I've just acquired a second GM for my Wilderlands campaign; yesterday at the Meetup we ran different dungeons (Stonehell & Sunless Citadel), IRL at separate tables, in-world about 12 miles apart. We did some after-game coordination & I'm quite excited at the prospect of making this work. Has anyone done this/got tips for making it work well?  Pointers to discussion elsewhere?

Not for D&D, but for other settings and systems e.g. Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek, Star Wars. All three endeavors shared a lot of the same features.

I'll use CoC as an example. We originally started play in the early 1980s with me as the GM. Around 1987 we moved out of state for grad school and my friend Steve was the GM for some published scenarios and two long campaign. Then I ran some scenarios (some published, some made up) that shared some of the same PCs. Typically each player rolled up multiple PCs so that we could mix and match based on the scenario hook or the likely skill set needed and we ended up also running a number of NPC hirelings and servants. You can't really run a good dilettante without at least one or two servants. A gentleman must have his valet and a lady her maid after all. Then one of the other players ran one of the Victorian scenarios which involved time travel by some of the PCs and new characters from the period for other PCs.

Some time later my wife and I moved out of state and we later introduced some new players to CoC with me as the GM. My wife ran a scenario she created, but that was in the modern period and didn't share any characters with the other campaign so I wouldn't count that as a shared GM. One of the new players ran a bunch of stuff (published and invented) as she and I alternated GM duties with some overlapping characters between what we each ran. All these campaigns (with the possible exception of the modern scenario and some one-shots from the Blood Brothers II supplement) were in a shared world. One of the other new players also ran CoC, but his campaign was not in the same world setting. In fact he ran the same published world spanning campaign that our original group had played. We haven't played CoC since 2010 or so, but when we do what we play may well be part of the same large campaign.

Some key points for our success

• GMs must have a high degree of shared trust.
• GMs must have a genuine desire to share ownership of their setting with another person or persons.
• GMs must have enough compatibility in style so that the shared campaign setting is sufficiently coherent and consistent so that the players don't find transitions too jarring. I suppose everyone could be on board for some gonzo, crazy incoherent hot mess of a setting, but that doesn't sound at all interesting to me.
  
• If PCs are going to move between scenarios run by multiple GMs then it's important for GMs to have similar notions about experience power curves and the current and eventual power level desired for PCs and their opponents.
• If PCs aren't going to be shared by different GMs then different power curves and power levels are less of a concern.
• If the same players aren't shared by different then different power curves and levels are even less of a concern and coherency and consistency may also be less critical.
• You need an agreed method for deciding who is the GM for any given session of play. Typically we shifted between GMs once a campaign arc, adventure, or scenario was completed.
• You need a method of dividing authority. We often did this by different GMs running different scenarios and by having the GMs focus on and have overall authority for different locations in the game world. So for our Star Trek and Star Wars games the person that created, fleshed out, or first ran a location (usually a planet) typically had the overall authority for that place and the people and things in it. So a different GM would often check before using a major NPC from or making a significant change to that location.
• You need an method of sharing needed information. Since much of the time the co-GM(s) were also fellow players much information was transferred during the scenario where a GM was a player. If they later wanted to use stuff that came up in that scenario or needed to know more about something from that scenario (like the stats for an NPC) they'd ask the GM who created or first ran stuff for permission* or for more information.

* Typically it was pretty clear what things you might need to ask permission about and what things you didn't need to ask about. Nobody asked permission for every little thing. That just wouldn't work. On the other hand, casually killing off a major villain that somebody else created without asking to use the villain and to put them at risk is rude and breaks trust.

Rob Kuntz and Gary Gygax were co-referees for Gary's Greyhawk game.

Rob is alive and kicking and online at ODD74 and Ruins of Murkhill.

I think multiple GM's in a campaign is almost always an excellent idea; it transfers more power to the players, freshens up the setting, and spreads the work load.

Multiple GMs is always a trainwreck. The GMs will get egos and fight over the parts of the setting that they see as theirs. Nothing will line up. Scheduling is worse.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1011244I think multiple GM's in a campaign is almost always an excellent idea; it transfers more power to the players, freshens up the setting, and spreads the work load.

I agree - rotating GMs is my preferred approach to a campaign. Everyone plays mostly as a PC, more shared world buildings/investment, less burnout. It's great ime.

Quote from: S'mon;1011138I've just acquired a second GM for my Wilderlands campaign; yesterday at the Meetup we ran different dungeons (Stonehell & Sunless Citadel), IRL at separate tables, in-world about 12 miles apart. We did some after-game coordination & I'm quite excited at the prospect of making this work. Has anyone done this/got tips for making it work well?  Pointers to discussion elsewhere?

Keep boundaries
Each have areas to concentrate on, don't cross over into each other's areas unless you have agreed beforehand
Don't use each other's NPCs or impact each other's plots
Don't introduce things as a GM that would directly help you own PCs
If you alternate, then alternate by scenario not be session, otherwise you have multiple scenarios going on at the same time
Agree on the style, pace and flavour of the game, don't have one GM who likes gritty, slow advancement games and another who likes pulpy fast advancement games, for example
Always have a scenario to run in case the other GM can't make it

We had a multiple GM RQ game in the 80s, with 4 main GMs and a couple of players who occasionally GMed and it worked very well. Each had his own area (Sartar, Prax, Pavis, Dorastor, The Acid Pits) and most scenarios involved being in or around those areas.

Quote from: soltakss;1011335If you alternate, then alternate by scenario not be session, otherwise you have multiple scenarios going on at the same time

We won't be alternating probably, the idea is that we both GM at the same real place & time to accommodate more players, and GM adventures in the same game-world area & time so PCs can cross back and forth easily between the adventures.  So my second/subordinate GM is running Sunless Citadel near Bratanis village while I run Stonehell near Selatine village:



He also has the info on Dyson Logos' Ruins of the Gorgon & Goblin Gulley dungeons near Bratanis if the group he's GMing for want to go there, but I expect they'll be doing Sunless Citadel for several sessions.

Edit: It's still my campaign, I'm letting a second GM run adventures in it at the same time as me so we can accommodate more players, without this I'd have had 9 on Sunday or turned some away.

The adventures are taking place at approximately the same time, currently month 6 of 4447 BCCC.

Why do some people insist on merging different game sessions?

Quote from: S'mon;1011341We won't be alternating probably, the idea is that we both GM at the same real place & time to accommodate more players, and GM adventures in the same game-world area & time so PCs can cross back and forth easily between the adventures.  So my second/subordinate GM is running Sunless Citadel near Bratanis village while I run Stonehell near Selatine village:

Ah, I see, two GMS running for two groups in the same campaign at the same time.

No, I have never tried that.

Do you plan on letting the two groups interact at all? Are their storylines going to overlap? Can they travel to each other's areas?

Can they put Magic Mouths down in the dungeon that trigger when a member of the other party goes there?

"Attention All Monsters!  Attention All Monsters!  Dickie Hertz is In the Dungeon!"

For that matter, swap members around.

For CROM's sake, DO NOT keep them as two indivisible groups.  That is the dullest of all possibilities.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011404Can they put Magic Mouths down in the dungeon that trigger when a member of the other party goes there?

"Attention All Monsters!  Attention All Monsters!  Dickie Hertz is In the Dungeon!"

For that matter, swap members around.

For CROM's sake, DO NOT keep them as two indivisible groups.  That is the dullest of all possibilities.

What do you mean? It should be one group instead?

No, I mean MIX THEM UP.  When Gary Gygax started running Greyhawk, you'd get a phone call... "Can you play Thursday night?"

You wouldn't know who else was playing until you got there.  Not only did you meet new gamers, but it kept the campaign a LOT more interesting.

Quote from: soltakss;1011403Ah, I see, two GMS running for two groups in the same campaign at the same time.

No, I have never tried that.

Do you plan on letting the two groups interact at all? Are their storylines going to overlap? Can they travel to each other's areas?

Yes, the second group includes 2 PCs who started with the first group, then joined the second group, and no reason they can't recombine with first group. By using 1 week long rests it is easy to handle this stuff in the downtime.

Current plan is one GM per dungeon/zone and PCs could swap between dungeon/zones every session if they wanted, but we want 2 reasonably sized parties. If we get fewer players for a session I'll GM and my co-GM can play his PC.

Quote from: S'mon;1011495Yes, the second group includes 2 PCs who started with the first group, then joined the second group, and no reason they can't recombine with first group. By using 1 week long rests it is easy to handle this stuff in the downtime.

The part I would find tricky these days is being able to end each play session at a rest or break point so as to allow movement of PCs between the two groups. But it sounds like you are already kind of doing that so apparently it isn't as tricky for you (and hopefully your assistant GM).