gaming..
It's not hard to GM.
Take a step back for five seconds. Think about the first games you ran when you were 10-or-so. OK? OK. How many "mistakes" by your own GMing standards did you do then? Lots I'm sure. Did that stop you from having a blast? Did that stop you from learning as you went through all these years to be where you are now? Nope.
So. Conclusion? It's not hard to GM. Just play the game. The rest will come afterwards, as you play it. Relax, and have fun.
Quote from: Benoist;497434It's not hard to GM.
Take a step back for five seconds. Think about the first games you ran when you were 10-or-so. OK? OK. How many "mistakes" by your own GMing standards did you do then? Lots I'm sure. Did that stop you from having a blast? Did that stop you from learning as you went through all these years to be where you are now? Nope.
So. Conclusion? It's not hard to GM. Just play the game. The rest will come afterwards, as you play it. Relax, and have fun.
Isn't that sort of assuming that the things that entertained you when you were ten are still entertaining to you now? I'm sure that's not true for me. My ten-year-old self GM would bore the hell out of me today.
Quote from: Brad J. Murray;497435Isn't that sort of assuming that the things that entertained you when you were ten are still entertaining to you now? I'm sure that's not true for me. My ten-year-old self GM would bore the hell out of me today.
No, because I'm not ten anymore.
My point is that all these things are relative. You can be a good GM from your own perspective at ten, in the sense that you love the game and have fun playing it and keep playing it afterwards. It's all in the head.
My point is that people should relax and not try to be Monte Cook when they run their first game. Just play the game. Have fun. The rest comes as a matter of fact as you enjoy yourself and want to keep enjoying yourself in the future.
Quote from: Benoist;497436My point is that people should relax and not try to be Monte Cook when they run their first game.
I'm lucky. I barely know who he is, and have never played at his table. So for me I never worry about how I compare to "established" game people. especially since a lot of the people I meet who write games tend to be the kind of people I end up not liking.
QuoteJust play the game. Have fun. The rest comes as a matter of fact as you enjoy yourself and want to keep enjoying yourself in the future.
I agree wholeheartedly. And regardless if you're ten or two hundred years old we're all looking for the same thing right? Fun right?
I also think you can learn to GM.
I found both Robin Laws and Graham Walmsley liberating, Laws because it made it clear that different players want different things from a game, and Graham since he said 'sometimes it's okay to play it by ear, to say YES, to listen and feedback, to improv as a GM like you would as a player.
Play Unsafe: http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/play-unsafe/3646830
Robin Laws Gamesmastering: http://www.sjgames.com/robinslaws/
I also find roleplaying tips a good source of little tips and wrinkles.. even though the email that it is wrapped up in is always overstuffed with stuff I have to weave thru..
Roleplaying Tips: http://www.roleplayingtips.com/
AND finally, good players support a GM, and help you be good, so let them have their head and let them lead a lot more than some linear plots may have otherwise let them.
I second the Robin's Law book for exactly the reason you mention; the stress it puts on the fact that different players want different things and that pragmatic GM should learn how to read his players and mold his game around them. Of course GM who have a large pool of players to pick from don't need to be concerned about that; they can just fit the players to the game. But even the mood among the same set of players can vary for session to session.
I'm less of a fan of Play Unsafe. It's interesting and certainly from a player perspective the willingness to take risks (not just physical risks, but dramatic ones) can bring a session to life but overall the tone of the book it's a little too passionate for my tastes and the suggestion aren't quite as universally applicable.
On the same note there is also a book called "Gamemastering" by Dominic Wäsch. It's a little ridiculous in the school book style it's written in (there are even at the end of chapter exercises!). But if you can get passed that the book presents a very detailed and broad survey of all sorts of different GM techniques. The preview (http://watermark.rpgnow.com/pdf_previews/86465-sample.pdf) gives a better idea of what's in it.
Quote from: Serious Paul;497506And regardless if you're ten or two hundred years old we're all looking for the same thing right? Fun right?
And this is important because fun means different things to different groups. The most important thing a GM has to discover
first is what makes running games fun for him or her and then see how this translates to the group.
Regards,
David R
Quote from: David R;497611And this is important because fun means different things to different groups. The most important thing a GM has to discover first is what makes running games fun for him or her and then see how this translates to the group.
Regards,
David R
Yes to this.
It is OUR game when I run it, the players and myself.
But they are placing a lot of trust in me that it will be worth playing. So my first priority was always to find out the type of game that I really get into; and then only allow players in who understand and also appreciate that style of game.
It may not be that I am anywhere near the GM in other games I am in the ones I want to play. But working within the game style I want to play, I GM at my best, and provide the best experience for my players.
Quote from: Brad J. Murray;497435Isn't that sort of assuming that the things that entertained you when you were ten are still entertaining to you now? I'm sure that's not true for me. My ten-year-old self GM would bore the hell out of me today.
And me.
RPGPundit
On the subject of books on Gming, I would suggest my upcoming guide, but given that its being published by Precis and sometime after Lords of Olympus, I don't think you'll want to hold off until 2015...
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM? What are the basic skills require? Does the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby? Do you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
RPGPundit
NO, not everyone can be a GM. I am in the mindset that a GM is special in certain skills that a lot of players just do not have.
Communication skills, imagination, clarity, ability to remember rules, know the rules of the game, on the spot decision making ability, firmness, courage, sense of humor, and most important of all, consistancy, fairness, balance of rules, understanding the fact that it is a game are all necessary prerequisites to be a good GM. After being a solid DM/GM in personal games, at gaming conventions, and whatnot, I am totally convinced there are people who will never elevate further than to player status.
Being that I was a Marine on active duty for 23 years, I think that a lot of the intangible benefits I picked up or already had made me a sharper DM/GM over the years...
I think that there are some skill sets that can be a hurdle for some in being a GM for certain games.
And YES, I do feel and agree that there is a lack of good solid DMs/GMs for games in the current community.
Quote from: Ian Noble;497146I think there is a preponderance of pussies out there who are too scared to step into a leadership role.
I don't think GMs are all that special. Great GMs are... but I've only seen about two of those in my whole 30+ yr gaming career.
+1 totally agree
Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;497676Being that I was a Marine on active duty for 23 years, I think that a lot of the intangible benefits I picked up or already had and made sharper made me a much better DM/GM over the years...
Heh. I agree that my service as a small unit leader in the Marine Corps has helped me out in a lot of things over the years, including running my games.
QuoteAnd YES, I do feel and agree that there is a lack of good solid DMs/GMs for games in the current community.
Your local area community or just over all?
Quote from: Serious Paul;497686Heh. I agree that my service as a small unit leader in the Marine Corps has helped me out in a lot of things over the years, including running my games.
Your local area community or just over all?
The first question: Yes, I hear you... Builds up that confidence to a level you never thought you possessed...;D Retiring as a SGTMAJ gave me patience I never thought I had...LOL
It is the gaming community as a whole. I witnessed this at almost every convention I been too and I mean GenCon, DragonCon, Origins and whatnot... I see it at the local conventions I attend here in Washington State, and I CERTAINLY can tell by the people who post on forums as well...
Semper FI...
I went to one Gen Con in Indie, and it nearly made me quit gaming permanently, and actually I did stop gaming for about a year. But I have yet to hit any of the local Cons. Just not my speed.
I game with a lot of people, but almost all of them are friends. People I hang out with outside of the game too.
I don't really feel that being a GM is some magical thing that only a select few have. I think player communication is important, the ability to tell the players "No." is important, and keeping in mind that it's a group effort, not just one person's story time is another facet.
A lack of ego and arrogance helps, along with a willingness to listen to your players and accept their constructive criticisms.
Quote from: Serious Paul;497720I went to one Gen Con in Indie, and it nearly made me quit gaming permanently, and actually I did stop gaming for about a year. But I have yet to hit any of the local Cons. Just not my speed.
I game with a lot of people, but almost all of them are friends. People I hang out with outside of the game too.
Wow, what happened at that Con?
It's a long story. Basically it boils down to I don't enjoy crowds, and because I work in law enforcement I tend to see the worst in people. Add in some other, non game related wonkiness and I just was turned off by the hobby for a while.
Quote from: Serious Paul;497801It's a long story. Basically it boils down to I don't enjoy crowds, and because I work in law enforcement I tend to see the worst in people. Add in some other, non game related wonkiness and I just was turned off by the hobby for a while.
Ah, I think it was more because of a game at the Con. Damn my poor reading skills when I am tired, they will be my undoing.
Well, good for you that you are back ;). I actually enjoy Cons a lot - but Polish ones are significantly different (though I doubt you'd enjoy them, sadly, as they are borderline drinkfests at times.)
Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;497676NO, not everyone can be a GM. I am in the mindset that a GM is special in certain skills that a lot of players just do not have.
I also have to agree.. everyone can GM, but not everyone can GM well. If you say there is a minimum standard to be good, not everyone can get there.
BUT most gamers could GM much better with some help, support, guidance and advice in developing their own style and one that meshes with their players.
Quote from: RPGPundit;495957Are you of the opinion that anyone can GM?
I am of the opinion that anyone can GM, but not everyone can GM well.
QuoteWhat are the basic skills require?
We talked about this over on RPG.net, but it got very emotive very quickly. Here's a mindmap (http://db.tt/TFtMEiEJ) I put together with the key tasks a GM undertakes IMO, and the necessary skills can be inferred from it to a degree.
QuoteDoes the skill set required to the GM consist of things so difficult that it is a "hurdle" in our hobby?
I think the biggest hurdle is the
desire to GM. You have to put yourself
out there somewhat to be the GM. The GM is seen as standing alone (in my experience) whilst the other players are a group; some people don't like to push themselves out of the crowd.
QuoteDo you think that there is a lack of GMs (or good GMs) out there; or is that rubbish?
RPGPundit
I'm lucky. In my group of seven (including myself) all but one of us are willing to GM and two or three of us are very good in my opinion, and the others have their moments too. In my opinion, the difference between a good GM and a great one is not one, big thing but lots of little things all working in combination.
I can't speak for other groups, however there seems to be a significant number of groups out there with only one or two members who are willing to take the GM's seat.
Quote from: Rincewind1;497806I actually enjoy Cons a lot - but Polish ones are significantly different (though I doubt you'd enjoy them, sadly, as they are borderline drinkfests at times.)
See, I find nothing wrong with a game becomming a borderline drinkfest because RPG style gaming is supposed to be a social activity due to the role-playing. A convention like that would be very attractive to me.
Quote from: jeff37923;498586See, I find nothing wrong with a game becomming a borderline drinkfest because RPG style gaming is supposed to be a social activity due to the role-playing. A convention like that would be very attractive to me.
I mostly meant Paul's case, since with his Lawful Neutral approach to life, he may not regard such disdain for law nicely :).
Quote from: Rincewind1;498587I mostly meant Paul's case, since with his Lawful Neutral approach to life, he may not regard such disdain for law nicely :).
OK, I get that, but I think that being able to facilitate a social event is something very very close to being what a GM does. There are some added aspects, but that does seem to be the core of it to me.
Quote from: jeff37923;498588OK, I get that, but I think that being able to facilitate a social event is something very very close to being what a GM does. There are some added aspects, but that does seem to be the core of it to me.
I am actually against drinking too much and gaming - either we drink, or we game. Then again I do not game much at the Cons, as I am too busy getting shitfaced with people I meet once per 2 months.
Quote from: Rincewind1;498594I am actually against drinking too much and gaming - either we drink, or we game. Then again I do not game much at the Cons, as I am too busy getting shitfaced with people I meet once per 2 months.
Ah, I have been doing my most recent gaming at the local pub, so I'm a little biased. :D
Quote from: jeff37923;498603Ah, I have been doing my most recent gaming at the local pub, so I'm a little biased. :D
Two beers are a bit of a limit I impose on the group. Three tops.
Most of the crew have 2-4 glasses on wine, though two of the players normally go more to the 3-7 glasses. When they do go on the high end of that, we have them call their wives.
Gaming for us is, at the heart, very much a social event. we cook a big dinner, SO's often show up, etc.
Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;497713and I CERTAINLY can tell by the people who post on forums as well...
You mean when they write about things they have done which are errors, in your experience, or are you talking about gleaning whether someone is a decent DM strictly from the way they post?
Jeez, I hope you mean the former. But that 'CERTAINLY can tell' implies to me you claim to have some sort of radar-like gift for detecting shit DMs.
Oh man, being a GM is so hard that it's something a fourteen year old could never do...
Quote from: VectorSigma;498759You mean when they write about things they have done which are errors, in your experience, or are you talking about gleaning whether someone is a decent DM strictly from the way they post?
Jeez, I hope you mean the former. But that 'CERTAINLY can tell' implies to me you claim to have some sort of radar-like gift for detecting shit DMs.
I can tell by the way people talk to me whether or not they will suck as a DM or not. I can tell by the way people post if they will be a good DM or not. I been doing this crap too long...
I suppose most people possess the skills required to GM, although I'd say the difficulty curve between running a "decent" game and a "great" game is pretty steep. I also think GMing is an endeavor that 99% of the population would not consider a "leisure activity".
Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;498815I can tell by the way people talk to me whether or not they will suck as a DM or not. I can tell by the way people post if they will be a good DM or not.
I'm over here resisting an urge now, you understand.
Quote from: VectorSigma;499075I'm over here resisting an urge now, you understand.
You want this, don't you? The hate is swelling in you now. Take your Troll weapon. Use it. He is unarmed. Strike him down with it. Give in to your anger.
Quote from: Rincewind1;499076You want this, don't you? The hate is swelling in you now. Take your Troll weapon. Use it. He is unarmed. Strike him down with it. Give in to your anger.
Give in to the Derp Side.
You know, this Palpatine line sounds terribly like something Lucas wrote out of porn movie.
"You want this, don't you? It's swelling now. Take your weapon" Come on.
You know, now as I reread it, that Palpatine line sounds like something Lucas wrote when watching a porn flick.
I can't find the exact quotation, but there's a lovely bit from the filming of Star Wars in which Harrison Ford says "Jesus, George, it's one thing to write this stuff, but you can't expect people to actually say these lines. Like, out loud."
Quote from: misterguignol;498775Oh man, being a GM is so hard that it's something a fourteen year old could never do...
LOLWell played, Sir. Well played indeed.
Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;498815I can tell by the way people talk to me whether or not they will suck as a DM or not. I can tell by the way people post if they will be a good DM or not. I been doing this crap too long...
Then provide us with a list of who on theRPGsite is a good GM, please.
Dammit, jeff, I was trying to be so GOOD.
Quote from: VectorSigma;499182Dammit, jeff, I was trying to be so GOOD.
I know, that is why I threw myself on this particular grenade.
You are still unsullied VectorSigma. Now, in my memory, go forth and become the Paladin/Jedi Knight you were destined to be...