So I was talking to some friends of mine back in LA. Things aren't going well. Their GM is a railroading combat-monkey that tries to tell the players how their PC's *should* be reacting to his self-circle-jerk world. The guy is a bit of a clod.

It got me thinking...

How much does one's reading habits matter for GMing? A few guys I know that I consider "great GM's" that are voracious readers of fiction and non-fiction.

I know a few GM's that I just consider "good" or "decent" - their reading habits are sporadic, but when they read anything, it's usually good material.

I know of *no* "good" GM's that don't read at all.

Is this anecdotal with the rest of you? Do your own reading habits inform what you consider good/great in your GMs? What about your playstyle?

Hmm. Interesting question. The only GM's I've had experience who weren't reasonably well-read were grade school kids, so I don't think that counts.

I don't think there's been a direct correlation between good vs. great and a massive reading list _per se_, but I do see how reading (and video) content greatly influences GM style. All the GM's I know use what content they have and find interesting in their game worlds, and their thinking about cause and effect and narrative and all sorts of other subjects shows up in their GM style, naturally enough.

Well, hopefully, naturally enough. The weird and problematic GM's I can think of tended to also have some wonky/off thinking, or to be hung up on some ideas or reading or viewing and trying too hard, or in weird ways, to incorporate it in their games. I've done this myself, and look back on it as some of my weakest bits, when something had caught my imagination and so I ended up putting stuff in my worlds that was derivative and not really integrated into the world in a satisfying way. These things tend to be off-putting when I see similar things from GM's, especially when they're obvious and lazy and/or self-satisfied about it. I know one GM who I generally think is great, but my least favorite parts of her games are when the inspiration is borrowed in a way that seems transparent and shallow to me. Especially when I'm not particularly interested in the original subject being used.

I may be mis-interpreting, but it seems to me that over the last 25 years or so, both pop fiction and RPGs (and computer games) have taken a depressing dip in the direction of forced plots, exaggerated protagonist abilities with no reason, easy protagonist survival, things not needing to make sense, undeserved focus/significance on protagonist plots, etc., and I imagine that TV and Hollywood and Young Adult fiction have a lot to answer for. But maybe I'm just becoming a cantankerous old grump. ;-)

Well it could be the baseline of what is expected in new GM's/Players has increased.

I mean if you're my vintage (I started GMing in the mid/late 70's) all we had were books for fantasy media. I'm mean sure we had some movies, like all those Steve Reeves Hercules movies, Spartacus etc. but certainly nothing to compare with REH, and Moorcock, Leiber, Tolkien etc in terms of impact.

I think you bring up another good point I glazed over - GM's that flub it in trying to force a narrative. I think that's just a learning experience, but it still stems from having consumed SOME kind of media that they're trying to recreate. That said, I think the ones that learn from this are the ones that go on to let go with trying to force narratives (because they inevitably fail) and come to embrace the Sandbox ethic of letting the game be emergent from actual play.

Getting to that point is, in my experience, an often bumpy ride to figure out on your own.

I think you need to be a student of story, if you want to create memorable moments in concert with your players.  However, I think you can be a fine GM without being anything close to a voracious reader, provided you tap into player creativity. What broad reading does, for me, is allow me to pilfer ideas, morph them, and bring them into play in other guises. Also helps with prep because fluency speeds things up.

Honestly, I don't think I've ever met a gamer who wasn't a reader, so this seems something of a foreign to me.

Yes, I still do.  I read lot's of fantasy and comics, and I love to build worlds.

Sometimes I think reading too much is a hindrance. (For me.) I'm a voracious reader of science fiction; I read the classics when I was younger, and now I'm hooked on modern SF, especially the new space opera.

But most of my players are TV/movie addicts, and that leads to a lot of disconnects when I'm running a game. They're completely lost when I explain to them which authors inspired my game; I usually get a chorus of variations on "Never heard of them" in response.

It's hard to run a good SF RPG when you can't find players who've read Iain Banks, Stephen Baxter, and Alastair Reynolds. But they've all heard of "The Fifth Element."  :banghead:

Most of my gaming circle(s) is (are or have been) extremely well read and have been for about as long as I've known them (up to 30+ years in a couple cases).  They vary dramatically in their ability to GM in my experience, but I will put up with the worst because sometimes just the chance to game with old friends is worth it.  It also helps that the worst ISN'T totally horrible, just occasionally annoying.

I don't really think it comes down to being a heavy reader or reading good material even. A lot of natural storytellers I have known never even touched a book. And GMing, while I don't consider it storytelling, is more like telling a story than like writing a novel. Your speaking. People are reacting. It is a kind of public speaking. In fact, the worst GMs I've had try too hard to sound like prose from a novel. That doesn't really work well for setting the scene in an RPG in my experience. It is a whole different skill set.

What I do think is important is being inspired. Some GMs will find that in books, some in film, others in music or art. Most will probably have a blend of places they take inspiration from.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;858251They're completely lost when I explain to them which authors inspired my game; I usually get a chorus of variations on "Never heard of them" in response.

I'm not sure I see why that is a problem... if anything it frees you up to pull from those sources without Players recognition.
If the Players want Star Wars and you're aiming for Asimov... that's a different issue.

From my own experience, I appreciate GMs who have read (and watched) widely... not just reams of mainstream fantasy and scifi. I WANT them to get inspiration and ideas from places I'm not familiar with.
Playing with a group who all read and watched the same narrow scope of fiction had led me to kinda hate fan-service in games... "Oh, look! ANOTHER clever reference to The Princess Bride!"

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;858256I don't really think it comes down to being a heavy reader or reading good material even. A lot of natural storytellers I have known never even touched a book. And GMing, while I don't consider it storytelling, is more like telling a story than like writing a novel. Your speaking. People are reacting. It is a kind of public speaking. In fact, the worst GMs I've had try too hard to sound like prose from a novel. That doesn't really work well for setting the scene in an RPG in my experience. It is a whole different skill set.

What I do think is important is being inspired. Some GMs will find that in books, some in film, others in music or art. Most will probably have a blend of places they take inspiration from.

Yeah, it's true, I steal from everything.  TV, comics, Cartoons, Anime, Movies of all genres, novels, other game systems/settings, video games... If I think it's cool, and I can make something of it, consider it stolen.

Quote from: Simlasa;858257I'm not sure I see why that is a problem... if anything it frees you up to pull from those sources without Players recognition.
If the Players want Star Wars and you're aiming for Asimov... that's a different issue.

Exactly, and in the end if you turn your players onto your inspirations, so much the better.

Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;858251It's hard to run a good SF RPG when you can't find players who've read Iain Banks, Stephen Baxter, and Alastair Reynolds. But they've all heard of "The Fifth Element."  :banghead:

Hard to run a game based on those three authors, I'd imagine. But since they are a tiny fraction of SF authors, not hard to run a good SF RPG with people who have never, ever read those three authors. All three of whom are British authors of roughly the same age as me which is a rather narrow cross section of SF authors.

• Banks - name is familiar, can't recall anything by him I've read, certainly none of his novels.
• Baxter - might have read something of his, though nothing comes to mind when I skim his bibliography.
• Reynolds - nothing looks remotely familiar.

Of course they've heard of the Fifth Element. It had both Bruce Willis and Milla Javovich in it and they are way better known than almost any SF writer living or dead. Now if the only thing your players know about SF is the Fifth Element, I agree you have a problem. And if it were me, I'd choose to run something other than SF for that group.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;858256I don't really think it comes down to being a heavy reader or reading good material even. A lot of natural storytellers I have known never even touched a book. And GMing, while I don't consider it storytelling, is more like telling a story than like writing a novel. Your speaking. People are reacting. It is a kind of public speaking. In fact, the worst GMs I've had try too hard to sound like prose from a novel. That doesn't really work well for setting the scene in an RPG in my experience. It is a whole different skill set.

I disagree. I've seldom  (like maybe one session at a Con) played an RPG that was set in the same time and place that my GM is from. If the GM isn't well read, then they really need to be extremely well traveled. Otherwise the scope of what they know and can represent is going to be limited to their little slice of whatever country and city they happened to grow up and to live in. And that's just way too narrow a point of view.

Quote from: Bren;858262I disagree. I've seldom  (like maybe one session at a Con) played an RPG that was set in the same time and place that my GM is from. If the GM isn't well read, then they really need to be extremely well traveled. Otherwise the scope of what they know and can represent is going to be limited to their little slice of whatever country and city they happened to grow up and to live in. And that's just way too narrow a point of view.

You don't need to read for that though. You can pick it up from television, movies, talking with people, documentaries and radio. I am not knocking being well read but I really don't think it's the only way to be a great GM. Nor do I think it is all that necessary. The reading levels of the good GMs I have played with are all over the map.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;858263You don't need to read for that though. You can pick it up from television, movies, talking with people, documentaries and radio. I am not knocking being well read but I really don't think it's the only way to be a great GM. Nor do I think it is all that necessary. The reading levels of the good GMs I have played with are all over the map.

For anything beyond a very surface level of knowledge one will get from TV and film, I think you do need to read. Even the long documentaries like Ken Burns' Civil War are still only at a surface level of knowledge and in my experience, those are the exceptions not the norms for documentaries.

Quote from: Bren;858264For anything beyond a very surface level of knowledge one will get from TV and film, I think you do need to read. Even the long documentaries like Ken Burns' Civil War are still only at a surface level of knowledge and in my experience, those are the exceptions not the norms for documentaries.

What exactly are you looking for in your games???

Quote from: Bren;858264For anything beyond a very surface level of knowledge one will get from TV and film, I think you do need to read. Even the long documentaries like Ken Burns' Civil War are still only at a surface level of knowledge and in my experience, those are the exceptions not the norms for documentaries.

Some GMs are great at research and enhance their campaigns with it. Others take a lot of surface level knowledge and turn it into an exciting adventure. I certainly won't dispute you are probably going to learn more by reading books about the civil war than by watching documentaries (though reading the right books is just as important as how much you read). But I don't think GMing requires that kind of smarts. Again, I am not knocking being well read. I like to read a lot myself. And above all I like to read history books. But I have never really seen level of reading reflect quality in GMing in the groups I've been in. What seems to matter is that the person have sources of inspiration.