Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2023, 09:37:40 PM
I would say Facility is very system dependent. The others are more universal and can apply to multiple systems.

Absolutely. I am nowhere near as good in my Facility of say Stars without Number, as I am with D&D1e,2e,3e. Likewise with SWADE. Enthusiasm will also wax/wane.

Self evaluation is always tricky.  Especially when it's as subjective as being a good GM.  You might be the greatest GM for a particular table and shit for another group of nerds you never mesh with.  There are practical skills that are needed that we can improve but that's only part of the story.  Hell, I could be a solid 20 with this list and still be a shit GM.

Quote from: tenbones on September 12, 2023, 11:21:48 AM

Quote from: Theory of Games on September 12, 2023, 05:18:51 AM
It's quite clear some of your are full of shit: scores of 12+? 

I'm rocking an 8, but unlike the rest of you, I provided an honest assessment of my GMing abilities. Most GMs are gonna fall between 7-9 just based on reality. 12+ is Matt Mercer territory and I'd bet money nobody here is on that level.

But also keep in mind, he runs a very different kind of game than 99% of all the other forms of TTRPG's - he's running a performative gameshow and his other skills funnel directly into that. And he's *very* good at it. His players are professional actors, they show up to play/perform, on time, they know how to *perform* as players for obvious reasons. They certainly aren't bringing their baggage that other players have to the camera for your consumption. They don't have "bad days" or "bad sessions" - by design.

TL;DR: Critical Role is basically the TTRPG version of Who's Line is it, Anyway? and anybody playing with Wayne Brady would look like a fantastic GM.

Quote from: tenbones on September 12, 2023, 11:24:36 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2023, 09:37:40 PM
I would say Facility is very system dependent. The others are more universal and can apply to multiple systems.

Absolutely. I am nowhere near as good in my Facility of say Stars without Number, as I am with D&D1e,2e,3e. Likewise with SWADE. Enthusiasm will also wax/wane.

Yeah, and the breakpoints for each tier in Facility can vary quite a bit from system to system, inherently too.  Hero System has a very steep learning curve.  Once you get it, it's not all that difficult to get up into the 3-4 range (assuming interest).  5 is difficult because of the sheer amount of stuff, but it's doable with time. 

Meanwhile, Toon is a system that an interested GM can go from 1 to 2 after a couple of sessions, given any kind of prior experience with RPGs.  Really mastering Facility in Toon is deceptively difficult, though, for the amount of material.  Part of it is understanding the source material at more than a surface level.  The game can't really teach you that, only show you some examples and hope you get it.  Another part is that you can't run Toon correctly and refer to the rules at all during play.  So it is kind of a "deep breathe, plunge in for 20 minutes, do the best you can" thing, then repeat after a break.

Don't get me wrong, Toon is a much easier system than Hero to learn.  However, it's not as easy to master as it would appear at first glance.

Currently, I'd say I'm a 15 on your scale, but that's a deceptively high answer. Assuming I'm using my own system, I default into gamemaster status in Facility and Adjudication skills because I designed the bloody thing. If we were talking a published system, my best system would be SWADE, and my score would probably be around 10.

I'm really not great at Improv and Enthusiasm is something I've been hit or miss at. I tend to filibuster major changes to the session break, when I can actually think about what I want to do with things. As I've said elsewhere, I don't view myself as a particularly gifted GM. In fact, one of the key reasons I switched from GMing to game design was so I could design myself crutches out of the mechanics.

I also suggest you add familiarity with Storytelling formulae. One of the biggest things I can bring to a game table is that I used to be a developmental editor (before accepting that Academia and book publishing is...a mess and I should do my own thing) and I know things like story structures and character arcs quite well.

• Do you know Vonnegut's Rules for Writing a Short Story?


• Do you know what a Character Arc is?


• Do you know what the shapes a story can take are?


• Do you know the difference between a Flat and a Round character?

As a freebie, here's Vonnegut explaining the shapes of stories. I use Vonnegut because he was a humor writer and is good at making learning this stuff amusing.

I'd put my self at a 9, maybe a 10. Most of that is my enthusiasm is a 4 or 5. I've been DMing since I got Holmes and I always prefer the big chair. There are few things that don't make me go "I could game that", but I'm not sure I'm quite proficient enough to doing that to get a 5.

My weak spot is facility, in large part because of laziness and disorganization in prep and getting too easily swept up in the things. I rate it a 2.

The others are solid 3s and I just need more time behind the screen with deliberate work to up them.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 11, 2023, 09:37:40 PM
I would say Facility is very system dependent. The others are more universal and can apply to multiple systems.

While true it also reflects a bit of personality.

I put myself at 2 because I get scattered and lack focus. My last long running game I relied heavily on two players as my rules expert instead of being the rules expert at the table. That is not unique.

One reason I avoid Rolemaster or DragonQuest or other very complex games I'd love to run is knowing myself well enough to know I probably won't put the needed work in having the bare minimum facility in running them.

As a side note, that's the big reason I love B/X and clones...not nostaligia but knowing today they are systems that match my willingness/ability to put the work in to have an acceptable facility.

Quote from: PulpHerb on September 12, 2023, 06:17:42 PM
I'd put my self at a 9, maybe a 10. Most of that is my enthusiasm is a 4 or 5. I've been DMing since I got Holmes and I always prefer the big chair. There are few things that don't make me go "I could game that", but I'm not sure I'm quite proficient enough to doing that to get a 5.

My weak spot is facility, in large part because of laziness and disorganization in prep and getting too easily swept up in the things. I rate it a 2.

The others are solid 3s and I just need more time behind the screen with deliberate work to up them.

By the math and reading your post, you're a 15.  Also, facility is the easiest thing to get to a solid 3 and it doesn't take that much more effort.  It's more about technique than lots of work.

Quote from: BadApple on September 12, 2023, 06:23:43 PM

Quote from: PulpHerb on September 12, 2023, 06:17:42 PM
I'd put my self at a 9, maybe a 10. Most of that is my enthusiasm is a 4 or 5. I've been DMing since I got Holmes and I always prefer the big chair. There are few things that don't make me go "I could game that", but I'm not sure I'm quite proficient enough to doing that to get a 5.

My weak spot is facility, in large part because of laziness and disorganization in prep and getting too easily swept up in the things. I rate it a 2.

The others are solid 3s and I just need more time behind the screen with deliberate work to up them.

By the math and reading your post, you're a 15.  Also, facility is the easiest thing to get to a solid 3 and it doesn't take that much more effort.  It's more about technique than lots of work.

2+3+3+4 = 12

or 13

Opps *hides math degree*

Oh, and this math error shows my problem with facility

Quote from: PulpHerb on September 12, 2023, 06:25:00 PM

Quote from: BadApple on September 12, 2023, 06:23:43 PM

Quote from: PulpHerb on September 12, 2023, 06:17:42 PM
I'd put my self at a 9, maybe a 10. Most of that is my enthusiasm is a 4 or 5. I've been DMing since I got Holmes and I always prefer the big chair. There are few things that don't make me go "I could game that", but I'm not sure I'm quite proficient enough to doing that to get a 5.

My weak spot is facility, in large part because of laziness and disorganization in prep and getting too easily swept up in the things. I rate it a 2.

The others are solid 3s and I just need more time behind the screen with deliberate work to up them.

By the math and reading your post, you're a 15.  Also, facility is the easiest thing to get to a solid 3 and it doesn't take that much more effort.  It's more about technique than lots of work.

2+3+3+4 = 12

or 13

Opps *hides math degree*

Oh, and this math error shows my problem with facility

Stupid me just put in an extra category and added 3.   

Either way, don't undervalue yourself.

I'd give myself a 10, but a full 40% of that comes from enthusiasm and engagement, not actually being good at it. For mechanical mastery, 3, I can handle the rules just fine, and am not averse to homebrewing once I feel I have the system down well enough. I'd say I'm about a 2, though, with respect to adjudication, on account of issues linked into my major weak point... 1 in my ability to improvise on the fly. I can alter modules or (recently also) seriously pre-prepped sessions slightly on the fly, but that's about as far as I go while maintaining my comfort zone. This means I very often have to try to vacate said zone, oftentimes with subpar quality as the result. Character dialogue outside of scripted events and anticipated actions is difficult for me, and I find I tend to broadly describe what folks say rather than actually saying it. Likewise, I struggle making things up whole cloth rather than extrapolating from prior prep or module worldbuilding. Random tables are usable, but making them come to life constitutes a struggle. So in a sense I do feel this system overrates me a bit. Enthusiasm and mechanical comprehension/alteration are indeed helpful... But not having the ability to adapt and adjudicate well will kill the quality of your game, and there's a reason why I am seldom a group's first choice of GM, lol. Might be something to say for more general dramatic acting/story narration/creativity too, though I won't complain at getting a higher score by right of their exclusion. 

Quote from: Fheredin on September 12, 2023, 06:07:07 PM
Currently, I'd say I'm a 15 on your scale, but that's a deceptively high answer. Assuming I'm using my own system, I default into gamemaster status in Facility and Adjudication skills because I designed the bloody thing. If we were talking a published system, my best system would be SWADE, and my score would probably be around 10.

I'm really not great at Improv and Enthusiasm is something I've been hit or miss at. I tend to filibuster major changes to the session break, when I can actually think about what I want to do with things. As I've said elsewhere, I don't view myself as a particularly gifted GM. In fact, one of the key reasons I switched from GMing to game design was so I could design myself crutches out of the mechanics.

I also suggest you add familiarity with Storytelling formulae. One of the biggest things I can bring to a game table is that I used to be a developmental editor (before accepting that Academia and book publishing is...a mess and I should do my own thing) and I know things like story structures and character arcs quite well.

• Do you know Vonnegut's Rules for Writing a Short Story?


• Do you know what a Character Arc is?


• Do you know what the shapes a story can take are?


• Do you know the difference between a Flat and a Round character?

As a freebie, here's Vonnegut explaining the shapes of stories. I use Vonnegut because he was a humor writer and is good at making learning this stuff amusing.

What does storytelling have to do with running a game?

One of the issues of the hobby, especially today, is that there are people that give advice on GMing, but there are no standards as to what IS good GMing. It's do these "5-things and be a good GM". There are no clear indicators on what exactly you're striving towards. Mainly because the advice is geared toward appeasing ones players instead of setting the axis down upon which your world spins.

So there is no established process for someone that is essentially left to their own devices to figure out. Today, we constantly reinvent the wheel unnecessarily. YES that is what we did in the past, we had little choice in that matter. With the flood of new players that have come into the hobby, there should be framework for more experienced GM's to point to and to hand down this knowledge for our hobby to continue to flourish. Especially with the direction WotC is going. This is a huge opportunity for independent gaming. We should take full advantage of it - whether you're running a private game, or whether you're a publisher/creator.

We should care about our gaming and that starts at our table. Outside of the need to be unified against corporate asshattery that is WotC, surely we can be united on framing a set of standards for GMing that people can all benefit from. Whether you *agree* on the framing is irrelevant - the framing is there for us to discuss and if you GM, you'll be in there somewhere to find some ideas for YOU.

I'll be posting more in this thread about methods to deal with perceived holes in their "game" as GM's. And obviously others are welcome. The goal should be to cultivate the enthusiasm to GM for its own sake. And *push* your own boundaries to levels that you're comfortable with, but with enough effort you can see possibilities beyond your own expectations.

I do notice a lot of people, both in this thread, and in my many discussions off this forum, rate themselves hardest on Improvisation. I expected that. I'll address that first in a later post.

Quote from: tenbones on September 13, 2023, 05:57:29 PM

I do notice a lot of people, both in this thread, and in my many discussions off this forum, rate themselves hardest on Improvisation. I expected that. I'll address that first in a later post.

Improvisation relies on so many different techniques that it can be all over the place in the same session.  Depends on what needs to be improvised.  By now, some things I can improvise half asleep.  Other things, no matter how much I work at it, no matter how many tricks I pull, it just doesn't fly.  For example, I simply cannot make up a name off the cuff without a huge risk of it being off. 

GM Preparation for me largely consists of having things handy that are either difficult for me to improvise or that are too distracting to do in a rush all the time.  I can improvise a monster in a system/setting that I know well, but I'd rather not  Give me a name and a hint of a personality, and I can improvise an NPC just fine.  Give me a name and make me come up with the personality off the cuff, I can do it, but there might be a little hesitation.  No name?  Flounder awkwardly for 20-30 seconds that feels to me like an eternity.  Nope, gave up worrying about it long time ago.  Better to just have that list of names handy. 

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 13, 2023, 07:21:26 AM
What does storytelling have to do with running a game?

Storytelling improves the roleplay experience by adding a direction to the campaign. Your character isn't just gaining power; they're actually learning a moral lesson which connects the main story to their backstory or the character's motivations.