Where do GMs come from?

Fiasco · October 06, 2009, 11:06:07 PM

I chose other because I think the best option is "I learnt on the job".

You may have natural talent, you have hopefully read the rules, you may well have seen others GM but all that isn't as formative as actually running a game. That is when you start to learn (well, if you are any good).

Like most things in life, you learn through trial and error. You run a game, you judge by the players reactions how it went. They may give you feedback. You hopefully learn from the process and do better the next time...

jeff37923 · October 06, 2009, 11:06:23 PM

I'm pretty much self-taught as a GM. Many years ago, I did do some theatre work with the Pacific Conservatory of the Performing Arts because I thought that it might help my GM skills, but that is as close I ever got to any kind of formal training.

DeadUematsu · October 06, 2009, 11:19:51 PM

I'm self-taught and I got good by doing.

PaladinCA · October 06, 2009, 11:43:01 PM

I'm a GM and I'd like to know what's going on!

I thought I knew, and then I came onto the internet and found out that I've been doing it all wrong for 30 years. :idunno:

It's very disconcerting.

beejazz · October 07, 2009, 12:01:22 AM

Quote from: PaladinCA;336817I'm a GM and I'd like to know what's going on!

Same here for different reasons. I've played here and there, and I've run 3 mini campaigns and a hand full of one-shots. I think in the last one (a while ago mind you), I just started really getting the hang of it and learning to do it well. School keeps me busy for now, but I feel confident that next game will be even better.

The Shaman · October 07, 2009, 12:08:44 AM

Quote from: GeekEclectic;336800If you can't read to learn the basic concepts or do enough math to make use of the randomizers that make RPGs actually, y'know, games . . . what exactly do you do with your imagination and improvisation? I suppose you could rely on others for everything, but . . . that would get old really quickly.

Many groups seem to do just fine with a rules guru who is someone other than the guy behind the screen.

Knowing the system frontwards, backwards, and sideways mean nothing if you can't create interesting encounters and events or quickly adjust to the constantly changing environment created by the players and their characters.

Spellslinging Sellsword · October 07, 2009, 10:40:26 AM

I bought the Mentzer set of Basic D&D at Toys-R-Us and had my sisters and best friend make characters. I started running games and other friends started playing in the sessions that I ran. I'm still GM'ing to this day. I couldn't decide if this was natural talent, books, or something else, so I voted other.

Aos · October 07, 2009, 11:02:38 AM

I started gaming in 78 or 79. I've been the default GM in every group I've been a part of since the middle 80's. I started GMing in 1980 or so. I had a couple of friends with natural talent for GMing, but initially I sucked at it; however, I improved rapidly. At first, I learned from watching others. I probably learned more from bad GMs than good ones. Lots more.
Later, I just spent a lot of time thinking about what worked and what didn't work and experimenting.

Abyssal Maw · October 07, 2009, 12:11:48 PM

I've nearly always been the DM in every group I've been in.

That said, it's a combination of things: natural talent, advice, observation (both for good and very bad examples), sharing techniques with other DMs, and tons of practice. The aggregate is what makes a good DM.

(There's no option for that so I chose other.)

LordVreeg · October 07, 2009, 12:47:57 PM

Quote from: Xanther;336768Similar story here. Started in late '77 with my best friends college age brother DM this thing called D&D out of three little books. After a few games, my friend DM'ed, I DM'ed I introduced another friend who DM'ed, mt bewst frined brought in one of his friends, we all played in each others games, then we met others at school who were doing the same thing, like late 1978, early 1979, some of who learned from older brothers, and tried their games. It sorta went like that. Some learning from others, lots of trial and error and seeing how others did it.

Since high school I've probably GMed 99% of the games I've been in. I GM the one game I have now, don't have time for much more than that although I do I miss playing.

Xanth, I am going to start just using your posts and pasting them. Seriously.

College age older brother of best friend had 4th ed T&T and OD&D, played in those in 76 and 77, by 77 myself and my best friend started GMing each other, I went to private school and recruited, by HS had home group and school group as GM.

Run 2 live groups (one on a 1 per 4 week, 1 on a 1 per 3 week sched), and one online group.

T. Foster · October 07, 2009, 01:09:55 PM

I initially learned to GM by reading the Mentzer-edit (1983, red box) D&D Basic Set, which is IMO still the best ever set for that purpose (even if in retrospect I don't agree with some of the specific advice). I became good at it (to the extent I am good at it...) by observing other GMs, learning both what to do and, perhaps more importantly, what not to do.

Skyrock · October 07, 2009, 01:20:47 PM

I'd say it's something from everything. I learned parts through being a practicing GM, parts through active discussions, parts through more passive self-teaching (blogs, articles, GM help sections in books etc.), and parts from bing a player under other GMs (and especially a kickass Cyberpunk GM helped me there).
So, I'm going to vote "Other", which seems to be the best fitting.

boulet · October 07, 2009, 01:23:13 PM

GMs are from Mars and players from Venus. Everyone knows that.

Aos is from outer space though.

Soylent Green · October 07, 2009, 01:45:13 PM

I was torn between "I am a player. My GM doesn't know what he's doing" and "I am a GM. I wish someone would tell me what's going on". I would have gone for both it it had been an option.

In the end my vote went for the former because, on balance, I play a bit more than I GM and I find that, however experienced, there are so many GMs who manage to snuff out all the joy and excitement from a game.

Also of late my I've been running some good games so I feel good about myself as a GM. Yeah I know, it's not going to last.

Cranewings · October 07, 2009, 03:31:07 PM

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;336882I've nearly always been the DM in every group I've been in.

That said, it's a combination of things: natural talent, advice, observation (both for good and very bad examples), sharing techniques with other DMs, and tons of practice. The aggregate is what makes a good DM.

(There's no option for that so I chose other.)

I think another thing is a desire to be good, and to judge your goodness by how entertained you can keep a group, and how long you can keep them that way.

The ability to be self critical underscores expertises in almost every field. Its why 80% of the world considers themselves better than average, but only 10% of serious practitioners can be called experts. Most people can't see their own flaws honestly.

Where do GMs come from?

Cranewings