@VengerSatanis - I definitely need to play in one your campaigns someday.

Quote from: Theory of Games on September 12, 2023, 05:18:51 AM12+ is Matt Mercer territory and I'd bet money nobody here is on that level.

Matt Mercer isn't a DM, he's an actor. Stick him in a convention, give him a module with 15 minutes to read through it, and give him 6 players he's never met before and see how he does.

Aside from that, not to betray old school but I'm not sure that a numerical rating is that useful. However the different aspects are certainly something to think about, and tenbones has laid them out thoughtfully and intelligently as we've come to expect from him.

It'd probably be more useful to simply put a tick by whichever you think you're best at, and a cross by whichever you think you're worst at. Then think: would my games be improved more by emphasising my strengths, or working on my weaknesses?

In either case, most of us just need to game more. You don't get better at something never doing it. Of course, simply doing it isn't enough - you have to reflect on it afterwards. For example in my most recent game session, the players were soldier/SWAT types doing a training mission of liberating hostages in a bank robbery. Afterwards they "debriefed" with their instructors on what they felt they did right, what they could do better, were there different approaches and why they would have been better or worse, and so on.

And I as GM reflected a bit, too - I'd provided blueprints for them to plan their assault, but these were electrical and some players didn't realise this was a wire rather than a wall or furniture, etc. And as I wrote up the session for them afterwards, I realised I could have given them a bit more flavour. Instead of "he misses," it could be, "the rounds whizz past you, and into the marble wall behind, ricocheting off and sending small bits of stone flying," as that sort of description tends to bring players a bit more into the events - everyone instinctively ducks slightly when they hear that, and their character becomes more cautious, etc.

Keep gaming, and reflecting on it. Tenbones has given us a framework for that.

I got 14

Quote from: Eirikrautha on September 14, 2023, 09:22:59 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on September 14, 2023, 07:41:24 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on September 13, 2023, 11:06:18 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on September 13, 2023, 10:18:29 PM

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.

That's a very narrow definition of roleplay, and it depends on a specific play style and set of expectations.  Not only is it not a universal quality of GMs, it's not even necessarily a desirable one.  You've mistaken your preferred playstyle for RPGs...

Bluff called.

I am not saying you always need to choose the "storytelling" option. It doesn't fit every campaign and the GM's job is to juggle many hats, anyways. What I am saying is that telling a story requires some intentionality and if you don't know a thing or two about storytelling, you can't explore this direction of roleplay.

You also can't really judge other playgroups using it. I don't mean this in the sense of snowflakes not wanting to be judged...I mean that your knowledge of the subject is limited to browsing TV Tropes ten years ago. You literally do not know what you're talking about, so you have absolutely no idea how it does or doesn't combine with other game aspects.

...This is another allergic reaction to Forge-style story games, isn't it? Do I need to start prefacing my posts with trigger warnings? I don't even view those as stories beyond the fevered dreams of lobotomized hamsters; they don't know much more about storytelling than you do.

You fucking buffoon, I have a MA in English Lit.  I've published scholarly papers on Anglo-Saxon and Chaucerian texts.  I've forgotten more about storytelling than you've ever known.  When people don't agree with you, it doesn't make them ignorant; it might just mean you're wrong.  You are the poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger Effect.  You seem to think, because you've learned a little bit about the structure of stories, that you have some supreme knowledge that others around you don't share.

I recognize the elements of story, dumbass.  The difference is that I don't prioritize them over the agency of players in an RPG.  If players push forward consistently, I don't enforce a relaxation of tension, despite the fact that narrative beats tend to make better stories.  Because my players are playing a GAME.  And their fun is not limited to, or even primarily connected to, constructing a cohesive narrative.  So, anyone who says that their DMing is significantly informed by the principles of narrative structure is simply declaring to the world that they are a shitty DM.

A common Lit-major misconception.

A Literature credential is not a publishing credential. Literature classes tend to focus on classics, with Chaucer being a good example. However, Literature favors essay writing because academic publishers rank publications based on citations. It's my educated guess that you don't see too many publication classes because it would negatively interfere with a university's accreditation.

Publishing and creative writing for commercial fiction is more a blue collar field that happens to sometimes be taught at University. Popular fiction has completely different tropes than classics and you can't learn about popular fiction by studying the classics. I actually have a publishing degree, and the actual classes on creative writing focused on 19th and 20th century authors who wrote about writing. Chekhov, Forster, Vonnegut, Capote. You go further back than about 1850 and popular fiction wasn't developed enough to take to modern reverse engineering.

Regardless, my point is not that I have a piece of paper and you don't--if anything, the best way to learn this stuff is to self-educate because the university classes are not that great. My point is that classics literature and publishing popular writing are two radically different academic domains which happen to share the English Department at most Universities. 

I flat out do not have a lit related degree, so I apologize in advance if this comes off as uneducated to those among you who do. That said, I do sometimes wish I were better at describing a scene, crafting plot hooks, narrating and adjudicating actions from an in-world rather than mechanical sense, and bringing characters and in-game stories to life. I feel y'all are probably at least a bit better at that all told, and I respect it. I kinda call this story narration, as opposed to storytelling, since I fear if I ever tried for the latter I would likely railroad. Like, scene description, tale telling, dialogue writing/improv, you get it. It all feels very creative arts/writing-exercise-esque to me.

I also feel like good module writers probably have what you guys have, even if that's not necessarily the same as being a good DM who can do good improv (also something I want to learn, lol). I really respect those folks and the time and energy they put into a less well paying hobby and commercial arena. They certainly make my own life easier and my games better, even if I myself may lean a bit too much on them from time to time.

My point being... Maybe y'all don't recognize quite how good at improv/story narration you really are, even if you've had to practice to get where you are. It's inspiring, and I plan to work to become better at that sort of thing as well. But yeah, definitely give yourselves some credit on that level as well. And thank you all for your involvement and posts in the community.

Quote from: Fheredin on September 15, 2023, 07:19:43 PM
A common Lit-major misconception.

A Literature credential is not a publishing credential. Literature classes tend to focus on classics, with Chaucer being a good example. However, Literature favors essay writing because academic publishers rank publications based on citations. It's my educated guess that you don't see too many publication classes because it would negatively interfere with a university's accreditation.

Publishing and creative writing for commercial fiction is more a blue collar field that happens to sometimes be taught at University. Popular fiction has completely different tropes than classics and you can't learn about popular fiction by studying the classics. I actually have a publishing degree, and the actual classes on creative writing focused on 19th and 20th century authors who wrote about writing. Chekhov, Forster, Vonnegut, Capote. You go further back than about 1850 and popular fiction wasn't developed enough to take to modern reverse engineering.

Regardless, my point is not that I have a piece of paper and you don't--if anything, the best way to learn this stuff is to self-educate because the university classes are not that great. My point is that classics literature and publishing popular writing are two radically different academic domains which happen to share the English Department at most Universities.

What are you talking about?  First of all, the elements of story are not the domain of "modern writers" only.  Most of the storytelling techniques employed by modern fiction writers are no different in kind (but not necessarily in excellence) that those employed by everyone from the Greeks to the Middle Ages.  While some evolution has taken place in what is considered popular, any story-telling technique you think is modern, I guarantee you I can find an example of from 200+ years ago.  (BTW, just because a person specialized in a particular literature doesn't mean we didn't study works from outside those periods)

As for this:

QuoteHowever, Literature favors essay writing because academic publishers rank publications based on citations.

This is one of the most ignorant takes I've ever read.  While literary publications might feature the discussions of literature in the format of essays (though I did co-edit a creative journal in grad school that was primarily prose fiction and poetry), the discussion is of the structure, composition, and elements of the narrative works we are studying.  That's like saying that because a doctor uses a Latin term for an ailment, his remedy must be antiquated.  An essay about literary analysis is about ... literary analysis.  You, once again, have no idea what you are talking about.

(BTW, if you want to contrast a literary journal with an actual technical journal, I can point you in that direction, too.  I did my undergrad double-majored Physics and Math... so I know the difference between a technical treatise and a literary analysis... having written both...)

Out of curiosity, to Eirikrautha, have you found your training on writing and themes, say for instance character analysis and dialogue within the classics or whatnot (probably using the wrong words there) helpful for DMing? Like, if I took a free or cheap online creative writing course or the like do you think it might help with my improv? Or at least my prep? I don't want to tell a story or whatnot, so much as get better at narration and those things I mentioned in my prior post.

Alternatively, would my time better be invested in writing practice, drama exercises (if I can somehow find the time and fellow participants), or watching YouTube/trawling places like here for advice? I do DM occasionally, but to often lackluster effect, I feel.

Also, anyone else can obviously jump in on this. If my problems are improv and what I earlier termed narrating scenes/world/in-game stories/doing good dialogue (not storytelling in the traditional sense) what has helped y'all get past difficulties or build up strengths in those areas?

Quote from: KindaMeh on September 15, 2023, 08:07:26 PM
I flat out do not have a lit related degree, so I apologize in advance if this comes off as uneducated to those among you who do. That said, I do sometimes wish I were better at describing a scene, crafting plot hooks, narrating and adjudicating actions from an in-world rather than mechanical sense, and bringing characters and in-game stories to life.

I've a degree in history and literature, and honestly neither helped me in those things. What does help is a wide range of reading and watching, plus some personal experience. For example, if you go camping even for one weekend in the forest, lie there in the dark, hearing the animal noises and seeing the stars, starting a fire and so on - well, now you'll become better at describing the D&D party camping in the woods. But if you don't do that, well nowadays there are a zillion YouTube videos and blogs describing it, spending some time watching and reading this stuff will teach you a lot.

Likewise anything else, like various melee weapons, firearms, and so on. Characters and plots you can just rip off from books and movies. Obviously you don't go from zero to doing this wonderfully in one session. It takes time. And your players will help you in this, because everyone at the game table wants to have a good and fun session. They'll cut you a lot of slack, and the tiniest detail you offer they'll take and run with, and build on themselves.

"Why does the villain have that thing?" says player A.
"He's probably going to do such-and-such," says player B.
And then you, who'd only put in that thing as window dressing, say to yourself, "Actually that's a pretty good idea!" note it down and go with it.

Your feeling, even unconscious, is that players are judging you and passively waiting for you to present things. It's not true. They're ready to jump in enthusiastically, and they're grateful to you for being there, since the game can go ahead without one of the players, but it can't go ahead without the GM. So they'll give you a chance, give you the benefit of the doubt, and do their best to help you.

Quote from: KindaMeh on September 15, 2023, 08:46:57 PM
Out of curiosity, to Eirikrautha, have you found your training on writing and themes, say for instance character analysis and dialogue within the classics or whatnot (probably using the wrong words there) helpful for DMing? Like, if I took a free or cheap online creative writing course or the like do you think it might help with my improv? Or at least my prep? I don't want to tell a story or whatnot, so much as get better at narration and those things I mentioned in my prior post.

Alternatively, would my time better be invested in writing practice, drama exercises (if I can somehow find the time and fellow participants), or watching YouTube/trawling places like here for advice? I do DM occasionally, but to often lackluster effect, I feel.

Also, anyone else can obviously jump in on this. If my problems are improv and what I called story narration (not storytelling) what has helped y'all get past difficulties or build up strengths in those areas?

Being a good DM involves so many different techniques, that almost anything you do to exercise the relevant parts of your brain will be helpful.  You need to be careful, however, not to over apply the techniques.  Or rather, don't fixate on a handful of techniques as if they are the "answer".  Part of being your own good DM is synthesizing a mix of techniques that fit your goals. 

Take for example, listening to a variety of music, playing a musical instrument, singing, composing, etc.  I can almost guarantee that doing several of those things seriously will, as a side effect, improve a GM's sense of subtle pacing.  But you don't go chase those thing as if they are going to make your pacing perfect (they won't), nor are they the only way to get those improvements (they aren't), and if you do decide to study music, to get the most benefit, it should be for its own sake, because it is interesting.

Another exercise that will strengthen "narrative muscles" is to parrot poetry.  That is, take an existing piece of verse (not free verse), keep the same syllables and flow, but replace most of the words to completely change the meaning. The result will be garbage poetry.  However, doing this will give some insight into what makes the original good.  This is one of the poetical equivalents of practicing scales in music.  However, the main reason to do this is not to be a better GM but as exercises towards eventually writing your own poetry.  Becoming more poetical will, as a side effect, likely help your narrative descriptions have more punch in fewer words.

Those are only examples.  Getting new experiences by living is one of the best DM training things you can ever do, and it doesn't much matter what those new experiences are.

Quote from: KindaMeh on September 15, 2023, 08:46:57 PM
Out of curiosity, to Eirikrautha, have you found your training on writing and themes, say for instance character analysis and dialogue within the classics or whatnot (probably using the wrong words there) helpful for DMing? Like, if I took a free or cheap online creative writing course or the like do you think it might help with my improv? Or at least my prep? I don't want to tell a story or whatnot, so much as get better at narration and those things I mentioned in my prior post.

Alternatively, would my time better be invested in writing practice, drama exercises (if I can somehow find the time and fellow participants), or watching YouTube/trawling places like here for advice? I do DM occasionally, but to often lackluster effect, I feel.

Also, anyone else can obviously jump in on this. If my problems are improv and what I earlier termed narrating scenes/world/in-game stories/doing good dialogue (not storytelling in the traditional sense) what has helped y'all get past difficulties or build up strengths in those areas?

Ehhh, not really.  Some plot points can be helpful for inventing what is happening in the setting, and coming up with characters on the fly I will occasionally steal mannerisms or personalities from literature (but you could easily do the same from movies or TV shows).  I mainly run sandbox campaigns, sometimes with a long-term existential threat, but usually not.  So I really don't use much of what has been referred to above as "story mechanics."

Honestly, the best way to get better at improvising material is to... improvise material.  I'd avoid creative writing or improv workshops, just because they aren't really focused on the kind of improvisational techniques you need for a roleplaying game.  I find that the sorts of things I need on the spur of the moment defy direct preparation.  When my players decide to enter the sewers to see if they can infiltrate the stronghold, a general knowledge of how sewers work, what they are likely to be made of and contain, how to access them, etc., is far more important that how to improv a clever voice.  So I'd say a well-rounded investigation of the elements of your setting (medieval, sci-fi, modern, etc.) is far more valuable than studying characterization.

As well, when it comes to description or presenting the "scene," I find that the two most important tools I use are details and vocabulary.  Thinking in terms of the sights, smells, sounds, and tactile stimuli help paint a verbal picture for the players.  On the surface this is similar to some facets of creative writing, but really it is a matter of being able to picture the place or situation you are creating for the players and doesn't require any special skills or training.  Having read a wide variety of literature probably doesn't hurt, but I don't think it is necessary, either.  I also find that being able to describe similar things using different words helps to keep my players from getting bored with the descriptions, so a decent vocabulary is helpful (the twentieth room with the "smell of rotting flesh" pretty much loses all uniqueness and impact).  Much of my vocab was probably gained via reading literature, but, once again, I don't think that necessarily means that literature is the only vehicle for such acquisition.  If you feel that presenting the world to your players in an engaging and convincing manner is a weakness, then looking at how other people describe things doesn't hurt.  But it's just a small part of what RPG "improvisation" really is.  It's part psychology ("What will grip my players?"), part literary ("How can I paint a picture in their head?"), part verisimilitude ("What is believable and authentic in this moment?"), and part reactionary ("How can I play off of what they just did/said/believe?"). 

And it's also about recognizing how people interact with the world around them.  One of the first things I used to teach my students was how to spot the important ideas is walls of fictional prose text (some authors can be very descriptive and wordy... I think it was Mark Twain that said Herman Melville could pack a sentence into a whole paragraph).  The keys: look for things repeated and things out of place.  You don't need to describe what the players expect to see; describe what is unusual about the scene.  If you mention the temperature multiple times, your players will instinctively assume that the temperature is somehow important or of significance... so it should be (nothing irritates players more than unintentional red herrings).  People walking into a blood-soaked room aren't going to notice the tile patterns on the floor first... it'll be all the blood that catches their attention first!  So be aware of what you are describing and how it relates to what people would actually notice in real life.  Once again, a skill that is related to literary analysis, but not exclusive to it.

So I'd say practice by running games.  Then practice by running more games.  Get feedback (and use your own senses... you'll know when you have your players engaged) and be self-critical.  Finally, as an ultimate step, practice by running even more games.  There's no shortcut.  Experience is the best teacher...

  KindaMeh, you have to give yourself permission to fail along the way to grow into success. Yes, it's just that hard... and simple. 

You have to let go of the 'accreditization of everything'. That's theoretical stuff, fun for laboratory research, often up in its own ass in fear of theory failure, ready to split every hair. But it is the application, the play, the uncontrollable reality that is the real crucible. And it's a lot less serious in stakes, and people in it a lot more forgiving, than we think.

Stop overthinking and play!

Quote from: Opaopajr on September 16, 2023, 03:22:46 AM
KindaMeh, you have to give yourself permission to fail along the way to grow into success. Yes, it's just that hard... and simple. 

You have to let go of the 'accreditization of everything'. That's theoretical stuff, fun for laboratory research, often up in its own ass in fear of theory failure, ready to split every hair. But it is the application, the play, the uncontrollable reality that is the real crucible. And it's a lot less serious in stakes, and people in it a lot more forgiving, than we think.

Stop overthinking and play!

Very good advice! I really think that a lot of the problem comes from would-be DMs watching lots of play from people streaming online and getting the impression that they have to meet a certain performance standard to even try. Never forget that unless you are a paid DM that you are just a participant like everyone else. You are not some performer that everyone is expecting to give them a show. Just chill and run the game. Learn from that session, take notes and run some more.

Thank you all for your responses and encouragement. Much appreciated. 

Quote from: Eirikrautha on September 15, 2023, 08:33:36 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on September 15, 2023, 07:19:43 PM
A common Lit-major misconception.

A Literature credential is not a publishing credential. Literature classes tend to focus on classics, with Chaucer being a good example. However, Literature favors essay writing because academic publishers rank publications based on citations. It's my educated guess that you don't see too many publication classes because it would negatively interfere with a university's accreditation.

Publishing and creative writing for commercial fiction is more a blue collar field that happens to sometimes be taught at University. Popular fiction has completely different tropes than classics and you can't learn about popular fiction by studying the classics. I actually have a publishing degree, and the actual classes on creative writing focused on 19th and 20th century authors who wrote about writing. Chekhov, Forster, Vonnegut, Capote. You go further back than about 1850 and popular fiction wasn't developed enough to take to modern reverse engineering.

Regardless, my point is not that I have a piece of paper and you don't--if anything, the best way to learn this stuff is to self-educate because the university classes are not that great. My point is that classics literature and publishing popular writing are two radically different academic domains which happen to share the English Department at most Universities.

What are you talking about?  First of all, the elements of story are not the domain of "modern writers" only.  Most of the storytelling techniques employed by modern fiction writers are no different in kind (but not necessarily in excellence) that those employed by everyone from the Greeks to the Middle Ages.  While some evolution has taken place in what is considered popular, any story-telling technique you think is modern, I guarantee you I can find an example of from 200+ years ago.  (BTW, just because a person specialized in a particular literature doesn't mean we didn't study works from outside those periods)

As for this:

QuoteHowever, Literature favors essay writing because academic publishers rank publications based on citations.

This is one of the most ignorant takes I've ever read.  While literary publications might feature the discussions of literature in the format of essays (though I did co-edit a creative journal in grad school that was primarily prose fiction and poetry), the discussion is of the structure, composition, and elements of the narrative works we are studying.  That's like saying that because a doctor uses a Latin term for an ailment, his remedy must be antiquated.  An essay about literary analysis is about ... literary analysis.  You, once again, have no idea what you are talking about.

(BTW, if you want to contrast a literary journal with an actual technical journal, I can point you in that direction, too.  I did my undergrad double-majored Physics and Math... so I know the difference between a technical treatise and a literary analysis... having written both...)

You can't publish in the modern story environment without actually understanding it. Sure, "round characters" technically existed before Forster gave a test to characterize them, but because we now have a formal test for them, they are now far more prevalent than they ever were in antiquity. I would hazard a guess they're about 100 times more common in 20th century and later writing than they were in the Greco-Roman or Medieval eras, but I can say with confidence they are at least 20 times more common.

This is also true when you look at the history of the speculative genres because they were not particularly well codified before the 1940s.

But here's the real problem I have with what you say; you have now stated that you have effectively three degrees in two radically different fields, but you haven't demonstrated to me that you've even read a Wikipedia article on Chaucer, let alone the original. There's also the decorum of proving a negative case; academics are usually quite reluctant to argue negative cases because it's pretty likely someone could prove them wrong, and they are very unlikely to argue their field of study is irrelevant or that they don't use it for something because that's asking to get their funding cut.

I'm not saying you don't have a degree--these days bear scat in the woods contains tapeworms with BAs in it--but if you don't know anything relevant...I kinda suspect these degrees weren't worth it.

Quote from: Fheredin on September 17, 2023, 02:49:02 PM
I would hazard a guess they're about 100 times more common in 20th century and later writing than they were in the Greco-Roman or Medieval eras, but I can say with confidence they are at least 20 times more common.

And the first thing we learn when pursuing a degree is to back up our assertions with evidence.  Now, provide your statistics to prove your assertions above.  Because the vast majority of ALL characters ever written are flat characters, and this is especially true in modern media.  Most authors don't both to create attributes for characters that won't be needed, and every character doesn't need to be rounded for a story to be effective (some times it can even be a detriment).  So I don't see how you pulling numbers out of your ass is any sign of expertise.

In fact, I've yet to see any information provided by you that shows even a basic knowledge of literature or storytelling.  What's your brilliant insight here?  You keep telling us that you know more than we do about storytelling, but you never actually say anything about storytelling.  So, put your money where your mouth is.  Describe this perspective you have on RPGs and storytelling.  Because, based on what you've posted so far in this thread, you haven't said anything a middle-schooler with Wikipedia couldn't babble out...