What makes a good DM, a good DM?

Hello and good evening to you all, Community! I have a question, though it's more of a curiosity...what makes a good DM, well...a good DM? You see, I've always wanted to become a DM ever since our group started to become a little more interested into various tabletops, ranging from DND3.5, Pathfinder to even the obscure Unknown Armies set up. But, all this time, I've been considering just what makes a DMer well, a great one since I do have a plot idea in mind. Yes, I am still a newb who just got his feet wet in Pathfinder. I'm looking for some advice on how to DM or just what qualities makes a good DM, if people would be so willing to share. Many thanks! -Solros

A lot depends on the people you are playing with, but here are some tips that might help you. Don't make your narrative too complex.  Everybody loves a good political drama with evil schemes being sorted out behind the shadows, however, usually those scenes that get sorted out behind the shadows are done outside the purview of the party, and ultimately will lead to too much exposition on your part.  If the party are the ones handling the evil schemes behind the shadows, if the scenario is too complex, your players will rarely follow the crumb trail you want them walk down.  I believe the acronym is K.I.S.S. Keep your villain present and visible.  Nobody likes a final boss that appears out of nowhere at the end of the story.  Have your villain thwart your parties efforts at every turn, have your villain taunt your players for their mistakes, make your players hate the villain as much as the PCs are supposed to hate the villain. Don't be afraid to say 'Yes.'  If you slaved over an encounter for hours to bring it to perfect balance just to have one of your players find a funner and simpler way to circumvent the scenario, go ahead and say 'Yes.'  Your players will always think of something you didn't, and giving them the latitude to 'beat' you at your own game will give them a lot of satisfaction.  Unfortunately you just wasted hours of your life for them to not even witness your master stroke, but, I guess it was not as brilliant as you thought if they circumvented it.  Maybe you will be able to reuse that scenario later on and plug up that hole that smarmy player bested you with.  Nessecity is the mother of all invention.

The first and most important step to being a great DM is being a DM period. That's just a jab at the player to DM ratio we have on roll20 ;P There are 36 basic plots in literature, so you don't need to worry about originality so much as the dilivery. Telling a story is like telling a joke in that sense.  Say yes to everything , if it's a bad idea let them know failure has dire consequences, hopefully they get the point. Obviously there are acceptions.  Keep your facts strait and notes on hand, an NPC forgetting his own name is a bit of a buzzkill. 

If you need to let a player go, let them go. Also in my first campaign, My players needed healing BAD, and there was actually a character who I could have made a healer pretty easily If I'd just modified the module slightly.

Aha. I see indeed. Well, I...given my self-perceived style, I'm more of a 'determinist' type. I've been like such as a roleplayer as well. The type I feel is that I give players the illusion of freedom. Sure they did something to circumvent something, but overall the result will always be the same for them, as opposed to making it freeform. Tell me, is there a 'style' I should attempt? And any kind of advise for exposition? Hohoho. I shall indeed. To what extent can I allow freedom? I'm intending on making a few things purely luck based, such as who among the group gets X or X happens to person. Also, to what degree can a DM be transparent? Can I roll in public all the time or...? Also, is there any kind of material that would help me get better at it? Or...? Many thanks!

83 free  modules.  Reading over them can give ideas and help with balance and progression ideas. I've never run a module but they make a good "how to". Also if you have the time, podcasts are a fun way to listen in on other DMs. 

No one can tell you how to DM. It's more an art than a science, really. Game design and GMing are different animals and being great at one doesn't always translate directly to the other. That said, experience is the best teacher: GM and enjoy it, the good with the bad. The more you do it, the better you'll get. I've been at it over 30 years, since 1st ed AD&D (after the little brown books, but I have those, too.) Here are a few things I'd say throw in the back of your brain and let simmer-- some are personal playstyle issues, so take them as you will. No campaign is written in stone. Don't allow the rules to stop the game more than necessary. If a rule bogs the game down, make a ruling and run with it. (And then make a note and look the rule up after the game). You don't have to be perfect or right all the time as GM-- players will respect this type of honesty more than stopping for 30 minutes to find a rule or simply asserting dictatorial power. The more you GM, the more you'll be able to make these on-the-fly calls more reasonably and even the best GMs have to do this occasionally or stop the game mid-combat to find a rule. Sometimes, you can make a ruling "until  I can look it up." I don't go retro after that (if I was wrong, we play it from once the rule is found the right way). Allow players to do what they reasonably can do-- I'm with the say "YES" group in 99% of cases. Impossible things are attemptable, but may require a nat 20. Most things are already covered in the rules and players can find their own flaws in their plans (I DM'ed a paladin in full platemail who tried to jump a 10-ft pit. The rules did the rest).  Allow players to play their characters as they feel they want to (The Hand Incident, anyone?), but let them expect NPCs to behave they way they naturally would- don't let the players abuse the NPCs just because they're players. Also, watch out for 'the penguin with cymbals'-- players who will push your willingness to inforce "suspended disbelief" to keep their characters alive. I only warn about this one because one of my best gaming buds is just such a penguin, who will walk up to a sleeping polar bear and smash the cymbals repeatedly. I've killed him more than any other player, not through vindictiveness or rejection of his plan, but through the dice-- and he knows it's coming when he starts pushing the bounds of reality or stirs up an anthill full of giant ants with a 40-ft move when he's a 2nd level dwarf with a 20-ft move....which he did solo, away from the party.... DON'T predetermine the outcomes of the story. Don't depend on any NPCs to make it (or PCs for that matter). While the overall direction may be something you steer them towards, let the story unfold on its own. Players are inventive and crafty and funny-- they will reward you with unintended consequences of their own actions without you needing to do much more than give them the rope. Things you think they'll blow through in 10 minutes make take them an hour and vice-versa. Let them PLAY, and you DIRECT the rest of the cast and the setting. I like to think that I get to enjoy the story as much as the players do-- I may know what's behind the next door, but I don't know how they'll respond: kind of like watching your favorite action heroes on a new adventure-- you know their mannerisms and how they might respond, but they'll always do something to make you go "wow!" I enjoy being the audience in their movie, to some extent. I roll all dice in the open- death happens. That's what resurrection is for in some games and you can always make a new character. I don't like fudging dice because, as a player, I don't like being fudged on, either to give me something I don't deserve or to whack me when I do what makes sense. I let the dice fall where they may. This one is highly selective, and different GMs play this differently, so find your own happy medium. Don't be afraid to House Rule. Stephen S. points to problems with healing (something I've house ruled on in most D&D games I DM). Don't use too many House Rules, otherwise you confuse the players, but use ones to fix things that don't work for the way you want the campaign to run. Some people get house rule happy-- basically, remember the rule of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" rather than trying to house-rule "cool" things. And a piece of advice for exposition-- find a way to get the players involved, so you're not talking to them but with them. Supply them with little pieces of the puzzle early and then, when exposition hits, let them try to figure out how their piece fits with what you've revealed. Some exposition can be handled away from the table (handouts/emails/forums here on roll20/etc), providing a great ending/starting place for specific games. If the players get to the wise wizard and ask the magical question ("How many licks does it take?"), and the wizard has a big exposition, let the question be the game ender, post/ send out the wizard's spiel away from table-time, and then let characters start by asking follow-ups. If it's history or political stuff, either post it somewheres or send it to the caster-types and let them disperse it as common knowledge to educated people in the land. Find ways to have the PCs interact with the information and not just absorb it.

Havster said: DON'T predetermine the outcomes of the story. Don't depend on any NPCs to make it (or PCs for that matter). While the overall direction may be something you steer them towards, let the story unfold on its own. Players are inventive and crafty and funny-- they will reward you with unintended consequences of their own actions without you needing to do much more than give them the rope. Things you think they'll blow through in 10 minutes make take them an hour and vice-versa. Let them PLAY, and you DIRECT the rest of the cast and the setting.  Havster made a lot of good points, but I wanted to quote this one again just to reiterate it's importance.  After each session - not immediately, but when you have some critical distance - sit down and analyze the session.  Figure out what went well, then come up with a way to incorporate more of what you did well.  The difficult part is to honestly assess what didn't go so well and then commit to doing less of the bad stuff next time. Make an attempt to get to know your players.  This might be more difficult on Roll20 than in real life, but it's still an important step.  It's possible that you might get more honest feedback via Roll20 than face to face, so make good use of it. Remember to have fun - if you're not having fun the game will suffer.

One thing I've been doing with my current group, which I've blessed with some great players, is that the town they have been doing everything in and around treats them well. They slew a dragon so the people call them dragon slayers gives them discounts and loves them. In a nut shelldodon't have all your npcs out to get your players, if they are chasing some villians have a guard stop him. Have a noble take an interest in them and fund them, have a fair inn keeper who gives them some extra ale, have a child come up to them and tell him he's his hero. Make them feel like the heors they are.

Hats off to Havster for taking the time to post that informative wall of text. Dave makes one of the most important points of all, know your players .

Aha. Went to sleep and such response! Many thanks, community! And especially to Havster, for sure I shall study your wisdom, good sir! One more thing: how exactly should I make NPCs? Is it in my right to give them things they wouldn't normally have? Like, perhaps your Sorcerer has Uncanny dodge for some inexplicable reason?

A good DM in my view asks more questions than makes declarations, and uses the "Yes, and..." principles in all things. The DM should also be transparent in every way possible with the mechanics and fictional stakes so that players understand the weight of their decisions before they make choices. If there's a predetermined plot the PCs must follow, the DM should tell the players that there is one and ask for the players' buy-in. He or she should also enlist their players in every aspect of the game, including those "traditionally" assigned only to the DM (for no particularly good reason other than tradition), including world-building, fleshing out NPCs and locations, and determining the interesting reactions of the setting to the actions of the PCs. A DM who knows how and when to do these things has engaged players and action-packed games.

Read through the DMG. Start with pre-made adventure, switch in some bats for rats, move the layout around slightly, and add little things to make it original (such as a trap). There's all kinds of advice out there, do some reading of major pitfalls. You've probably played a few games, if you haven't had at least two DMs you really like, watch some online...I'd suggest Chris Perkin's robot chicken game on youtube. We can't explain everything that will make you a good DM, some of it is matching/accommodating play styles, which is somewhat situational chemestry. What we can do is give you tips: Good store telling, keeping things interesting. You are making the adventure's backdrop. Allowing players to shine. They are writing the narrative in the world you create. Consider suggestions and communicate with PCs. Preparation. Know the abilities of monsters you're using (how does their poison effect player, special attacks, etc..) Have back up plans/plots/hooks. Don't lead by the nose. (You can have multiple hooks as backup to get them someplace you set up). If they do something crazy or clever, all the more fun. Figure out how to resolve their actions with dice. Know the rules. Sometimes you have to wing it so the game doesn't halt. Limit rule disputes to a minuet of stating the case and offer a solution/adjudication and to look up problem after game. Handling problem players. There's advice out there for most player conflicts from metagaming to rule lawyers. If the thief keeps stealing all the loot and spoiling the game for the rest...you can house rule or introduce events that resolve it, can't use skill checks against party members OR street-rat steals from the thief and the party finds the loot to split). Don't shatter expectations with house rules. Surprising plot twists, unexpected events, and such are great. If you house rule, you need to make clear. If you're making a low magic world, taking out the 5 foot step, or any number of changes to rules...let players know upfront so they aren't disappointed in character build.   You are aiming to entertain. Not aiming to defeat the players. No keeping them in a plastic bubble where they'll never be defeated. Know the players and what they like. With a pick up game, either state the type (all dungeon crawling, heavy rollplay, puzzle intensive, etc..) or do a variety. Track what's going on. Keeps loot form mysteriously appearing/vanishing. It allows you to make player actions have consequences later on (remember that store owner you stole 100k from? there's now a 20k bounty on your head). Propel the story onward. This usually can be done with experienced players by asking "what do you do". If you're met with deadpan "uhhh..." then start initiative, have someone do a skill check, or whatever gets players going. Other times you could start rolling d20 percentile dice just to spur on action without doing anything...(toss in a predatory animal or weather now and then so they don't catch on).

It can be dangerous to tell a new DM to say yes to everything. They often aren't experienced enough to quickly weigh out game balance issues that come with "yes, but...". There are also times it can cause conflict. Can a new DM think on his feat enough about a game imbalancing decision to say yes? A player asks to have a +5 sword at level one...yes, but...it's cursed, a double edged sword and damages the wielder half of any damage he does with it. What if the thief starts stealing treasure from the party stash and is too good at sleight of hand to be caught? Other players are going to be angry. You might have to house rule or consider some sort of social contract. You want... to say yes to most reasonable requests. players to feel like they worked for things. to let the player know if there's going to be serious repercussions for a likely failure (a warning). You don't want... say no because of your expectations of how story/character actions were going to go. to say yes every time and make it feel as everything was handed to players. to say yes to something near impossible and have players die with no warning. Be accommodating within reason. Don't be afraid to say "I'll get back to you next session" but lets table this for now.

Fuck saying yes to everything, lol. This whole player empowerment movement is bull poodoo of the highest order. Sometimes, as the DM, you have to flat out tell a player... "No, your idea is dumb. Do something else."

James B. said: It can be dangerous to tell a new DM to say yes to everything. They often aren't experienced enough to quickly weigh out game balance issues that come with "yes, but...". There are also times it can cause conflict. I've read "say yes or roll the dice." I like the overall philosophy, but with the understanding that a GM shouldn't be afraid of limiting options to what he or she is comfortable with regardless of what a player's wishes are. Also, the best way of learning how to GM is to actually do it.  "Paralysis by analysis" is a very real thing, and what works for one person in their blog, book or podcast might not work for you.  Just do it

"Yes, and..." is a two-way street and those who react against the approach negatively generally fail to grasp this. It is the cornerstone of improvisational acting, which is a big part of RPGs. The DM and the players must all abide by "Yes, and..." in this approach. You can't contradict the rules or anything anyone has previously established. It doesn't mean there's no challenge or that the players don't earn their victories or that every single idea that comes out of the players' gobs work. Dice determine that. And "player empowerment?" I don't even know what that is or why it would be considered bad even if it was a thing. A DM concerned about that sounds like he or she loves the illusory power and control of the DM chair a bit too much! "Yes, but..." or "No..." is the DM shutting down ideas or adding dis-incentives. In improvisational acting, this is known as "blocking." Blocking or denial is about control of the addition of information to the scene. It slows or stops forward movement. "Yes, and..." is respecting and including ideas while adding fun challenges that everyone enjoys because they had a say. It moves the game forward in a positive way and increases player engagement. It also reduces the load on the DM during play and reduces preparation time for him or her. If you don't believe me, ask to play in one of our games!

Player empowerment can be a bad thing if you have dingleberry players that will abuse the yes and crap.

JonathanTheBlack said: Fuck saying yes to everything, lol. This whole player empowerment movement is bull poodoo of the highest order. Sometimes, as the DM, you have to flat out tell a player... "No, your idea is dumb. Do something else." No, you tell them yes then cut their arm off so they can't use their new 2-hander after you implied it's a bad idea. Ideally though you'd screen your players before hand and not include people who are clearly not taking the game seriously. A player and a DM personality clash is a game breaker IMO. Drops an f-bomb, then follows up with poodoo, you crack me up Kadaga. Furthermore "say yes to everything" is not without it's exceptions, to quote myself. Clearly I didn't elaborate enough, apologies.

Why are you playing with "dingleberry players" who engage in "abuse?" Perhaps you should consider playing with people more mature or who put the game first. (It's also possible to have a civil discussion without calling other people's ideas "crap." One would think a "mentor" would be able to do that.) "Yes, and..." comes with inherent agreement. "Yes," I agree with your ideas. "And," I'm adding my own. And so on. You abide by what I've said; I abide by what you said. You can't then contradict what has been established, and that includes the rules of the game. It's just that simple. It moves the game forward in a positive way with the DM not playing on the defensive.

Can't always choose who the DM lets into the group. Can't always be picky about what groups you join.

Guys, please. At ease. I did understand that not everyone should get what they please. That much is certain, given from experience. I play with close friends and some who are rather reasonable. I'm actually doing a home-brew heavy campaign and all, so I will be sure to make changes from session to session. That is, if I could get our pilot running and my confidence to actually ride high. In that regard, what should be my first approach to 'smurfing'? For one, there is ALWAYS a character who is a notch higher than others given how much time the user goes into researching it. He curbstomps alot of our encounters yet when he falls our entire team suffers given how they are not in the same level. What should I do for such things? Also, I'm not sure about conflict resolution. is there a step-by-step thing to follow?

You can't choose who the DM lets into the group, but a "Yes, and..." DM should explain how it works, get buy-in from the players, and politely remind them when they're going against the principle to head off any problems, presuming the players are acting in good faith. (Those who aren't should be ejected if an out-of-game conversation does not work.) You can be picky about what groups you join. No D&D is better than bad D&D and games that include "dingleberry players" or a defensive DM who's got his finger on the "No" or "Yes, but..." button is one that I wouldn't choose to game with.

Meh. I'd rather play by the books D&D with a DM that doesn't put up with stupid crap than not play.

Äventyr said: In that regard, what should be my first approach to 'smurfing'? For one, there is ALWAYS a character who is a notch higher than others given how much time the user goes into researching it. He curbstomps alot of our encounters yet when he falls our entire team suffers given how they are not in the same level. What should I do for such things? When you find out, let the rest of us know.  Again, it's a matter of what would work best for your group.  Personally, I wouldn't want to hamstring someone who puts work into making their character the best they can, but I also only run games where system mastery is less of an issue than in new school D&D.

Äventyr said: Guys, please. At ease. I did understand that not everyone should get what they please. That much is certain, given from experience. I play with close friends and some who are rather reasonable. I'm actually doing a home-brew heavy campaign and all, so I will be sure to make changes from session to session. That is, if I could get our pilot running and my confidence to actually ride high. In that regard, what should be my first approach to 'smurfing'? For one, there is ALWAYS a character who is a notch higher than others given how much time the user goes into researching it. He curbstomps alot of our encounters yet when he falls our entire team suffers given how they are not in the same level. What should I do for such things? Also, I'm not sure about conflict resolution. is there a step-by-step thing to follow? Ask for the player with more system mastery to offer assistance to those without the same skill level. It improves the other players (if they'd like to learn) and would no doubt be a reward in and of itself for the mentoring player. You can also make sure your encounters have more things to do in them than "kill Team Monster," such as alternative objectives and goals. Rarely are my encounters about one side killing the other side. The PCs and monsters always have goals. On conflict resolution: Do it with an out-of-game conversation between mature adults, not with in-game consequences. If the player is doing something that seems like he or she is yanking your chain, stop, and ask them to clarify their intent or goal. There is a long sad history of DMs using passive aggressive means in-game for get-backs on the players through bad things happening to their characters. Don't fall into that trap. Talk to the player like an adult and resolve the conflict directly.

JonathanTheBlack said: Meh. I'd rather play by the books D&D with a DM that doesn't put up with stupid crap than not play. To each their own. I'd add that the approach I'm suggesting is in the books. So I guess that makes me a by-the-books DM and since I explain and hold players who buy-in to the "Yes, and..." approach, that makes me someone who "doesn't put up with stupid crap." Good to know.

Dave D. said: Äventyr said: In that regard, what should be my first approach to 'smurfing'? For one, there is ALWAYS a character who is a notch higher than others given how much time the user goes into researching it. He curbstomps alot of our encounters yet when he falls our entire team suffers given how they are not in the same level. What should I do for such things? When you find out, let the rest of us know.  Again, it's a matter of what would work best for your group.  Personally, I wouldn't want to hamstring someone who puts work into making their character the best they can, but I also only run games where system mastery is less of an issue than in new school D&D. I have my players collaborate in the character making stage so that the non power players are given the option of asking advice and as a team they can capitalize on synergy. This also fosters the team building mentality, as they are a 'team' whether predetermined or by railroaded "chance".   

I didn't mean to stir up an argument. The part I reacted to that said "say yes to everything" (with everything emphasized), even said on the same line there are exceptions. I was merely expanding on that, trying to put some fine print on the warning sign that hangs with the words 'always/never'. It can depend greatly on the type of game you're playing. If you have players make 5 characters each and play tomb of horrors, yes they are going to die for doing something stupid. That's half the fun of that type of game. If players are in a heavily roleplayed game and spent over an hour on their back story...they are attached to playing that character and you shouldn't kill them off so easily. Conflict resolution... It depends on who it's between and what it's about. If it's a rules debate, you can make a temporary ruling and look it up after the game (explain this is to keep things flowing). If a player doesn't like the ruling, they can drop out of initiative and rejoin after finding the rule. If there's two players fighting over a certain loot you can do a rolloff (useful to have distribution system before fight happens). If there's a disagreement between where to go/what to do...usually majority wins and there's plenty of dice in case of a tie. It takes some experience to split the party and keep everyone engaged if you choose to go that route in some cases. Is there a particular conflict you're trying to resolve? Google can be your friend with advice about it afterwards. Just do your best to mediate in the moment. The job is often even more about people than it is about rules.  --- @Iserith - Good note about not being passive aggressive in game. My solution above about stealing was meant more for re-balancing a party, but that is something to use cautiously because players resent loosing 'their' items, even if stolen (and imaginary).

Hm. Good point. Especially that one about not trying to get back at people at the board. For sure, I shall bookmark and keep this handy. I really do want to try and get things handled, hopefully I wouldn't just crumble under the pressure and all. On a side note, I must ask: what is the balance like Core book only? I was thinking about, to reduce complexity among my homebrew group, to just eschew everything BUT the core book and small nuances from the other books like Ultimate fighting with reasonable bargaining. I know next to nothing baout balance, given how I always just pick a character with the intent to roleplay insead of simply fighting mindlessly.

"Yes, and..." is perfectly compatible with all styles of play including games like Tomb of Horrors. It's independent of such concerns. Perhaps it might be surprising that characters get killed left and right in my games, more so than other campaigns I've seen, even with this approach. The difference is that the players put themselves in those situations and enjoy the outcome, even if it's death or dismemberment, because they had a hand in its creation. Player buy-in is magic for a DM's game. (Aside: Dungeon crawling, combat, etc... that's all roleplaying, too.) If there is a rules debate, err on the side of the player. It's literally nothing to the DM in that moment, and not worth any sort of pause or interruption of the flow of the game. Correct it later. "Yes, and..." also helps with conflict resolution. If you're staying true to the principle, you can't contradict something another player says unless that player is blocking (and if you're staying true to the principle, you strive to avoid that), so there are no long debates over what to do or how to mitigate failure. You accept the idea offered and add onto it with your own idea. The next person accepts that and adds their own. And so on until it's time to initiate and test the plan with dice. Ever have those games where you spend 30 minutes talking about how to deal with some issue, each player shooting down the other's ideas, until someone gets frustrated and just attacks? I'm sure you have. That sort of stuff doesn't happen at "Yes, and..." tables. It just moves forward, all the time.

Äventyr said: Hm. Good point. Especially that one about not trying to get back at people at the board. For sure, I shall bookmark and keep this handy. I really do want to try and get things handled, hopefully I wouldn't just crumble under the pressure and all. On a side note, I must ask: what is the balance like Core book only? I was thinking about, to reduce complexity among my homebrew group, to just eschew everything BUT the core book and small nuances from the other books like Ultimate fighting with reasonable bargaining. I know next to nothing baout balance, given how I always just pick a character with the intent to roleplay insead of simply fighting mindlessly. First, fighting is roleplaying. If you can understand this, it makes you a much better DM. "Talking or acting in-character" is a form of roleplaying not roleplaying itself. Similarly, fighting is a form of roleplaying. All are equally valid in the game because they represent choices made by a given player in the context of the game. Any time you make a choice that your character would also make, whether that's trying to impress the king or swinging your sword at a charging orc,  you're roleplaying . With regard to balance, which game and edition are you playing?

Ahh. I was playing Pathfinder 3.5, I think? <a href="http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gettingStarted.html" rel="nofollow">http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gettingStarted.html</a> Hm. Good point. I am also considering proper behaviors and all, adding the idea of food and water and such. Is there a place I can go to train, hone my DMing skills? Or perhaps a tutorial for novice DMs on the Roll20 system/

Balance can be very tricky in any system based off the 3.X edition of D&amp;D. The more materials you include in the character creation process, the more&nbsp;wacky&nbsp;the results can be. You'll want to have a Session Zero with your players and talk about the game expectations prior to play, including the preferred power level and optimization of the characters and expected challenges. When you've reached consensus on that as a group, decide what books you'll all be drawing from and use them accordingly. Remember that optimization (or min-maxing, though that has more of a pejorative tone) is not inherently bad and does not have anything to do with a player's ability to roleplay. But it may be out of step in a given game with a given group. Getting everyone on the same page prior to play is paramount. The best way to learn to DM is by doing it and talking about it. You're already talking about it, though look to other communities as well, specifically Wizards of the Coast, Paizo, or others. Now go host some games, share your experiences - your troubles and your successes - and partner with other DMs to run games for each other and discuss the results. I'm not sure what you mean by "food and water and such." If you mean that you should have food and drink at your games, I heartily agree! Sharing food is one of the most basic and bonding of the human experience and should be a part of any game in my view. If you're talking about the players having to track mundane supplies, this is something you should discuss at Session Zero. I personally don't make it an issue unless it is somehow important to the drama of the scenario. Otherwise, it's just so much pointless accounting.

There seems to be a lot of discussion around the say Yes concept. Here's a couple articles that you might find useful. <a href="http://dndacademy.com/when-to-say-yes-and-when-to-say-no/" rel="nofollow">http://dndacademy.com/when-to-say-yes-and-when-to-say-no/</a> <a href="http://angrydm.com/2012/11/dont-always-never-say-no/" rel="nofollow">http://angrydm.com/2012/11/dont-always-never-say-no/</a> I'll also second Voth's idea of podcasts. I've been a gamer and DM for about 25 years and have only recently started listening to podcasts. I think they are fantastic for becoming a better DM. Some give general advice and others let you listen to other people running their games. A few I would suggest: Fear the boot, shark bone, Behind the DM Screen, the Tome show, Crit Juice, and lastly my own: Dungeon Talk (advice) and The Campaigns (actual play). I'd also suggest twitter: lot's of great advice and links to RPG blogs on there. @slyflurish and @theangryDM (his is the second article I linked) are both fantastic to follow. &nbsp; Michael

Aventyr, one of the problems with restricting things to 'core only' is that many core options were pushed to the APG or even later. With that said, there are a number of issues with the later hardbacks that can really give a GM a headache. My suggestion would be to run a player's desired builds by an experienced Pathfinder GM or post the build on the Paizo board. There are a lot of people there who will let you know of potential issues.&nbsp; - Gauss

In a single sentence? "A good DM always puts 'having fun' ahead of any other concern." If you believe your first priority is to 'defeat' your players and make your e-penis bigger? You are not a good DM. If you believe your first priority is ensuring that your players are forced to acknowledge how great a writer you are? You are not a good DM. If you believe your first priority is to fanwank and chain your players to cumbersome rules in an RPG and get punchy when a player finds a loophole? You are not a good DM. Think on your feet. Be firm but be fair. Be willing to change and be willing to challenge them. Put their characters in the spotlight, not your overpowered author insert NPC. But above all things? Put having fun ahead of any other concern.

Rent is too damn high Definitely, the second part I need to practice on. Given how I'm always going about with flowery writing and how fast I read from script (Another problem I have). What do players find 'fun' , anyways? I did have them write up backstories to each character and I am planning to include them in the world building, but I'm not exactly sure what else I should do in order to further engage my players. I do have ample time to change things given how my very first 'real' session takes place a few days from now, but I ought to mentally prepare myself. Speaking of which, what are some good ways to practice these DMing strategies, anyways? I'm always have a knack for theorycrafting. Oh, and one more question: just how much should I write for? Given how I'm always thinking in the thought pattern for RPGs with definitive 'milestones' and 'barriers' , even though I try to break out of this I am finding myself a bit...how does one say...a bit confused. Just not sure how much to write.

Okay, glad you asked! 1. Scripts (IMHO) are for major, critical plot events ONLY.&nbsp; Get used to just knowing your NPCs personality and speech patterns and improving the dialogue. Players will appreciate a character who feels real (as opposed to one they can just imagine reading from a script in George Lucas' basement). 2. What is 'fun'? Giving your players the opportunity to wander your world, letting them make choices, giving them interesting encounters and always doing what they don't expect (IE: Your players go to a castle to answer a summons about a kidnapping expecting a stolen princess. Instead the princess has kidnapped a knight and is planning to marry the poor sap against his will in a foul ceremony which will allow her to become one with an evil outsider and the King wants the players to gut the royal brat before she unleashes the End of Days). There's more to it than that, but basically there's your foundation. 3. Don't think plot synopsis. Think plot hooks. Don't imagine a story with a beginning, middle and end, think many adventurous possibilities (IE: The heroes must throw a ring into Mount Obviously Named To Scare Off Tourists/Party must dispose of evil jewelery before force of ultimate evil manifests and devours the souls of all mankind and their little dogs too/Throw ring into Mountain. You win! YAY!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; VERSUS&nbsp; If players go into tavern and ask around, they will hear about a ghostly castle that needs clearing up. If players go into Royal Notary Office they might encounter a crying Hobbit who someone to deliver his mother's medicine to her cottage in the forest of Extremely Hairy Cannibalistic Lumberjacks. If players stop by the Castle, the royal adviser might be convinced to let them aid her in a stealth mission to require some embarrassing fanfiction she wrote about Gandalf the Grey and the Royal Haberdasher). The former can railroad the players and the DM and allows you to write freely. The latter&nbsp; &nbsp; forces you to simplify and diversify your plot options, thus controlling the temptation towards purple prose. Savey?

Having fun is the whole point, but different people take pleasure in different things. Unless you consider DMing charity or punishment you have the right to get some enjoyment out of this. If you're the type of person who loves a loose premise and watching where the players take it then do that, but if you want to be a storyteller with a narrative arc and structure then do that. It is perfectly OK to say I want the players to go from point A to point E, just don't insist that they go to B then C then D in that order. Two things I swear by are the Red Herring and the Mystery. Lets say the party is investigating some strange goings on in a village and they meet a swineherd and ask him for some intel. He tells them when he was down by the river he found the tracks of a large party and when they investigate they run into a band of brigands and a big fight. These guys are not the source of the strange goings on and this encounter won't get the One Ring any closer to Mt. Doom, but the players can have some fun, get some XP, and get some treasure that will help to get the One Ring to Mt. Doom. So whats the Mystery? When they search the bodies they discover one brigand has a tattoo of a red dragon on his chest. Take the player's questions anywhere it goes. So they ask do any of the others have tattoos? You have not thought this out, say yes. So they ask is equipment of the tattooed brigands different/ better then the others of the gang? Sure, why not. So they ask in the encounter did these guys seem to be in charge? Again yes, but that's the end of it, there's no more information to be discovered. You could run the whole campaign and never come back to this, but they will wonder is this significant and you can incorporate this element into a future campaign or not. Maybe this little side adventure gives birth to the Legend of the Order of the Red Dragon, the elite guard of a noble family that turned mercenary when their lord was killed.&nbsp; If they don't take the bait, "so the guy had a tattoo, so what", well you didn't invest a lot of time in it and you move on. As to what players like I find that players respond to challenges that use their particular skills and abilities. If you have a character that knows origami then put something in that uses origami. If every situation just tests their ability to deal damage then they have no reason to develop anything else.

One bit of advice based on my early attempts at GMing that I haven't seen yet...being a good player &nbsp;does not necessarily mean being a good game master. &nbsp; I thought I knew DnD 3.0 rules pretty good until my first DM attempt where I put an 8th level vampire monk up against a group of four 4th level PCs. &nbsp;What? &nbsp;Four CR 4 PCs are not designed to fight a CR encounter? &nbsp;The first PC is dying on the first hit with a negative level? Oops. That attempt had more issues...for example, the rogue in our party did not appreciate the fact that we were playing in an "undead crypt" and he was unable to use sneak attack the entire session , and the aforementioned vampire monk (P.S., flurry of blows plus energy drain is a fairly mean combo, FYI). I stuck with it, learned from my mistakes, and each game I get better. &nbsp;The only other advice is to take turns GMing if possible. &nbsp;It's easy to get tired of GMing if that's all you do...the relative effort you have to put into each session is considerably more than the players, and it's fun to just relax and get to play the game without worrying about all the campaign details. Lots of good advice here but the only way you're going to get better at it is to give it a shot. &nbsp;Be willing to admit when you're wrong (and you will be!). &nbsp;Don't be afraid to make things up on the fly. &nbsp;You don't need a full stat block for every NPC...generally you only need to know a couple of general capabilities and personality and give them a bonus that's a bit above, below, or equal to what the PCs can do. Good luck!

Many thanks for the advice everyone; I'm going into my 3rd session with friends and feedback had been most positive! Now I pray I'll get the guts to DM to total strangers now...But, I came here to say that I treasured each and every one of your advice! I have read them many times and come to apply them, along with the mistakes I've made and how I've learned for those. Now, I have a few questions: where should I go if I want to make ultra specific searches for people? I mean, I could put it up for LFG, but I may end up getting people who may not be to my caliber of being lenient on a very new DM and strange Homebrew ideas.&nbsp; Also, I wanted to ask: is story better told with a more linear approach? Or should I keep a more open world idea of sorts? What are some techniques to help immerse my party members aside from story telling and such? How should I reward players for various initiatives like thinking outside the box and unconventional tactics? I was thinking awarding extra EXP for Roleplaying and possibly Crazy schemes and all. I'm still a greenhorn after all this, which isn't made any better by the fact I'm still new to the platform. But this is thanks to all who have posted here!

Solros, "Ultra-specific searches for people"? Uh....could you be more specific and tell us what you mean? =) As for your second piece.....well, that's up to you to decide. I personally value low linearity in my campaigns. But if that's your thing, so be it. Some players have complained that I am "too unfocused" or that they have "excessive freedom". As for immersion, the easiest thing to do is make the NPCs react to them. If a king gives you a mission no matter how much of a ponce you are, then it breaks immersion and really makes the world seem flat. A world where that same king can either give you a mission or toss you out on your ear based soley on player responses is a far more real and dynamic world.&nbsp; A world where the players can easily get immersed in. As for rewarding players? Get to know your players. Some prefer EXP. Some prefer money. Other reject all that and are best rewarded with you making the world react to their choices and brilliance (or colossal stupidity, as sometimes is the case) . We all start as greenhorns in everything, Sol.&nbsp; I am still a novice in many game systems, myself. The fact that you are listening to your players tells me that you have already come farther than the vast majority of GMs I played with growing up. Keep your chin up!

Well, I will say this now, I am looking for people who are alot more tolerant of trying out new things, not afraid of dying, putting up with someone new to the game and certainly, someone who will be alright with alot of strange homebrew ideas and removing certain books. And on top of that, I'm looking for people who can make good histories on their characters and matching personalities. Not that I'm a 'Holier than thou' GM, it's just I find there's more to things than just hack and slash. For this I am looking for a more specific search, but I am not sure about how I would go around to getting that done. Hm. True enough. I'm still testing along the limits of my own given freedom and such. But alright. Ooooh. That seems quite interesting. That could well complete the world tendency/karma idea I had running. But the only downside is that I must improvise given how I need to do alot of off-the-bat talking to go along with the whole write up on important events. But hey, can't improve without trying, no? I shall keep note of that. And besides, collossal stupidity isn't too bad. Sometimes it's a good source of laughs from time to time. Many thanks, Lou. However, I must ask, though this may come a bit hard...how should I deal with a 'hard' player? Like, someone who is hard to deal with. I'm a pacifist/wuss by nature, not the type to speak out too much...

As to searching for people, I think the way the LFG is set up now may work a little better for you than you think. You can throw it up there and have the applicants respond in the LFG forum you get-- then you can chat with them there and maybe set up a skype "interview" if you're really that nervous about them. If you put some idea of the kind of campaign you're running (SYSTEM, races, alignment expectations, etc) and a little bit of a backstory or teaser, you can then invite applicants to provide you with how their character maybe fits into that story. The Linear/Sandbox question depends on your players, I think. I've had players that I present a town to, with some idea for them adventuring, and they interact intensively with NPCs and find their own adventures (i.e.-sandbox). Other parties seem to stand around with their fingers up their noses if you don't give them a clear objective-- that's not necessarily a bad thing: some people just want to swing a big sword and kill stuff and don't play for the storyline beyond that. You can tell your players what you intend to run (more linear or more sandbox), or start them off with some linear adventure (a nice dungeon crawl, for instance). From there, mix and match as you see fit and as your players seem to gravitate. As to immersing players, this again may be dependent on the player. One idea I like to use (and I often award extra xp for it) is to ask for some kind of family background/history. I get tired of the "orphan" story that makes for no backstory at all and can often find ways for a "woodcutter's son who swung his axe and got bored" to have family show up and bring in some immersion. Sending players back home to the old town where they start after they make it up a few levels also works well-- if you build some NPCs in there early, they'll seek them out again later. (A 3rd level Fighter bully at level 1 can get his come-upance at level 5 in front of the town).&nbsp; As to awarding extra XP, this one is totally up to you. I've played in campaigns where you only got what you took in monster kills and in others where you were rewarded for being there (most of the old pbem games I played awarded xp for each post, with a max based on expectations per week). I don't tend to award extra XP for good thinking-- I think the rewards of that play out in the game: wasting the monster ingeniously with tactics instantly is its own reward. Bypassing it, under many rules systems, gets you the same XP as fighting it. I do reward xp for effective skill uses that are examples of characters pushing themselves and their talents occasionally; I more often award extra xp for doing things that help the game overall (like keeping a character journal or creating something new)-- more for those kind of immersion things than for the action things, I'd guess, which is another way to encourage that immersion. The character that makes friends with the bartender and then- when asked- kicks over a few hundred gold so the man can make some 'improvements' to the place or whatever gets a little extra xp over the one that simply shouts for more beer all the time. As a rule of thumb, and I'm sure several others out there have their own rules, I never go more than 10% as an xp reward, and that's extreme and more common at lower levels where any xp is a bigger chunk.&nbsp; There's another idea for doing something similar in a D&amp;D product (not sure if it's UA or RC)-- it recommends setting an extra party slice of xp (if there are 4 players, divide xp by 5) and then make some decisions ahead of time about what earns pieces of that extra slice (look over the adventure and say "The first to try X in this room" or "The person who thinks to ask this question" or such and split up a good bit of that xp over the adventure, leaving a little of it to award to that 'good tactics' stuff you mentioned earlier. (I haven't actually tried this method out, but I can see benefits to using it.)

Sol, Dealing with a pain-in-the-ass? If any of us knew the definitive answer to that, we'd be writing up a book that would bring about world peace! We all have different kinds of "hard" players: from the demagogue to the rules-lawyer to the spoiled debutante. You could practically make a Monster Manual for the sheer number and variety of players who can get your goat. But I think Havster is on the right track: interview your players before you bring them in. Get to know them. If they turn out to be a problem, send them a private message explaining your issues and potential solutions. If they persist in dragging the session down? Boom Time. Kick 'em out. Better a jilted troll, than to have someone ruining everyone's good time.

There were some how-to-DM resources available from the start. &nbsp;First there were the good how-to write-ups within the original games: &nbsp;especially the ones that TSR, Inc. tried to mass-market directly into bookstores where suburban teen buyers could not count on finding experienced players in their area to pick up hints from. &nbsp;Then there were entire paperbacks trying to catalog the RPG offerings to date and offer RPG tips: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Role-Playing-Mastery-Gary-Gygax/dp/0399512934/ref=sr_1_42?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1368245355&amp;sr=8-42&amp;keywords=how+to+play+roleplaying+games" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Role-Playing-Mastery-Gary-Gygax/dp/0399512934/ref=sr_1_42?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1368245355&amp;sr=8-42&amp;keywords=how+to+play+roleplaying+games</a> I tried some D&amp;D but the first game to give me the "complete" picture of DMing or game mastering or refereeing or whatever it's called in your game was STAR FRONTIERS (Alpha Dawn set). &nbsp;You should make sure you find a game with a GREAT orientation to RPGing and designing adventures, not just a cursory one: <a href="http://www.starfrontiersman.com/downloads/remastered" rel="nofollow">http://www.starfrontiersman.com/downloads/remastered</a> Some tips in no particular order of importance: 1. &nbsp;Don't bog down the game for your players by researching the rulebook to find the exact application of a rule (wing it instead), or waste their face-time with you by spending a lot of time shopping for items, travelling uneventfully from place to place, or using every spell, skill and device at their disposal to look for clues in places where even your secret notes tell you there are none. &nbsp;Tell them they completed things to their satisfaction and get them to move on. 2. &nbsp;Don't play it like a computer-game. &nbsp;Computer RPGs have exploded with the speed and graphic power and memory capacity, but they can't improvise or give a result that was not pre-programmed. &nbsp;But before there were immersive computer RPGs we paid much attention to, we game masters read lots of actual fiction BOOKS, and wrote adventures with more than one plot-hook or lead into different sub-branches of an adventure, that could be encountered in any order, and that would re-join later. &nbsp;Our RPGs were more "feathery" than linear. &nbsp;We tried to tie all the amazing loose ends we created -- but we always failed! 3. &nbsp;Also not like a computer-game: &nbsp;your improvisation ability, your "organic computer" in your head is a fantastic opportunity to tailor-make the RPG to the tastes of the players. &nbsp;Computers can't sense that. &nbsp;Mass-media like movies can't tailor-make their experience but must be all things to all people. &nbsp;You however do have this opportunity. Do the players like to immerse themselves in combat rules? &nbsp;In the bits of role-playing with the diverse population? &nbsp;In the storytelling aspects as a living history of a land unfolds? &nbsp;Do they want to get mixed up with the political intrigue and try to stay on the right side of the ruling parties? &nbsp;Find opportunities to give each player exactly what they want. 4. &nbsp;Don't play a setting like it's all there waiting for the player-characters (PCs) to do something to it. &nbsp;These are living, breathing places with thousands to millions of inhabitants going about their business. &nbsp;If player-characters upset the order of things, there will be blow-back. &nbsp;If there is a secret plot or conspiracy, it will upset the lives of dozens. &nbsp;Some will be eager to tell the PCs the piece of the conspiracy they know about. &nbsp;Some will be indifferent or seek to demand favours for what they know. &nbsp;Some profit in their own way from the status-quo, and will resist the PCs in their attempts to unmask or oppose the conspiracy. &nbsp;Be sure to sketch a few non-player characters in the environment that may be of help: &nbsp;the street-urchin who witnessed the murder of a key nobleman 10 years ago, the out-of-work free-lance mercenaries who tell you conflicts are coming closer and closer to this town, the weapons-maker whose orders are pouring in (almost as if the king is planning a war...) 5. &nbsp;Learn speed-reading. &nbsp;It really works (generally they prove you will double your reading-speed and improve comprehension at the same time) and you will cut through all those big RPG rulebooks LIKE BUTTER. &nbsp;I have read 80 rules systems so far, and there are always good ideas that are applicable elsewhere. 6. &nbsp;The Reader's Digest has a popular column for decades, "It Pays To Increase Your Word Power" with ten new words to learn. &nbsp;A spellbook shouldn't just be described as "a spellbook" but "a heavy, ponderous and moldy tome that sits there challenging you to open it". &nbsp;An orc-lord is not just "an orc-lord" but should be described as "a snarling, steely-eyed, grizzled leader with tan skin discoloured by age, and ears and face scarred by dozens of combat-challenges to his leadership." &nbsp;Your opening description to a new scene, object or character should be short but vivid, invoking not only sights but sounds, and smells. &nbsp;Do not give away too much so that you have made players' decisions for them. &nbsp;Give only what is perceived at a glance, but give it vividly with active language, and then have the players ask questions to gain more details and insight to form their next course of action. 7. &nbsp;Some people here have already mentioned "problem players". &nbsp;I feel I was lucky meeting up with players who were all rowing the boat together to achieve an entertaining result. &nbsp;But sometimes a player is withdrawn, maybe they aren't familiar with the fiction of a genre, and doesn't suggest anything. &nbsp;Try to draw these out, ask them what they think of the situations, ask if they can think of skills their character can apply at the right moment to help the group. &nbsp;There will also be the opposite, very gregarious and talkative players talking out of turn (do check with every player about what they want to do, and do it even-handedly) and also talking a lot of irrelevant stuff about other games they have been in, or popular movies, or whatever. &nbsp;Gently encourage this player to shut their trap...er, no, that's too rude. &nbsp;Do encourage them to stick to the issues at hand, and in their turn. &nbsp;Encourage them to let the other players have their say, and to not push other players into a course of action they want.

It is difficult to tell a story with a roleplaying game because the protagonists (the player characters) are not under your control. You need to give players and characters alike a reason to stay with the story you want to tell, that is easiest done by being upfront about the planned story: I want to run a campaign where the chosen of the gods fight against an ancient evil. You may be reluctant to take your part, but you have to create characters that will take part. (Oh, and including ingame reasons for how to switch the chosen is a good idea, in case players change and such.) Most player do not mind linear storys to much if they appear between adventures, that is during downtime. Definitely give them rather free scenarios for the adventure itself. Give them an objective, do not prepare ways to reach it. For example, require them to gain the favour of Lord Spencer of White Mountain Pass. Then, give Lord Spencer a personality - what does he wish for, what does he hate, and so on. Then, the PC can learn about Lord Spencer and find their own ideas to gain his favour. Games with clear objectives and open solutions usually work best. (Later, the player might come up with own objectives - support this and work with the players to make it part of the story.) Do not worry about immersion, that usually comes from alone once the group got comfortable with each other and used to your game. Everything that builds trust will also improve immersion. There is only one really good reward for thinking outside the box and innovative tactics: Praise. Tell your players how much you liked the idea and give it a fair chance to succeed. (This is what the "say yes and" stuff was about.) Do not give extra XP, it is not necessary - the spot light is usually all that is needed. Also, as a more general tip: Read rule books with different approaches. If you only read Pathfinder and similar games, you will start to think the solutions shown there are the only ones possible. They are not. There are different approaches with different benefits and drawbacks. Some interesting games in this regard might be: The Solar System (Free HTML, you can get the printed version for around 5 Euro) PDQ / PDQ# (Free PDF, out of print) Spirit of the Century (Free HTML, available in print and as ebook alongside with other versions of this ruleset, for example Diaspora [Science Fiction], Dresden Files RPG [Urban Fantasy]) Has also a very good GMing section. A Cortex Plus based game from Margaret Weis Productions , for example Leverage, Smallville or Marvel Heroic Roleplaying Basic Game. (Available in print and as ebook.) Beware, Cortex and Cortex Plus are completely different games! Western City RPG (some remaining stock is still in print, can be ordered as PDF as well - be careful, there are an English and a German version of the game!) HeroQuest Core Rules (available as print and pdf) There are probably more good games to read, but I think this is a good start.

Solros said: Many thanks for the advice everyone; I'm going into my 3rd session with friends and feedback had been most positive! Now I pray I'll get the guts to DM to total strangers now...But, I came here to say that I treasured each and every one of your advice! I have read them many times and come to apply them, along with the mistakes I've made and how I've learned for those. Now, I have a few questions: where should I go if I want to make ultra specific searches for people? I mean, I could put it up for LFG, but I may end up getting people who may not be to my caliber of being lenient on a very new DM and strange Homebrew ideas.&nbsp; Also, I wanted to ask: is story better told with a more linear approach? Or should I keep a more open world idea of sorts? What are some techniques to help immerse my party members aside from story telling and such? How should I reward players for various initiatives like thinking outside the box and unconventional tactics? I was thinking awarding extra EXP for Roleplaying and possibly Crazy schemes and all. I'm still a greenhorn after all this, which isn't made any better by the fact I'm still new to the platform. But this is thanks to all who have posted here! The point of an RPG is to create a story collaboratively by playing. No matter whether you do that with a linear or complex plot, a non-plot premise (situation or location), or pure sandbox. When you are done with play and look back at what has happened, that's the story. The story is not created before play. It is an artifact of play. Whatever your approach, you need to bring your players in on that and get their buy-in. Some players do not like adventures with plots (I don't, for example). Some do not like sandboxes, mostly because they've played in "static sandboxes" that are terrible. Definitely know how you're going to do it and discuss it with your players before the game. If they agree they want a plot, they'll be sure to stay on that plot without you needing to curtail their choices or engage in the dreaded illusion of choice. If they agree they want a sandbox, get on the same page about what that means. This will make your game much better. You'll be working in the same direction instead of trying to herd cats. Thinking outside the box and unconventional tactics are best rewarded by saying, "Yes, and..." to their ideas and testing them fairly with dice as appropriate. In fact, the best games have GMs and players that say "Yes, and..." to each other as it is the foundation of improvisational acting, which is what you're effectively doing when playing an RPG. This makes for a highly engaging, very smoothly running game. No additional XP should be awarded in my opinion. Good, fun ideas are their own rewards.

2 short and basic things I think are required to be a good DM are never admitting that you're wrong, and providing a fun, enjoyable experience for your players.

I would add that the reason a lot of players don't come up with innovative ideas and just stick, to use an example from D&amp;D, with their trained skills and power cards is because they don't want to be wrong (to put it in improvisational acting terms, they don't want to be "blocked"). In other words, in many traditional games that I see being played, whether or not you can do something is often at the whim of the GM. This is not a proper approach to the game as it breaks player agency and creates an atmosphere that the players can only choose those things the rules specifically say they can do, which is an area the GM cannot refute. With the "Yes, and..." approach, all ideas are equally valid and their rightness and wrongness are determined by dice outcomes, not GM fiat. If you then combine that approach with "always make failure interesting," you will see players trying all kinds of unorthodox things because (1) they know the GM and group will roll with their idea and see where it goes and (2) even if they fail, it will be fun and interesting to the players (if&nbsp;excruciatingly painful for the characters).