Quote from: The Shaman;292079Certainly all referees, game masters, or whatever are not created equal, but I've met very few who were indifferent to their role behind the screen.
Maybe that needs to be a different thread: how do we help game masters to be better "ultimate arbiters?"
After The Shaman's suggestion, I thought we could have a discussion about the DM's role as referee and decision maker. How do you become a decent referee at the game table?
I don't mean to be exhaustive by any means. I don't have the monopoly of ideas on this. Some suggestions:
The DM should know the rules. That's a given. You can't adjudicate and make decisions without first knowing how your decision might affect the game system as a whole. You need to know the game system to be able to make informed decisions.
The DM, to be a Referee, should act as such. This means the DM has to be fair. Decision-making isn't about the DM "keeping the players under control". Decisions should never be made under a "DM versus Players" paradigm. That directly leads to disaster at the game table. What making rulings is about is to keep the game going, to keep the players entertained, to not give unfair advantages to anyone around the table, to provide further opportunities to the players to have fun with the game.
It's about keeping the "fun" alive, so to speak. Which brings me to my next suggestion:
Listen to the Players' feedback. Very important. I think a good DM-referee should welcome feedback in any case and listen carefully to what's being said. The players should be aware that feedback is always welcome, but should also know that such feedback should not break the flow of the game. At my own game table, there's a basic rule that feedback, objections to rulings and such should take place before or after the game. Never during the session itself, or just as a brief remark. No long-winded arguments during the game.
Don't be afraid to call the shots in the end. Okay. So you've got an issue, propose something, and someone raises an objection. You've listened to all sides on the issue. At some point, you should make a decision. Players should be aware that you're the one doing the decision-making in the end, and just drop it once it's done. If they aren't able to do this, then maybe they ought to take a step back, breathe a little and come back when they aren't so worked up about a rule.
Okay. That's it for now. What would you suggest?
"No" is not a word to be afraid of. When you disallow something (be it character class, magic item, race, spell, or whatever) you are establishing a boundary within which the game can be played according to a certain mood or genre you wish to invoke. Saying "No" does not automatically mean that the GM is an asshole. Often, saying "No" just means that you do not want your game to become like a game of tennis without a net.
Establish game boundaries for the players so they know what and what is not possible in your game universe.
For example, we are playing a Star Wars game after Ep III but before Ep IV. The tone of the game is not cinematic and heroic Star Wars but more gritty and Firefly'esque. Knowing that we are playing a more gritty Sci Fi game than the science fantasy that is Star Wars, helps the players realize what is within the realm of possibility for their characters.
Its true that GM decisions should not be motivated under "Keeping the players under control", but it can definitely be motivated by "keeping A (1) player under control"!
A lot of what a GM has to do is make sure that no single primma-donna player wrecks it for the rest of the people involved, either by manipulating the rules, demanding or trying to rob more game-time for himself, or not letting other players participate in decision making or action or roleplay.
Your job is to try to make sure ALL of the players, as a group, are having fun. Or rather, because really you can't make anyone have fun who doesn't want to; to make sure that no one is ruining anyone else's fun.
RPGPundit
Front-Load Player Information
This encompasses several ideas, however the gist of it is to give the players as much information about your game, House Rules, expectations, etc., up front before you ever start creating characters.
I'm flexible as far as House Rules go, as long as their outlined beforehand. Nothing peeves me off more than some ruling or House Rule popping up in the middle of the game that wasn't there previously, or was changed up mid-stream. I don't like shifting rules while the game is in operation.
So, front-load your players with information. Give them a handout of your House Rules. Give them a handout of your expectations as a GM and expectations for the players. Discuss House Rules with them before the game starts. Talk about the campaign, in broad strokes, so the players have some idea of which direction the end game might take. This will allow the players to buy into the campaign concept, and give them fuel for character backgrounds and motivations. Talk to them about what kind of characters would best fit with the campaign story line.
Really, this just means being organized and providing a codified document of your system House Rules and expectations and goals for the game.
Always wear something sexy. I also suggest keeping a potato stuffed into your pants; it produces shock and awe in your players, and provides you with an emergency snack.
Err on the side of the players.
RPGs are not competitions, nor are they exercises in player wish fulfillment. If the flow and fun of the game would be enhanced by a minor ruling on the side of the players, go for it. I am not talking about free magic items, but if they roleplayed out their search for a secret door and the secret door is the only way to the next dungeon level, let them find the damn door...maybe by having wandering monsters waltz thru that secret door!
If two opposing rulings are equally fair, roll the dice.
Sometimes a rule mixes with a situation in an odd way where a referee's ruling could go two ways, both seemingly equally fair. Don't bicker or dither. Announce the two options and roll 1D6. 1-3 it's Option and 4-6 it's Option B. Then quickly move on.
Sometimes you are going to be wrong. It's cool, keep playing.
The best GM make mistakes. If you can fix it behind the screen, that rocks. If not, rewind the action if possible or negate the penalty caused by your mistake. But whatever you do, do it quickly and keep the game going.
And the most important rule...
If Aos offers you mashed potatoes, just say no.
French fries, anyone?
With curds?
No, I'm saving those for Kyle.
Better? By who's definition? "Better" for most people generally equates to "More Like Me|How I'd Do It!" Thus "Better" according to Benoist does not equate to "Better" according to Pundit.
-clash
I love all these suggestions so far.
I suggest observing other GMs for techniques. Learn what they do right and what they do wrong. Steal the good stuff and try to be cognizant of what the mistakes and pitfalls are.
Another thing is to be mindful of pacing. That is- have a set start time and end time, and keep an eye out for the energy level. If you get close to the set end time and everyone is still energetic, get consensus and keep going. If you see dice-stacking or it starts to get a bit weary for players, either bring people back into focus however you can or find an ending for the session.
Take player suggestions to heart. If one guy wants to play a dwarf and you didn't have any dwarven kingdom in the campaign or whatever, (and it's like.. you could but you never got around to it..) work with that player to set one up.
Quote from: flyingmice;292318Better? By who's definition? "Better" for most people generally equates to "More Like Me|How I'd Do It!" Thus "Better" according to Benoist does not equate to "Better" according to Pundit.
-clash
I think we're just sharing GM tips here, try not to get hung up on the wording..
Quote from: Spinachcat;292295And the most important rule...
If Aos offers you mashed potatoes, just say no.
Especially if the mashed potatoes already have gravy on them.
Quote from: Abyssal Maw;292319If you get close to the set end time and everyone is still energetic, get consensus and keep going. If you see dice-stacking or it starts to get a bit weary for players, either bring people back into focus however you can or find an ending for the session.
Or roll another joint.
Quote from: flyingmice;292318Better? By who's definition? "Better" for most people generally equates to "More Like Me|How I'd Do It!" Thus "Better" according to Benoist does not equate to "Better" according to Pundit.
-clash
Yes, there is such a thing as improving as a DM-referee at the game table. It isn't about "the way 'I' do it", or other people wouldn't have posted their own, and I wouldn't have posted a thread about it in the first place but would have written an actual blog entry about it instead. After, if you can't take advice on your own without feeling threatened in your manhood, that's your problem.
I too love all the suggestions so far!
Quote from: droog;292324Or roll another joint.
Right..What Droog said!
Quote from: Benoist;292325Yes, there is such a thing as improving as a DM-referee at the game table. It isn't about "the way 'I' do it", or other people wouldn't have posted their own, and I wouldn't have posted a thread about it in the first place but would have written an actual blog entry about it instead. After, if you can't take advice on your own without feeling threatened in your manhood, that's your problem.
I too love all the suggestions so far!
WTF? Threatened manhood? Were you planning to bite it off or something? What are you smoking? "Yes, there is such a thing as improving as a GM-Referee at the game table." I agree. I merely pointed out that "better" is an individual judgment and not an objective fact. That point sometimes gets a little lost around here. I'll go back to my excluded middle and sulk about my threatened manhood now, covering it with both hands to protect it from hungry Benoists.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;292331I merely pointed out that "better" is an individual judgment and not an objective fact. That point sometimes gets a little lost around here.
Lost? It's MIA, presumed dead.
Cool, we were short on contentious threads.
Shut the fuck up, Mary Sunshine! Roll a d20!
Pass the doobie to the left... now!
I always noticed that people would pack me cones when the fights got really tough. A friend of mine even muttered something about 'soothing the savage beast' once.
Expand your knowledge.
Read widely and deeply. Bookmark Wikipedia and spend a little time surfing articles. Watch documentaries. Learn more about the world--real and fictional. Learn about the real world so you can find interesting things to use in your game, discern what would be fun to include and what would be fun to exclude. Learn about all of the fictional worlds--mythological, popular, etc.--that play into your games, and for the same reasons. All the great techniques in the world can't help you if you don't have a body of knowledge to use with them.
(e.g.: The original publisher of DC's Captain Marvel was Fawcett Publications, which was originated in my hometown of Robbinsdale, Minnesota- a suburb of Minneapolis. Minneapolis (and its twin city of St. Paul) is the site for the magical city-state of Tolkeen in Palladium's RIFTS. Tolkeen is the target of conquest for the Coalition States, the iconic Evil Empire of the setting. What if Tolkeen had Captain Marvel as a champion and protector? What if this story had more cultural subtext, like using the CS-vs.-Tolkeen scenario to describe the rivalry of both Fawcett vs. DC and the Twin Cities vs. Chicago? Would this be fun, or not?)
Communicate with your players. I don't know if this will make you a "better" Ref, but it sure makes gaming easier.
Regards,
David R
I think the one major skills most GM's lack is their ability of knowing how to "dramatize" to them within the context of the game. A book I highly recommend is Doug Lipman's "Improving Your Storytelling" as there's a lot of good advice within that can easily be applied to GM'ing. Also " Imaginary Worlds" by Lin Cater, especially the later chapters on creating an interesting fantasy World. I'm pretty sure this book had an influence on early designers such as Gygax, Barker and Hargrave back in the day.
Quote from: flyingmice;292331WTF? Threatened manhood? Were you planning to bite it off or something? What are you smoking? "Yes, there is such a thing as improving as a GM-Referee at the game table." I agree. I merely pointed out that "better" is an individual judgment and not an objective fact. That point sometimes gets a little lost around here. I'll go back to my excluded middle and sulk about my threatened manhood now, covering it with both hands to protect it from hungry Benoists.
-clash
Look Clash, everyone knows you suck as a GM and, besides, you are doing it wrong. Get with the program. There is one and only one way to do this right and we know it...well, you and your threatened manhood know it too! So, man up and admit your GMing sucks and get on board here. By the gods man, you would think we kicked you in the stones or something.
My advice to you, as always, is get a really big d20 to compensate....ah, to ensure the players fear your dicktorial rule. Got it? Good. ;)