Whats the most important thing to you when you're the GM?
Is it that your group is having fun? Is it the story? The rules? What does tg consider vital above all others?
I personally believe the enjoyment of the players as a whole trumps everything else. Even if I plan to put them through hell the end result is them having a good time to me.
If I realize the group isn't having any of it I do my best to switch gears even if it's to the detriment of the story at large.
Everyone having fun is always the highest priority. Ensuring that your group are all enjoying the game is key, but you shouldn't forget that the GM is meant to have fun to.
Of course, this simple principle has a lot of more complex implications and extrapolations. As a GM, you need to read and adapt to your group, learning what each player enjoys and how to tie things together. if there's an element that only one player is ambivalent to but the rest of the group love, it's often hard to figure out how to include it, and that's just one example of weighting your priorities.
Which of the secondary elements listed in the OP the group find most fun, or what ratio between them, is an important thing to figure out, and IMO it's one of the hardest jobs of a GM. Even if you know everyone you're playing with, each new configuration of people requires a different set of assumptions and guidelines to work with.
Primarily it's that everyone has fun, but more specifically it's that everyone is having fun playing the game. Not playing Candy Crush or texting friends.
I can't force people to care about the story or characters, but there has to be a baseline level of mutual respect and paying attention. If you're looking up from your tablet saying, "Huh? Is it my turn? What happened?" or, "Who's this guy again? Sorry, I was doing something." then neither of us are going to enjoy the game.
>>47021584
First priority: Make the players enjoy and have fun.
Second priority: Make the players suffer.
Going to have to echo the others so far. Fun for everyone is the highest priority. The only issue in my personal group is that some of us have different preferences for what we enjoy in a game.
My friends prefer to roll the dice, smash monsters, get loot, and level up. I like a strong narrative, and an opportunity to act out a character. Sure, I enjoy smashing stuff as much as the next guy, but the games feel really boring and hollow for me if I can't be made to care about what we're doing and why.
>>47021732
Third Priority: ???
Fourth Priority: Profit
>>47021732
This is the true answer.
If everyone isn't having fun why the fuck would you be playing? If the story is the most important thing, remove the players and go write a shitty book.
And if the players aren't suffering, why would you DM in the first place?
>>47021800
>If everyone isn't having fun why the fuck would you be playing? If the story is the most important thing, remove the players and go write a shitty book.
There are story games and they are fun, but they're a lot more collaborative by nature.
You can borrow concepts from those games, but I agree that if you try to run (or play in) something like D&D as a vehicle to tell a story, then it's not going to be fun for everyone at the table.
>>47021656
This. Even with friends you're with on a regular basis it can be a pain in the ass to juggle everyones preferences. Hell with friends it's sometimes harder because they know you often as well as you know them and even the most competent player will meta game to an extent if they know what you're next play is gonna be.
I've found a decent system is to roll with the majority. And on the way look for ways to make it up to the odd man out or try to have somthing you know they will enjoy happen soon thereafter
>>47021584
I think the skill that makes the biggest difference in the quality of a GM is being able to read and understand what makes it fun for each player, and being able to cater to it.
Your warrior made a meta build? Whatever annoying OP combo he has, throw as many fights in that let him use it as you do fights that block and challenge him.
Druid built lots of lore and backstory around her character? Put her in scenarios and dilemmas that let her explore her character.
Swashbuckler and Sorceress won't stop trying to suck each other's faces? Ship it. With angst.
Rogue built really high acrobatics/climb or diplomacy/bluff and tries to be a clever dick about jumping/bluffing their way past your carefully crafted challenges? Craft more carefully, and/or make some challenges with false depth that they can jump/bluff past and feel smug about.
If the GM is on the ball, all of the above players can be in the same party and have fun.
>>47021584
>Whats the most important thing to you when you're the GM?
That the players show up, on time, sober, with their IRL shit sorted out, and play the damn game.
I don't care about every player's individual fun. I don't have the time or energy to do that. I cannot be the one responsible for delivering you personalized enjoyment.
The most important thing to me is that the players show up each week and engage with the story and the campaign because they choose to, because they enjoy it. I will do what I can to try and get them engaged, but their fun is their own responsibility.
This whole "I'm a player, cater to me!" mentality /tg/ has is literally the reason gaming is such a shit hobby to be involved in most of the time.
>>47021656
>Everyone having fun is always the highest priority.
I disagree.
I've seen this line of reasoning used to exclude other players, because "the D&D community as a whole has decided that your playstyle is detrimental to the community's fun"
I think it's more important that, the player in your group who is having the least fun, has the highest amount of fun possible, without solving the problem by kicking said player.
>>47021656
One thing I find helps is if, instead of DM Fiat and having the GM decide how everything works, you ask the players "How do you expect this should work?" and then go with what they suggest.
Rule #1: If you're sitting down at the table for anything after the first session, it means you approve of what is being played, how it's being played, and who it's being played with. You do not get to sit at the table to play AND complain that you're not having fun. Period. You made the choice to show up.
Rule #2: If you say nothing, and if you don't leave, as far as anyone is concerned you are enjoying the time you're spending there. If this isn't the case, leave.
Rule #3: The DM does not owe you anything. Though, you kinda owe him something if you're sitting at the table.
>>47021658
Better to play game systems that don't require you to wait for players to make their move.
Is there any D&D 3.5e or 4e variant with simultaneous turns?
If not, can we make one?
>>47021656
>As a GM, you need to read and adapt to your group, learning what each player enjoys and how to tie things together.
Do you? Do you really?
I mean, why do you owe them that, other than basic courtesy?
Why don't the players have to read the DM and adjust their expectations or play style to fit the way he handles things?
>>47022831
Because you're the one running the game. Being a GM is a position of authority and responsibility. You have more power than the players over the experience, so you also have a duty to put in more work. I GM quite a bit, and I don't think this is unreasonable.
>>47022724
>This whole "I'm a player, cater to me!" mentality /tg/ has is literally the reason gaming is such a shit hobby to be involved in most of the time.
/tg/ doesn't have that mentality at all, /tg/'s mentality is "I'm a roleplayer, cater to me, and ban those gosh damn minmaxing munchkin optimising powergamers for ruining my fun!".
>>47022959
And this is somehow okay to you? Making sure players are "always having fun" by crafting the entire experience to their whims, changing your DM style to make sure they are accommodated, and also giving them complete control over the narrative by never "railroading" or giving them a story you planned out in any way. This is a healthy relationship to have? "I'm the DM so I owe players everything, and they owe me nothing but are welcome to shit on all of my work if they're bored for a minute"?
>>47022810
>Rule #3: The DM does not owe you anything.
Eh, I disagree. You at least owe them rules consistency.
Rule 0 carries a lot of power and power corrupts. Please think of the players before screwing over someone with DM fiat.
>>47022828
>Is there any D&D 3.5e or 4e variant with simultaneous turns?
If not, can we make one?
It wouldn't really matter, because players would spend a similar amount of time planning their turns anyway before all acting at once.
It would have little benefit over an "all players have a turn then all monsters have a turn" style of system (aside from maybe versimilitude and strategic depth; the aforementioned system has the problem of focus firing being hard to evade, which depending on how a simultaneous turn system would work may not be an issue).
>>47022991
Nope. But you're leaping right into a false dichotomy rather than actually engaging with the discussion, so I'm just going to assume you're a moron and move on.
>>47022831
>Why don't the players have to read the DM and adjust their expectations or play style to fit the way he handles things?
Maybe both?
I'd go with both.
Both sounds good.
You guys ok with both?
>>47022959
>Being a GM is a position of authority and responsibility.
In theory yes.
In practice hahahaha.
>>47022976
>/tg/ doesn't have that mentality at all
Have you read this thread at all? /tg/ is 90% players, anything the DM does that isn't making sure they're having fun at all times is "railroading" and "why not just go write a book".
>>47023054
I have read more than one thread. This thread is not the only thread on /tg/. The other threads support my view and are neutral to your view.
>>47023046
>In theory yes.
>In practice hahahaha.
That's the thing. Being a DM is a position of responsibility, but not authority. Players have no social contract to not trash a DM's game out of spite or because they think it'd be fun in the moment. It's completely expected that they'll do that, and DMs are just supposed to smile and roll with it.
>>47023074
Stop playing with shit players. Problem solved.
>>47022991
>"I'm the DM so I owe players everything, and they owe me nothing but are welcome to shit on all of my work if they're bored for a minute"?
The difference is that you view this act as "shitting".
I view this act as "collaborative storytelling", or "creative use of game mechanics", or "having fun".
>>47023074
>That's the thing. Being a DM is a position of responsibility, but not authority.
I was implying the opposite.
I was implying that DMs are irresponsible, as they often cannot handle many situations without vetoing it via Rule 0.
Hm.
Perhaps the lack of authority you suggest, and the lack of responsibility I suggest, would go well together.
I give you a DM that abuses rule 0 and you give me players that disrespect the DM's gameworld. It will be good.
>>47023108
>I view this act as "collaborative storytelling", or "creative use of game mechanics", or "having fun".
If you're implying that literally anything your players do to derail, destroy, or ignore the campaign you present for them is "fun" for you, you're either lying or you're a whipped pussy.
Because clearly, they don't need you to have fun, but you do need them.
>>47023144
How about instead, we create players who don't disrespect the game world and the campaign, and I'll give you a DM who gives consistency, a coherent narrative and dramatic experience that everyone can be engaged with, and no one is compelled to fuck up because they think it would be funny at the time?
>>47023151
I feel like you're just a shitty GM bitching by proxy.
When I run games, the elements my players bring to the table are often some of the most interesting things that give me new ideas and let me take the campaign in interesting directions that I wouldn't have thought of without them. It lets me create a story which can actually surprise me at times, which I enjoy a lot more than knowing how everything will play out in advance.
>>47023074
Also, here is the problem
>a DM's game
It is not the DM's game. It is the game of the DM and his players. The DM does not have control over the game, he has control over the game outside of the realm of the players. It is the role of players to change the world, and they have as much right to do that as the DM does.
>>47023151
>If you're implying that literally anything your players do to derail, destroy, or ignore the campaign you present for them is "fun" for you
You say "derail" "destroy" "ignore"
I say "create their own story", "make their own fun", or "find something else to enjoy"
Again. it is not -my- campaign. It is -our- campaign. They are within their rights to break it because it fucking belongs to them. (And also to me. But still.)
You seem to be quite a control freak that doesn't want your players to have control over the game.
>>47023178
Now now son. I know RPGs are about getting immersed in an idealistic world of fantasy and make-believe. But you're taking it a bit far here.
>>47021584
No. 1 is my personal enjoyment, far ahead of anything else.
GMing takes a fuckton more work, time, and energy than playing.
The second most important thing is that players seem interested and pay attention, since that's one of the main avenues for fun as the GM.
>>47021584
>Is it that your group is having fun?
this
not saying other isn't important but fun is the linchpin. if you aren't having fun then you shouldn't be playing
>>47023151
>>47023209
Specifically, you imply that the players writing their own story, in a way that overwrites mine, is not fun for me.
You imply that I cannot have fun with someone else's story.
If this is what you genuinely believe, why in fuck's name are you a GM?
>>47021584
what do you do if A player isn't having fun... suppose that you have a group of 5 and the group gets to an inn and everyone is being silly and cracking jokes and one player hates that shit. what do you do in that situation?
>>47023209
>You seem to be quite a control freak that doesn't want your players to have control over the game.
Look, it's a very, very simple premise:
If I'm direction a movie, it is perfectly within my power to throw out the script and just shoot scenes of explosions and fart jokes, and then cut them together in a way that I think is funny at the time, because it makes everyone in the studio laugh for a minute.
But that doesn't mean I SHOULD. Because just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean it's worth it. When you have a campaign, why go out of your way to fuck it up, just because it's within your power?
I mean, if you take a great movie or book like, I dunno, Star Wars, and just halfway through the script say "Fuck it, they're pirates now. They go sailing off into the distance to fight mummies on boats!" just because you can? Or would you let it play through because you know the story being told is going to be 100x better if you exercise some restraint?
>>47023305
Because being a director or an author has fuck all to do with being a GM, and your analogy is pointless and inapplicable?
>>47023271
You can't do anything. The group wants silly jokes, meaning the player doesn't fit with the group.
>>47022976
Gamist faggots are the worst. Go play CoD, kid.
>>47023243
Can't blame ya.
Though "how to have fun as a GM" is a very open-ended problem.
Personally I like giving my players complex choices of how to proceed, e.g. in a combat encounter or a dungeon, and seeing how they make the complexities interact to do something unexpected and overpowered.
However, what usually happens is my players's intelligence and creativity are both set to Energy Saving Mode and they proceed to W+M1 attackmove "I do the obvious thing" "I repeat the actions typical of this situation" actions 95% of the time.
I know they enjoy it, but I don't - If I wanted to play with bots I could damn well play with bots. If all they're going to do is W+M1 it then I know exactly how the session is going to go and there's really no point (from my perspective) in grinding it out to its conclusion. The conclusion is already known in advance.
Oh well.
//blogpost
>>47023265
Your first statement and your last statement don't go together. If someone believes they can't have fun with someone else's story, being a DM is exactly the job for them, since they get to tell their story the way they want to.
>>47023271
>>47023328
Force my damn group to do something the 5th wants because fuck me, I'm not putting up with excluding the 5th player.
>>47023340
(You)
>>47023328
>>47023271
Make a campaighn specially crafted for stupid jokes. Like, make them play as imps or goblins with zero sense of right and left... or wrong? Nay, I like left more. So, they play as troublemakers and doing chaotic stupid stuff is perfectly in character for them, and GM is okay because it's a part of the master plan.
>>47023369
...
You do realise that's exactly what the DM does NOT do, right? The DM does not "get to tell their story the way they want to". Nor do the players. In fact they both tell stories that clash and interact.
That is, presumably, why you play as a DM instead of just writing a fucking novel. So you have a collaborative story-making process that involves other people writing the story along with you.
>>47023373
Get back to /v/ where you belong.
>>47023399
That does not even remotely solve the problem of one player not having fun with the shitty stupid jokes.
>>47022455
> with angst
>>47022654
We had a gm who would regularly gm drunk and it was fucking great.
Not absolutely smashed mind you but definitely past buzzed and it was hilarious and supisingly coherent random out of nowhere situation notwithstanding
>>47021584
Fun for everyone is my second priority, fun for me is first.
>>47023412
(You)
>>47023418
Well it would if he's the Minmax Win Objective Questcomplete type. He wants to Win, and cares not the means. The others want to Meme, and care not the ends. Hence, both work.
Though we don't know yet what 5th actually likes. He might not like this at all. Wonder what he likes?
>>47023305
>When you have a campaign, why go out of your way to fuck it up, just because it's within your power?
Because the DM does not get to define what "fuck it up" means. That is also up to the players, as it is the players' campaign as well.
>Or would you let it play through because you know the story being told is going to be 100x better if you exercise some restraint?
First, the story is not being told to you (as a player). The story is being crafted by you (as a player).
Second, if the players think it'd be entertaining, then you should take that into consideration.
>>47023412
But traditional tabletop games have mechanics and objectives in them.
There's actually an entire board for freeform roleplaying:
>>>/qst/
Maybe you should go there? :)
>>47023459
Doesn't sound like something I'd enjoy.
worth trying tho. Might be fun.
>>47022728
Never said kicking the player was somthing I do or even ignoring them for that matter.
I have one player who really doesn't get into a variety of games that much but will almost always show up and play regardless, he puts forth effort but I can tell he's not into it. This doesn't make me want to ignore him or remove him, instead I still try and include him as much as possible.
Doesn't help that he's also often "lol memes" all the damn time but at least he has the common courtesy to not represent them with his character.
>>47022828
Aces & eights has a fun mechanic where players all declare what they will do before anyone goes.
It sounds fucky but in practice is pretty neat.
>>47023523
What if you encourage him to make a memes character?
See if you can do that and if he likes it.
Refluff his moves to meme spouting, and give him "bonuses" (really start him out with a penalty, but the penalty is anulled) if he shouts the appropriate meme as he does the move.
That might get him engaged with the game.
>>47023551
I haven't heard about Aces & Eights, what's the system good at, what's the system used for, and what flaws (in playstyle or what the system can handle) does it have?
Also is there any form of Noob Pack or Starter Module that is free for GMs to get, or is it one of those "Pay $20 to play this game and no you don't get a free trial" games?
>>47023553
I think I just read the single worst post that has ever been made on /tg/.
We did it, guys. Everyone go home. It's over.
>>47023502
>implying I'm a braindead narrativist
Game mechanics exist to create an environment where reason and sense govern the players and the world, instead of muh feelings or fucking video game logic.
Of course D&D is the home of the truly mentally damaged and serves as the most toxic feature of this board and RPGs as a whole, as the foremost among gamist RPGs.
>>47023606
"Someone likes what I don't like! Clearly we should exclude him and imply anyone who wants to include him is an idiot!"
Alternatively, maybe people who likes things that you don't like, are new things you can learn to enjoy. You fucking meme-hating bigot.
>>47023641
>You fucking meme-hating bigot
We're devolved into Poe territory.
>>47023614
You seem bothered about something but I can't quite figure out what.
>>47023271
At that point it's up to the 5th player.
His options are generally
A. Sit there and be pissed off about what the other idjits are doing.
B. Since youre at a inn go do trivial shit/or minor things you need to do to distract yourself(organize spells, go shopping at stores in town, figure out what loot you want to sell etc...) I find that the books come out in towns all the goddamn time to check shit look things over figure out where that one goddamn formula or spell is etc...
Or C: just sit there and be pissed
>>47023517
I think it helped that the setting wasn't too serious to begin with. It involved dinosaurs, space aliens and machine guns...
>>47023655
The thing that pisses me off most about newfags is that they think 4chan hates memes.
I've been here since 2005.
4chan was the meme center of the internet and memes were our blood. 4chan is built on memes. They are our history and our life.
And we get these goddamn newfags coming in and thinking "He he we sure do hate them memes on 4chan don't we hey oldfags?"
Well. You, sir, are filthy. Someone should clean you up. This post brought to you by dial soap.
>>47023575
It is a fucking crunchy game. I'm not lying when I say it has mini games for its mini games.
Look it up online. You can find pdf scattered about but getting a hard copy is fucking hard and expensive. The game is really in depth but the way it's laid out makes it look more complex than it really is.
>>47023720
>>47023655
And I have as much fun with Doritos Airhorns Shreks as I did with Towercats, Milhouse not being a meme, and closeup images of Tom Delay.
I say: Encourage the player to express the memes.
Memes are love. Memes are life. Memes are not a meme. :^)
>>47023744
PDF is free?
Cool
>>47023553
It's not much he tries to insert memes in game it's more so we can't go a single game without a meme being dropped.
Bane posting irl is a regular thing at our table and it would be fucking annoying if his timing was so spot goddamn on
>>47023840
You should teach yourself and your other players to enjoy baneposting.
Perhaps instead of dreading games where a single meme gets dropped, you should look forward to games that have over forty memes. That's as many as four tens. and that's topkek.
You can handle the memes without getting your feelings all hurt. After all, you're big guys, aren't you? ... Or ar you some kind of hotheads?
>>47023781
It's not free but you can find free ones if you try to look. Alternatively you can find them for dirt cheap at other places.
I got most of my pdfs for it at bundle of holding for less than 20 bucks and it was more than 5 books worth in supplements and other things in addition to its core (cheat sheets, character sheets, pre made npcs and towns etc...)
>>47023877
Well ok. I'll pirate the game to try it.
But on principle I don't like games that don't have a free trial version.
>>47023861
No quite the opposite most of us get a kick out of. Cause like I said his timing is spot on and he usually doesn't drag it out or over use it.
>>47023897
:( you didn't say "Of Coursh!"
>>47023909
Maybe he's wondering why you'd kill a meme before throwing it out the plane?
>>47023928
He didn't post so good.
>>47023897
I don't even see a problem.
Or was this all part of your master plan?
>>47023953
True.
You should stay they'll expect a poster in the thread
>>47023840
Hothead detected.
>>47023968
Have we started the butthurt?
>>47023993
Yes, the butthurt rises.
>>47023981
I'm surprised she found a way to write that on her but so legibly.
>>47021584
1. The GM is having fun
2. The players are having fun
The GM puts the most time and effort (probably) into the game. Frequently, they see that time and effort get fucking destroyed. If they stop having fun, even if the party is having fun, they are well within their rights to retire the campaign immediately.
No game = better than a game you hate preparing for and running even if everyone else involved is having fun
>>47022828
Have you looked at Dungeon World?
>>47024059
I'd better look at Aces and Eights first.
Does Dungeon World have a trial version?
>>47024174
The text of DW is Creative Commons, so it's all available online.
http://www.dungeonworldsrd.com/
Beginning of the Playing the Game chapter:
>Playing Dungeon World means having a conversation; somebody says something, then you reply, maybe someone else chimes in. We talk about the fiction—the world of the characters and the things that happen around them. As we play, the rules will chime in, too. They have something to say about the world. There are no turns or rounds in Dungeon World, no rules to say whose turn it is to talk. Instead players take turns in the natural flow of the conversation, which always has some back-and-forth. The GM says something, the players respond. The players ask questions or make statements, the GM tells them what happens next. Dungeon World is never a monologue; it’s always a conversation.
>>47024224
Sweet! Looks like it'll be fun to optimise its mechanics and try to minmax it.
>>47024251
Well, you're in for a letdown.
>>47024321
Oh come on. It's a game. it HAS to have mechanics and an objective.
>>47024251
>minmaxing
>fun
Pick one and only one.
>>47024447
No, I pick both!
>>47024379
You sure sound like that faggot who was le ebin trolbosting recently about removing roleplaying from roleplaying games.
>>47024483
Yes that's me.
And I'm going to find a way to make Dungeon World a number crunching game!
>>47024504
>>47024483
Because I did it with MAID and apparently "you can't make MAID a crunch game" (despite it having rules for resolving literally every situation with a diceroll)
And it's easy to do with SS13 despite that being a "roleplaying game".
So this should be easy too.
>>47024537
Please do everyone a favor and fucking end yourself.
>>47024571
How about I end you instead, and improve the hobby by getting rid of a scummy intolerant roleplaying extremist? :)
>>47024619
You don't play RPGs, you're just literally an autistic person.
>>47024708
Well I'm gonna find a way to have fun by taking the RP out of Dungeon World!
>>47021584
I think that character growth and interaction is the most important thing. Or at least the thing I stress the most. I reward my players for really getting into their character, even if that means making bad decisions (that the character would totally chose)
>>47023013
