A Question to the Masses: Why don't you DM?

Greetings! This has been a question I've been asking myself a lot as of late. I run two games, myself, but trying to find my way into a game run by someone else has been extremely difficult. The reason for this is obvious: there are far more players who want in than there are DMs. This is kind of a no win situation for those of us who run things who want to be able to just play and for regular players who are just wanting a game otherwise. It's an odd situation indeed when fellows like myself are completely good enough to run a game for others, but can't find a game in which we can actually be the players ourselves. So I started to wonder and now I ask all of those who don't run games: why not? What has stopped you from taking up the reins and attempting to run a game yourself? Is it concern that the players will get upset with you? Is it the rules being rather complicated? Is it because there's no real resources telling you how you can get this done? I'm very curious about this and would love to hear from everyone who wants to respond. I eagerly await the responses to this thread and hope to get a large number of people saying their thoughts. They would be most appreciated and might help me with an idea that, if it works, might just become a bit of a resource I'm going to start working on for helping new DMs take up the mantle. Thank you for your time and responses!

I've been playing Table tops for around 12 years and have DMed way more than I have been a player. I've got a few answers for you: 1) Fear of responsibility. While the DM does have a bit more responsibility I don't feel this should be a real reason. My best games are made up from the seat of my pants. However in a way being a player gives you more freedom to do what you want. Which includes throwing a wrench in the DMs plans. 2) Lack of experience. Some people think they don't know the game or the rules enough, or maybe they just aren't comfortable being the center of attention. Being in a group of friends this shouldn't be an issue. Help your new GM out. 3) Lack of Creativity. Some times this does come with experience. It is hard to create an engaging world and challenges. 4) They like to Tweek. I've noticed several of my players fall in love with their combat machines of doom and love to tweek them. I think this is part of the reason they don't want to DM. 5) The DMs dirty little secret. We are on the player's side. Its hard to offer them a challenge without out right killing them some times. I've had players turn DM who don't understand this. It makes for frustrating games. 6) No one has put them up to it. I think most of the time its as simple as that. Maybe they don't think they can, maybe they are unsure. But most players will DM if they are put up to it. This is all from my personal experiance anyways.

I'm mainly a player and I have TRIED to DM, never to any success. I'm good with coming up with a world and characters to play with, the background of everything is no problem for me, but I'm bad with combat and challenges. I'm way too nice and non-confrontational to be able to pull off anything remotely threatening, and when I recently ran a premade adventure path, being too nice ended up helping the players completely derail the adventure so it was next to impossible to continue. I also have a lack of practical knowledge. I was never into History, or military tactics or physics, so not having a functioning knowledge of that is a detriment, particularly since my regular group all DOES have practical knowledge of that and use it. Plus I find it hard to think on the spot - contributing to me being nice, if the players come up with something, I roll with it and then kaboom... in that last case literally... I really do WANT to, but circumstances are against me, maybe if I hang around people who were more normal, with normal IQs and would not use knowledge of military procedure and protocol and a knowledge of weapons, armors and explosives against me...

My reason falls under William's #3. I have run games of many different systems for many years (30). I can read and run a module, blast up an idea for a by-the-seat-of-my-pants impromptu get together. I can wing it when the party goes off track with the upper half of them (I won't say the best), But when it comes to long-term campaign plans and world building, I just don't have it in me. I can't write a coherent storyline for guiding the characters through their adventures from 1st level 'til retirement. The flow won't come out of me. If the players are content with purely episodic adventures with little to no underlying story arcs, I'm golden. Most players aren't satisfied with that. That leads to William's #1.

Wow, two great answers already! @William P A good list of answers! I had considered most of those answers myself, though I hadn't considered the 'Dirty Little Secret' one. @Terratani That's a pretty great answer and I thank you for it. :) Sometimes it is fairly tricky when it comes to DMing because it can be a tricky mix when trying to deal with players who have some pretty advanced knowledge while trying to keep up. It IS usually the first instinct of a new DM to feel like helping the players along is needed and expected when neutrality is needed. Just to ask, would you find it easier to DM if you had a good instructional reference guide and what not on how to really get into the meat of DMing?

@Tex Good answer as well! A quick question, have you ever considered trying to run a longer pre-made adventure, like Red Hand of Doom? Bigger adventures tend to be a much longer and more significant undertaking and could last for quite some time depending on the players. This could likely handle your difficulty with story arcs. As well, you could ask the Brain Trust (aka: the general population). You said you can do most things and get a good adventure going, but it never hurts to ask for a little advice on overall story arcs from random people and getting ideas that way. A few ideas on how to create an overall story arc might be able to help you out on creating a Metaplot, getting the creative juices going. Really appreciate your answer here though. :) Thanks!

@ Terratani Here is another GM secret to making things challenging. Cheat. Don't allways show your dice rolls. Don't make it obvious that you are making shit up, some times that will ruin the effect for the players. But if some on just got an ax crit to the face for 79 damage? maybe it didn't confirm the crit? A player cast a last ditch hold person on the insanly powerful supper killer of doom, maybe he rolls a 1 on his save. Maybe a player is a bit upity and needs to learn that running into a horde of goblins is not a good idea. Some times you just have to do what makes sense or is theatrical. @tex I know exactly what you are saying man. Usually if I try to outline and adventure it turns into a spider web of things i think the players might do then they end up running off to Siberia to hunt down some one who might of had a grudge against them 2 years ago (shadowrun) and completely throw off my game plan. The best thing i've found is if you are running a story driven campaign know your npcs (and pcs edit. ) and what motivates them. Have a loose idea of where you want to go and buckle up cause you are about to go on a ride. Keep flexible as possible. Also... some times you can employee the force of nature method. Not a literal force of nature (unless your into that) but what ever the party is up against is so huge so diverse that you can't combat it with 4 or 5 people. This war machine,  cabal of mages, ancient dragon cult is going to do what it wants, and you heroes are just a thorn in their side. You find this sort of thing in source litterature all the time.

I actually read DM for Dummies, borrowed it from the Library. MAYBE if there was like a flow-chart that dictates courses of action based on what players do, starting with:  "Do you know what your player is trying to do?" No. "Ask the player what he's up to, does he tell you?" No. "Take every measure to stop because it can't be good." The big thing is if you're not good with spontaneity, only experience will help with that and it's easier to go in small steps and not have extreme people for that...

I have generally avoided GM'ing on roll20 for the same reason I have avoiding/left a lot of games on roll20. Players. The great thing about Roll20, is that anyone can get into a game, and play to their hearts content; it can also be the worst thing. I've seen many novice GM's throw in the towel with a random assortment of players, none of whom know each other, all come from different backgrounds and levels of experience, who either antagonize each other, exacerbate the muck up of a ruling, or just derail play by goofing off or drawing attention outside of the game.  That's a lot to handle when you're new to the table, and more so when you're the one trying to run it. With my time outside the VTT, I've been doing live groups for nearly 15 years (playing and GM'ing), and have always had the advantage of cherry picking groups that I know can play well together, personalities that, regardless of what kind of character they play, will still be able to negotiate that within the confines of the game. You don't always (almost never) have that advantage online - which has turned a lot of people I know away from MMOs in the same vein. Aside from that, some people just don't have it in them, or want to both with GM'ing; it is a lot of work, and only worth while if you find the time you spend in it rewarding. You can't make people like golfing; you can tell them it's easy, or it's relaxed, or that the clubs are light, you can give them a handicap - but if they don't enjoy the process, or the time spent on the green, it's not going to keep them there.

Terratani said: I actually read DM for Dummies, borrowed it from the Library. MAYBE if there was like a flow-chart that dictates courses of action based on what players do, starting with:  "Do you know what your player is trying to do?" No. "Ask the player what he's up to, does he tell you?" No. "Take every measure to stop because it can't be good." The big thing is if you're not good with spontaneity, only experience will help with that and it's easier to go in small steps and not have extreme people for that... Oh, lord, that book. I took a glance at it, but it didn't feel all that helpful, really. Hmm... Yeah, that's usually a good sign that you probably want to know what your player is doing. As the DM, if you ask what they're doing, they're to be telling you so immediately. You're the boss, you're the one who is running the game and, thus, you pretty much need to know what's being attempted. *chuckles* You're right though, experience does come with time and play and it does make it harder when your players are in an extreme sub-set. It sounds like you could do well with some calm, relaxed players who would allow you to actually get some experience in DMing, then I'm sure you'd be far better off.

Shortland said: I have generally avoided GM'ing on roll20 for the same reason I have avoiding/left a lot of games on roll20. Players. The great thing about Roll20, is that anyone can get into a game, and play to their hearts content; it can also be the worst thing. I've seen many novice GM's throw in the towel with a random assortment of players, none of whom know each other, all come from different backgrounds and levels of experience, who either antagonize each other, exacerbate the muck up of a ruling, or just derail play by goofing off or drawing attention outside of the game.  That's a lot to handle when you're new to the table, and more so when you're the one trying to run it. With my time outside the VTT, I've been doing live groups for nearly 15 years (playing and GM'ing), and have always had the advantage of cherry picking groups that I know can play well together, personalities that, regardless of what kind of character they play, will still be able to negotiate that within the confines of the game. You don't always (almost never) have that advantage online - which has turned a lot of people I know away from MMOs in the same vein. Aside from that, some people just don't have it in them, or want to both with GM'ing; it is a lot of work, and only worth while if you find the time you spend in it rewarding. You can't make people like golfing; you can tell them it's easy, or it's relaxed, or that the clubs are light, you can give them a handicap - but if they don't enjoy the process, or the time spent on the green, it's not going to keep them there. I think you really hit one of the nails on the head with your comment about random players and new DMs. I know well how it can frustrate newer DMs when one has to deal with an unruly bunch, because a bad experience can pretty much sour the idea of DMing for a lot of people. Playing online is never very easy and I've had my share of games that failed because most of the people just wandered off or the group seemed to have little interest in playing at all. Antagonistic players or outright trolls are easily one of the biggest problems, but can be dealt with by decent Vetting of players coming into the game. Personally? When I set up a game, I personally interview each of the individuals to see if they come across as too quiet, grating, antagonistic and the like. You always have to keep watching though, because players might become bored after starting and will end up having to be removed. It's doable, but I imagine for new DMs? It's not easy at all.

hmm... so DMing for Dummies is a bad book? Maybe I should write one? Maybe I should make it a roll20 project :D That being said as I recall the 3.5 DMG and its pathfinder counterpart both have some good sections on running games. as does the shadow run core book.

William P. said: hmm... so DMing for Dummies is a bad book? Maybe I should write one? Maybe I should make it a roll20 project :D That being said as I recall the 3.5 DMG and its pathfinder counterpart both have some good sections on running games. as does the shadow run core book. Actually, William, that's exactly what I'm getting information from this post for. :) I'm gaining some knowledge on what people are having troubles with so that I can start my project. I'm going to write a massive, wiki based guide on DMing games.

I've found that when you GM for specific players, (I had a group of online friends ask me to run a game) it will generally run better than with new, and/or random players.  I think Roll20 should implement some kind of experience level indicator in player profiles so that New GMs can get experienced players, and maybe have a better time GMing, and more experienced GMs can take on new players to show them the ropes of the game and teach them how to interact with other members, not only of the party, but the game world as well.  My biggest problem with GMing is I can't write a story to save my life.  Like I can get it started, but then it turns into a spaghetti bowl of ideas that don't really go anywhere.  Example: My Dragonborn Paladin in a game where I am a player has a very specific goal in mind for his destiny, but when I tried mapping it out (Beyond this is what I want to eventually do, and turn it into a campaign of my own) It became a jumbled mess and I got frustrated and dropped the idea. I am also a "Moderator" of a Guild of sorts on here and the biggest reason I see when I ask other players to GM (180+ players right now and only maybe 12 GMs) Is that they are unfamiliar with the rules.   So I think a logical, well thought out How-To guide would be helpful (The For Dummies books generally assume you have a working knowledge of the subject matter anyway) in allowing experienced players to stp up to the table so to speak and run the adventure, instead of just playing it.

Hypnos: As a GM, I don't have too much to say that others haven't said already, however&nbsp; if you're looking for examples of 'How to GM' done well (at least, in my opinion), I'd suggest checking out &lt;a href=" <a href="http://www.gregstolze.com/downloads.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.gregstolze.com/downloads.html</a>" &gt;How to Run Roleplaying Games&lt;/a&gt; by Greg Stolze (free pdf download at the bottom) as well as the GM chapters in the recently released Dungeon World.

I was just reading a couple of obscure games that have pretty good GM/DM sections.&nbsp; Hulks and Horrors, and the Dungeon World Guide here &nbsp; has some wonderful ideas, though a little out of my league.

I've been DMing for 20 years and what I noticed is that many very capable players don't get into DMing because they perceive it requires a lot of prep. What they often don't realize is that there are styles of DMing that are more prep-heavy than others. If you're using location-based adventures with no predetermined plot, you have a much lower workload and thus the barrier to DMing is reduced. You don't need a storyline - you just need an interesting location. The story will write itself based on how the character's choices interact with the threats and challenges in the location and how they are resolved with dice. It's an artifact of play, not something the DM need create beforehand. To that end, here's a helpful link for beginning DMs to focus your prep. Take a look. I bet you realize it's so much easier than you think!

Oh man, I NEVER would've started DMing if I didn't already have a group of gamers that I felt comfortable with. &nbsp;It would be terrible trying to learn the ropes with players who were actively trying to mess things up for you. &nbsp;I really think have a safe "environment" to experiment is key to getting your feet wet. &nbsp;Now I've got some experience and have dealt with problematic players, so it doesn't worry me much. &nbsp; I actually had a conversation with a friend who's very, very creative. &nbsp;She comes up with the best backgrounds for her characters. I asked if she wanted to give DMing a try and she said she'd love to, but she didn't feel like she knew the rules well enough. &nbsp;She really felt like she needed to know them inside and out before even trying. &nbsp;I was a bit surprised, since my experience was that no one cared if I winged it and happily offered rules advice. &nbsp;I guess it's true that everyone has a comfort zone, though.

@Taki I could not agree more! I was just discussing something similar with my sister. See, the problem here is that when you think about DMs? The near universal thing is that they've been doing this for AGES. I, personally, have 17 years of DMing under my belt. I've been doing it since 2e D&amp;D and have been playing since a late version of 1e. Others as well, almost everyone has a lot of experience...so where are all the new people? There's almost none. We basically are sitting in a top heavy ecosystem here, where you really have new people who COULD DM, but don't really have good resources for being able to do it. And that's kind of my goal: I want to do what I can to try and help the newer DMs learn to do it to help make the ecosystem just a little more equal and healthy. I think a really detailed and thought out guide can do that. Hell, I could seriously consider running a game specifically FOR individuals who want to learn how to DM. That sounds like something I'd be happy to do. @Balladeer Awesome, thank you. :) See, that seems like the type of reference that people could use. More things like that are always a positive! Have any other good things like that you know of? @Mike H Great! That is also super useful. I'll make sure to see if I can look through Hulks and Horrors too.

@Iserith See, that's a great example. Personally, I am an extremely heavy prep DM, mostly because I like crafting fairly long stories that are as grand as I can make them. At the same time, there's absolutely nothing that says other DMs have to take that route. Everyone has a personal style that they need to find that works for them. Sometimes all you need is the seed of something great and the players will be just as active in helping it grow. Also, thanks for that link! :) Every new bit of helping info is great. @Sarah A Agreed. Having a safe zone where some jag off isn't going to insult you for being slow or generally antagonistic does wonder. A DM needs to build their confidence and become experienced and it's very hard in a random player situation. Personally, I'm one of the guys that will help out with advice or being able to point out rules if the DM is having more trouble finding them. I like helping new DMs and this is one of the reasons I'd really like to write down a good, solid, expansive guide. The more newer DMs are helped to be confident and sure, the more everyone can game, really. And that's pretty win win.

Some of the previous comments have hit upon a couple of critical elements to get started in GMing. 1. Develop a compatible group: &nbsp;This is probably a big stumbling block for new DMs. &nbsp;Don't think that you can put out the call, take the first 5 players who respond and think that it will be a compatible group. &nbsp;The new DM should use the first number of sessions to figure out who will stay and who will go. &nbsp;Most of the time the players who don't fit in will just go their own way ( usually you never hear from them again ;-) ). &nbsp;Beware of the super enthused, "need to start playing tonight" player. &nbsp;The player who is in 6 games and just needs to play right away. &nbsp;They usually last 1 or 2 sessions before they go on to the next most exciting game they spot. 2. Preparation: &nbsp;Don't over prepare. &nbsp;Start small. &nbsp;Use the first sessions as a way to find the right players and get a fun game going. &nbsp;The story lines can be developed when you get an idea for what style of play you are comfortable with.&nbsp; &nbsp;Maybe start with one or two players so that you get to know them and their level of commitment. Nothing can kill a game faster than having too many players, who don't get enough of the lime light. &nbsp;They'll lose focus and get distracted.

Warren C. said: Some of the previous comments have hit upon a couple of critical elements to get started in GMing. 1. Develop a compatible group: &nbsp;This is probably a big stumbling block for new DMs. &nbsp;Don't think that you can put out the call, take the first 5 players who respond and think that it will be a compatible group. &nbsp;The new DM should use the first number of sessions to figure out who will stay and who will go. &nbsp;Most of the time the players who don't fit in will just go their own way ( usually you never hear from them again ;-) ). &nbsp;Beware of the super enthused, "need to start playing tonight" player. &nbsp;The player who is in 6 games and just needs to play right away. &nbsp;They usually last 1 or 2 sessions before they go on to the next most exciting game they spot. 2. Preparation: &nbsp;Don't over prepare. &nbsp;Start small. &nbsp;Use the first sessions as a way to find the right players and get a fun game going. &nbsp;The story lines can be developed when you get an idea for what style of play you are comfortable with.&nbsp;&nbsp;Maybe start with one or two players so that you get to know them and their level of commitment. Nothing can kill a game faster than having too many players, who don't get enough of the lime light. &nbsp;They'll lose focus and get distracted. Great advice! This is why I usually have what I refer to as a tutorial adventure whenever I start with a new group. That tutorial allows you to see who is going to be a good player, who's going to abandon and who is going to be a general problem. This allows you to get a bead on who will be best in your group before you get into the real adventuring. It helps a lot! As for preparation, starting small is always a good idea. Actually, if you're working D&amp;D 3.5, there's a great way to do that that I'm not sure how many people know about. Between 2000 and 2004 or so, WotC put out a number of free original adventures that were written by their in-house staff. There's a rather large number of them (probably 30 or so in all) with character start levels that range from 1 all the way to 20. Some of them are pretty sizeable quests, but a lot of them are deemed 'Shorts'. Basically, these are couple or three hour quests for a group of 4 that has been completely outlined for a DM to run. These things are easily some of the best methods of starting a DM out. They're all still available on the WotC site, if you can get to the D&amp;D 3.5 archive section. I downloaded them all only two or three weeks ago.

Do you have any links to those free modules?

Eric D. said: Do you have any links to those free modules? Oh man, they're all over the place so they'd literally need like 30 different links. The 3.5 Archive is...well...frankly pretty terrible and hard to wade through. I'll see what I can do though! Worst case, I'll put them into a .zip or .rar and find a place to host them, organized by character starting level. EDIT: Okay, putting up a zip file on Dropbox seemed like a good idea up until it appeared that it was a 100 meg zip. I hadn't realized how big some of these things are. Okay, this may take longer than thought, cause I'm going to start hunting down links! EDIT 2: My next post will be kind of spammy, because I'm collecting all of the links, so it'll be long. My apologies in advance for that!

@Eric D Okay! This took a while to get them all and find them again, but...woo boy, I did it! For reference, the D&amp;D 3.5 Archives are here:&nbsp; <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archives" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archives</a> They have a lot of cool resources that are good even today! Now, for the free adventures, I went through and nabbed the links to each and every one. Each year of adventure modules are organized from top to bottom by the level that they are aimed for! Sorry about the spam on these! 2004 Wreck Ashore (L 1) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040430a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040430a</a> Dry Spell (L 3) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040626a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040626a</a> Frozen Whispers (L 3) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040529a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040529a</a> Bad Light (L 4) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040731a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040731a</a> March of the Sane (L 5) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040827a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040827a</a> Primrose Path (L6) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040924a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040924a</a> Lest Darkness Rise (L 7) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041029a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041029a</a> Cave of Spiders (L 9) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041126a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041126a</a> Shrine of the Feathered Serpent (L 12) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041230a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041230a</a> Lochfell's Secret (L 15) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040109a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040109a</a> The Thunder Below (L 17) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041225a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20041225a</a> Force of Nature (L 18) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040326a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040326a</a> War of Dragons (L 18) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040227a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20040227a</a> 2003 The Eye of the Sun (L 4) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030725a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030725a</a> Fallen Angel (L 5) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030629a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030629a</a> Hasken's Manor (L 7) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030926a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030926a</a> Into the Frozen Wastes (L 7) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030111a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030111a</a> Environmental Impact (L 8) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030425a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030425a</a> Shoals of Intrigue (L 8) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030228a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030228a</a> Bad Moon Waning (L 10) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030830a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030830a</a> The Temple of Redcliff (L 10) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030329a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030329a</a> Road to Oblivion (L 11) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030614a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030614a</a> Ill Wind in Friezford (L 14) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030131a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030131a</a> Stone Dead (L 14) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030530a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030530a</a> Matters of Vengeance (L 15) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20031128a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20031128a</a> 2002 Test of the Demonweb (L 6) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021026a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021026a</a> Start At the End (L 7) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article1.asp?x=dnd/oa/oa20020628a,3" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article1.asp?x=dnd/oa/oa20020628a,3</a> Treasure of the Black Veils (L 8) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021206a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021206a</a> Tiger's Palace (L 9) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020830a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020830a</a> Crumbling Hall of the Frost Giant Jarl (L 10) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020329a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020329a</a> Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (L 11) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020928a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020928a</a> A Question of Ethics (L 12) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020726a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020726a</a> Thicker Than Water (L 12) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021227a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021227a</a> Desert Sands (L 13) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020223a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020223a</a> Black Rain (L 16) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020427a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020427a</a> Haunting Lodge (L 17) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021130a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20021130a</a> Icy Heart (L 20) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020125a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20020125a</a> 2001 The Secret of the Windswept Wall (L 3) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011021a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011021a</a> House of Harpies (L 6) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011221a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011221a</a> One Last Riddle (L 5 to 7) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010202a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010202a</a> An Eye For An Eye (L 8) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010824a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010824a</a> Fang, Beak and Claw (L 8) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010926a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010926a</a> The Sea Witch (L 10) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011005a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011005a</a> Harvest of Evil (L 11) - <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011130a" rel="nofollow">http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20011130a</a> And there you have it! All of the free adventures, specifically made for 3e and 3.5e, between 2001 and 2004! Keep in mind, these same missions can be converted into Pathfinder pretty easily as well! Some of them are longer, others not quite as much (the 'shorts'). Enjoy, folks!

Four words: I'm a college student. I wish I had the time. My first real try at running a Robotech campaign many years ago was a complete disaster. However, I did redeem myself with my Gamma World IV&nbsp;campaign. Right now I simply don't have the required time to write a campaign when I need to write a paper. :( &nbsp;

Mark R. said: Four words: I'm a college student. I wish I had the time. My first real try at running a Robotech campaign many years ago was a complete disaster. However, I did redeem myself with my Gamma World IV&nbsp;campaign. Right now I simply don't have the required time to write a campaign when I need to write a paper. :( &nbsp; Heh, yeah, I know how that goes. Well, if you do D&amp;D 3.5 or Pathfinder, consider the links I posted above. They're 44 free adventures, all pre-made, though I'm sure pretty much any setting should have some freebie quests around somewhere...

@Hypnos and WilliamP I actually found that DM for Dummies gave me a lot of confidence after other failures in DMing and helped me get the courage to try again. It did help me classify some of my problems and it helped me understand my strengths. My favorite parts were the sections on the types of players and the types of adventures you could build which really got me started. As someone that has been into TTRPGs since she was 10, I knew all the basics of playing the game and had an idea of what it took to run one, I just needed a better idea on how to go about putting it together. It in fact suggested that I did not actually have to do everything myself (GREAT advice!) and could delegate some things to players (like knowing the rules really well) As long as the GROUP has someone that's good at everything - like record keeping, or knowing the system rules - then you're good to go. It was a nice emphasis on how an RPG is a COLLECTIVE effort. So don't just dis it. But there are some things that you can't actually prepare for without experience - the real problem is getting that. @Everyone:&nbsp; My old online group that met on mIRC was pretty close for a while and I tried to run a few games with them, but it never really worked out... because... well because of spaghetti ideas that all fell limp and never actually reached any sort of direction or ending. One of them was using THRASH at another member's suggestion and I thought it was cool and made a setting of a martial arts academy on another plane that offered education to advanced martial artists that could do things like materialize their ki for power attacks and such, playing with the concept of the system being based on fighting games... It actually started prety good, but I ended up losing motivation and one of the players actually took over where I left off and I downgraded to a player with some NPCs I had made. I think things had also gotten hectic in my life at that point too. My villain was actually kinda fun being a devil child causing trouble in order to find his older brother - who was in fact the older 'sister' of one of the PCs... The group was fairly manageable, but I just couldn't hold onto it... Other ideas just never got off the ground because I wanted to do too much preparing and really understand the world I was building before &nbsp;playing in it in order to be able to build a story. World building is my favorite part, and I LIKE building a mythos and &nbsp;creating locales with culture themes and royal families and notable personae... Staying motivated when running an open-ended completely character driven game is pretty hard though. &nbsp;I actually had a falling out with that group because of a GM that lost motivation on a campaign I had REALLY invested a lot of interest in my character in... He kind of left it at a cliffhanger and I had to resort to a bit of Fan-fiction for some remote closure... We did some other roleplays for a while with the promise we'd go back and got in a row when he decided later that he would not be... Right now I am working on a new campaign concept and I am unsure if I'd run it. I kinda want to just build the world/maps, how it works and the premise, but then leave the rest to someone else to create the challenges and direct things... but we'll see once I've built everything... I'm even making my own tiles for it and that's a big thing... I am also thinking of distributing the tiles on the marketplace.

Terratani said: Other ideas just never got off the ground because I wanted to do too much preparing and really understand the world I was building before &nbsp;playing in it in order to be able to build a story. World building is my favorite part, and I LIKE building a mythos and &nbsp;creating locales with culture themes and royal families and notable personae... Staying motivated when running an open-ended completely character driven game is pretty hard though. You might consider an approach that I use when DMing. I don't build worlds at all, nothing. I create locations that can fit anywhere and then through framed questioning of the players during play, they build the world for me. So while I'm running the game and you're slaughtering orcs in the abandoned dwarven citadel I created, I'm asking you at appropriate times in the action why your people hate orcs so much or what you know about the dwarves who abandoned the fortress. I say "Yes, and..." to those ideas, adding my own ideas (or other players adding theirs), and they're now a part of the world. With each session, the world gets richer and more detailed and the players very engaged by it... because it's their ideas in play rather than just mine. So someone like you who loves building worlds would probably be very engaged as a player in that style. But also consider using your skills to harness and piece together the ideas of others to make a coherent whole while in the DM's chair. In that way, you've taken the workload off yourself on the initial prep, shifted it to the players in a beneficial way, and can use your natural talents to shape it into something consistent and interesting (even surprising). Consider also checking out the Microscope RPG .

I think everything has already been said at least once but here's my 2 cents. 1) It usually takes HUGE amount of time to do it properly. Of course if the set-up is very simple and mostly about combat this might not apply. I for one would not be ready to start a campaign with the real fear that my players wouldn't like to idea of it, I couldn't get proper players, the campaign wouldn't be finished...This is why I only GM for people I already know or someone I know has vouched for them. I also always in advance gather my players, tell them what I'm concidering and ask for opinions/if they like the idea. Eg. I started a new campaign (my first in Roll20, I've been roleplaying about 6 years and GMing about 4) about two weeks ago. I asked last December who would like the idea and would like to join. I had another campaign going on back then and asked if those players would prefer to continue that campaign/set-up or start the one I was thinking of creating. Only after I got their approval and I knew all of my players in advance did I start to work for the new campaign. It took me about 3 weeks to set-up the campaign and now I have worked about 2 weeks to create the content for the post-start phase. I would assume that it's still going to take me about 1 - 2 months to "finish" creating the campaign. So about 3-5 months of planning, creating maps, characters, etc. And all this doesn't include any of the NPCs and maps I have to create on the fly. I work full-time + I'm working on my master's thesis + studying for professional exams + I have other hobbies so obviously I'm not workin on my campaign 24/7 but still we are probably talking about 5 - 10 hours per week. No right minded person would ever do this unless it would pring them HUGE amount of satisfaction and joy. Most of my players enjoy more being just players. 2) Creativity. I know there are pre-done campaigns and those really do lower the barrier of entry. But still it's just a lot more satifying to have your own campaign and that always requires some creativity. 3) It can be stressful to GM, it's never stressful to just play. You have to take charge, be certain, react accordingly to anything the PCs throw at you. It's not the easiest job from abilities point of view but neither is it the easiest job from mental point of view. 4) Actually most of my recent players also GM or at least have GMed. None of them just do it online instead all the sessions are all handled face to face. 5) In general the GM should be the one who knows the rules best. If the players know the rules better then it can cause extra stress for the GM because s/he is always doubting her/himself. If everyone already know the rules well then it doesn't matter who knows them the best but the mental barrier is pretty tough to cross when starting a campaign with rules you don't know.

Are there too many games out there though? I mean look at that list. everyone should know atleast one system. and its not heard to learn. I look sometimes and theres alot, ALOT Of GM's looking for groups.

Awesome fucking thread! Started reading, could not stop. I just want to add some curiosities i have found to be true about the matter. First, the most troublesome players are the ones who dont DM, either they didn't like it, don't care about DMing or they have that noxius kind of personality that does not fit the one needed to DM. Being a Storyteller (as I know it, since i started with the WoD games) seems to bring some kind of insight that helps run the games when we are players. Not only can we help run games smoothly, but also, you can be sure an experienced ST won't rage, throw tantrums or derail the game as a player. So I guess if you are a new GM or want to start, get people who you know is a GM. We will give you tips, remind you of some rules and will be patient, since most of us remember the first times we GMed. In short, if you want to become a better player, GM a little; If you want to start doing it, gather some GMs as players. Another funny thing I noticed is that after so many years GMing I just dont like being a player as much. As opposed to when I started, I only wished for someone else to "take the mantle" so i could play forever. Not anymore. Call it GM Syndrome, given the option I will always GM.

Man, it's seriously fascinating to see all of the methods people use when they DM. Some are 'by the seat of their pants' and some are very heavy into pre-planning and what not. It's nice to see such variation! Really great to see all of this getting out into the air. @Terratani It's not so much that I'm 'dissing' the DMing for Dummies guide. I guess it's decent enough and it's the confidence building that's great. Personally though, I feel it doesn't really go far enough. To offer confidence is one thing, but a distinct structure for the DM seems like something that could be used. It's like you said previously, it'd be nice to have something akin to a flow chart. *chuckles* As well, so long as you trust the individual who is record keeping and helping out with the rules, that's a pretty good idea too. I've been that guy during a couple of games I've been in and have tried to help out. Works pretty well, I'd say. As well, hopefully building your own world goes well for ya! :) @Iserith Good alternative method for world building. Allowing the players to assist in the creation does offer a better connection for them to the world. There are a lot of good methods for DMs to really get their world moving well. It's pretty great to see so much creativity. @Maetco Some good points! Rather impressive that you're taking so much time to simply build the world for the game. Planning months of prep is a pretty massive undertaking and I wish you the best on it. Pretty much all you mentioned definitely seem to be important points for why individuals don't seem to really want to DM that much. Though I have to say, a lot of my players over the years have usually never tried DMing themselves, despite their knowledge of the system. It's only really now that I've been trying to figure out why that is and started this thread. *chuckles* @Kippeth V There's often a lot of GMs who are looking for games that they can just play in. GMing can get a little long in the tooth after a while and some people want to just relax and play instead of having to be the administrator. I don't think too many games is really a problem so much as a lot of players, not enough DMed games going on. @Embustero Glad to hear! After starting this thread, I never expected it would become something of a fountain of information for potential DMs! Thanks again to everyone who has contributed so far as well! And I couldn't agree more. Having a GM is a great addition to a game where someone happens to be pretty new to DMing. Granted, some DMs are impatient and not great teachers, so those types are definitely not the ones you want in your game, but a lot of DMs are willing to help out with rules and little bits of advice to help out a newer game master. The experience is there and many would be happy to share that with someone who'd like a little advice on how to do it. Heh, as for always GMing, it's a mixed thing. Sometimes people DM so much that they start to get burnt out. It happens a lot to people, myself included, and was the reason I went searching for a game to play in recently. It makes it hard to get past the burn out when we can't just get into a game. In turn, more DMs disappear or turn to private games because playing with people that you know well tends to be less of a stressful situation, thus reducing the pool of individuals running games on sites like this one. See, by new people trying to come out and DM, it makes the ecosystem healthier by adding new games. The new DMs learn the ropes and start offering games while older DMs are able to play, thus giving them a great break from having to run their own stuff, leading to less burn out. It's a big circle and it feels like that circle has been narrowing over time. @Everyone Something for folks to think about: I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but I thought I'd do so again... I'm planning on writing a rather in-depth guide on DMing and what not, but, at the same time, might there be interest in something akin to a tutorial game? Basically, a game that accepts newer folks who want to give DMing a try and helps them learn how to get a game rolling, how to use the rules, how to map, etc.? I'm curious as to how that could go and if folks newer to DMing would be interested in that.

Mapping is no problem for me as I am graphically inclined to begin with. My problem comes in when I present a community building concept to prospective players and one says he wants to make a Fascist regime like Nazi Germany... All I know about Nazi Germany is they killed people that weren't Blond and blue-eyed. HOW to use the rules might be good... I usually think of the kind of things I want and then look up the rules on how it works, since I'm not the type to memorize rules right out (although I am familiar with them, for Pathfinder, but there are too many rules to just know down pat for me.) @Hypnos I was directing the dissing comment a little more at William than you, and I can see what you mean that it's very general, but you can't actually BE specific for a tabletop role-playing game set-up because there are variable factors with each and every player as well as the GM. The only thing I think that it was really missing was how to handle the unexpected with something like a flow chart. It would also be nice to have maybe a set of etiquette on when it would be appropriate to 'railroad' and how to do that without being too obtrusive.

I'd just like to point out the take home from this (and any GM/DM advice thread); It's going to be different every time. You're players will be different, your ideas will be different, your setting, rule system, even mechanics might be different. So don't take one stance on it, and pigeon hole yourself into thinking that's always going to work. No one-right-way.

Terratani said: It would also be nice to have maybe a set of etiquette on when it would be appropriate to 'railroad' and how to do that without being too obtrusive. In my view, there's only one appropriate way to railroad - with your players' consent . Some DMs like to use the "invisible railroad" or "illusion of choice." This is problematic if your players expect no railroad or meaningful choices. So if you're going to have a game with a linear plot that requires you to use railroading techniques to make it work, tell the players what you're doing and why, then ask for their buy-in. They may tell you they don't care about being railroaded as long as the train leads to Awesome Town. Or they may tell you they want their choices to matter and don't want to operate within the constraints of a predetermined plot, in which case, use of that technique is ill-advised. In the former situation in which the players are aware of the plotted nature of the adventure, they can actively help you make it work better by choosing to stay on the path. If you try and keep your use of this technique secret, you run the risk of mismatched expectations that can simply ruin a game.

Yeah... not necessarily... I was running an adventure path (which by definition required a bit of railroading) and no, they did not help me at all by trying to stay on the right path.

Terratani said: Yeah... not necessarily... I was running an adventure path (which by definition required a bit of railroading) and no, they did not help me at all by trying to stay on the right path. We may be getting a bit off-topic, but at the risk of that, I would suggest either you didn't get their buy-in upfront or they said they gave you their buy-in but&nbsp;reneged. The former is on you; the latter is on them. As well, plot-based design is like handing the players a map with a path on it written in invisible ink and then asking them to stay on that path. It's really hard to do that if the players aren't working with you. As well, if they miss or misinterpret a clue you've dropped to get them to the next plot point, then they may think they are following the path you laid out for them. The answer is obvious to the DM, not so much to the players. This is very common and why some DMs recommend using the Three-Clue Rule for ensuring players follow the path you've laid out. An alternative would be to simply stop writing plots. Then you don't have to worry about any of this. We can take this to private messages if you want to discuss particulars. I don't want to derail this thread.

HOW to use the rules might be good... I usually think of the kind of things I want and then look up the rules on how it works, since I'm not the type to memorize rules right out (although I am familiar with them, for Pathfinder, but there are too many rules to just know down pat for me.) This depends a lot on what sort of game you're running, and what your players want out of it. If your players are the type who like to constantly tweak their characters in order to get optimal performance based on what the book says, I'd recommend sticking exactly to the book's rules, even if you don't particularly like that style of play. If, however, your players are more interested in the story than getting an extra +1 on Summon SuperMegaDeathBeamForce, then the rules are very open to interpretation as long as you're consistent with them. Don't like the 3.5 grapple rules? No problem! Change them, and tell everyone what the new rules are. Stick to these ones. Don't like the way World of Darkness handles social interaction? Change it to what you feel makes more sense! Can't remember the rules for naval combat in D&amp;D because you never read Stormwrack? Do what I did the other day and just make some stuff up that you feel works! As long as you're consistent, and you tell the players the rules you're using when they ask, everything should be okay.

Perhaps more people would GM if they could get a compatible group together and then agree to rotate the GMing duties. More people would volunteer if they knew they wouldn't get stuck as the GM for life.

@Terratani Actually, I do have a good piece of advice for that. It's pretty much what I tell every GM who wonders the same thing: There is no such thing as NOT railroading. Players already subconsciously know that there is an intent for them and that they get to play out what you are planning. It's a matter of how you dress it up and how fun you make it for them. So long as you have a game where the plot is going to lead somewhere, that's it. You ARE going to end up there by the end of the quest, they are going to face the bad guys that you want them to face and that's simply how it works. As the DM, you are telling a story. Your players are more or less the main characters in the story that you are telling. They're basically the stars with you as the author. You just don't know what they're intending to do until they do it. This also leads to a great way to deal with the unexpected. When you create the story you're intending to tell, you simply offer some slight limitations. You can have your open world where the characters can do things, but if the players are, say, in a city where the next bit is and they decide to go left field (leaving the city randomly, wandering off, etc.) you can generally limit it by simply trying to have them reason as to why they're doing that in the first place. If they can't answer that or they're just being contrary, one might reconsider that particular player for your next game. Basically though, by simply giving the individuals a set goal for each place they go to, most players will stick to what they're trying to do because, typically, they want to know what happens next. However, dealing with the unexpected things when they happen actually can be broken down fairly easily, because they can be helpful (if they did something good that you didn't think of) or less helpful (angering the important NPC in question, etc.) It also depends a lot on if they're doing (talking to said NPC, exploring places you don't want them to yet, etc.) Keeping them from exploring a place you don't want them to yet is literally as easy as placing a reinforced door with a key they get to find later. If they randomly wander off and start doing something random, ask them to explain why they're doing it. If they're hassling an NPC that is important, have said NPC threaten to leave or depart while telling them nothing. Most players will treat an NPC with important information very carefully. If they persist, go OOC and inquire as to why they seem intent on causing troubles. Don't be afraid to OOCly ask these people as to why they're doing what they're doing, especially if it's going to cause troubles for the group as a whole. I have more, but I'd need to organize my thoughts and write them all down.

@ Warren C That's how my groups tend to work, I even think that the group I joined here completely from Roll20 will be like this (we already ended up jumping into someone else running the campaign) Rotating GM duties by periods, either running a campaign to it's conclusion and swapping out or play a few months in one person's campaign, then a few in another and rotate it out to allow extra prep time for different GMs. My RL group on Roll20 does the latter. We run so much of an adventure in one person's campaign, jump to another, and we can go back to some of those old ones or leave them how we choose. @ Hypnos Yeah, doesn't work with players that have singleminded characters... my problems arose with a bard that wanted to raise the people in revolt to take down the monarchy and make it a parliamentary government and he resorted to setting places important to the monarchy on fire - destroying the next location to explore on the adventure path 9_9 I knew WHY he was doing what he was doing, it just really derailed the course of the adventure and made them miss out on maybe 2 levels worth of experience.

Warren C. said: Perhaps more people would GM if they could get a compatible group together and then agree to rotate the GMing duties. More people would volunteer if they knew they wouldn't get stuck as the GM for life. I'd love to play in a group like that. Switching DM duties would be pretty fun.

Hypnos said: @Terratani Actually, I do have a good piece of advice for that. It's pretty much what I tell every GM who wonders the same thing: There is no such thing as NOT railroading. Players already subconsciously know that there is an intent for them and that they get to play out what you are planning. It's a matter of how you dress it up and how fun you make it for them. So long as you have a game where the plot is going to lead somewhere, that's it. You ARE going to end up there by the end of the quest, they are going to face the bad guys that you want them to face and that's simply how it works. As the DM, you are telling a story. Your players are more or less the main characters in the story that you are telling. They're basically the stars with you as the author. You just don't know what they're intending to do until they do it. I think it's important to note in your explanation that you're speaking of a particular style of DMing - Hickman style in particular. A DM who does not prepare predetermined plots does not have the issues you are describing and thus needn't apply these techniques. Railroading is only necessary in a game that has plots in the first place. Location-based or situation-based adventures don't have plots and can be explored at the players' choosing however they like with no additional stress on the DM to keep them on a predetermined path. This is the Gygaxian style of DMing. What separates the two is just one thing: a predetermined sequence of events created by the DM. In other words, a plot. I would add that, with reference to prep being a barrier to DMing, plot-based design is actually more work than situation and location-based design. This article breaks it down. So if you want less work as a DM and less chances of your prep work being wasted when the players make choices, you should consider not writing predetermined plots. Story is an artifact of play , not something the DM creates ahead of time for the characters to experience (that would be more accurately called plot ). Story is the thing we create by playing. That's true whether you have a plot or not. I find this advice particularly apt for running games in Roll20 where your players may be an unknown quantity. A plot requires buy-in or heavy use of techniques that many players simply object to or will resist to the last. Contrast with players you know personally and have the benefit of "reading" face-to-face as you play. A location or situation-based game is just that - throw whatever PCs you got in there and see what happens. You don't really have that flexibility if you're dictating a predetermined sequence of events for a given adventure (the plot).

Terratani said: @ Hypnos Yeah, doesn't work with players that have singleminded characters... my problems arose with a bard that wanted to raise the people in revolt to take down the monarchy and make it a parliamentary government and he resorted to setting places important to the monarchy on fire - destroying the next location to explore on the adventure path 9_9 I knew WHY he was doing what he was doing, it just really derailed the course of the adventure and made them miss out on maybe 2 levels worth of experience. Heh, actually, that's very easy to solve. In this case, it helps to consider an odd source: Newton's Laws of Motion. Specifically, the Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Said bard, because of his actions, would likely gain reactions from those who do not want to see the monarchy displaced. This includes the city guard. Since the bard obviously was causing trouble, it would make sense that the guards would then find him and throw him into the dungeon. Sometimes, an example must be made: said bard in my games would likely be thrown into the dungeon for sedition and probably wouldn't be getting out. Time for that player to roll a new character.

Iserith said: I think it's important to note in your explanation that you're speaking of a particular style of DMing - Hickman style in particular. A DM who does not prepare predetermined plots does not have the issues you are describing and thus needn't apply these techniques. Railroading is only necessary in a game that has plots in the first place. Location-based or situation-based adventures don't have plots and can be explored at the players' choosing however they like with no additional stress on the DM to keep them on a predetermined path. This is the Gygaxian style of DMing. What separates the two is just one thing: a predetermined sequence of events created by the DM. In other words, a plot. I would add that, with reference to prep being a barrier to DMing, plot-based design is actually more work than situation and location-based design. This article breaks it down. So if you want less work as a DM and less chances of your prep work being wasted when the players make choices, you should consider not writing predetermined plots. Story is an artifact of play , not something the DM creates ahead of time for the characters to experience (that would be more accurately called plot ). Story is the thing we create by playing. That's true whether you have a plot or not. I find this advice particularly apt for running games in Roll20 where your players may be an unknown quantity. A plot requires buy-in or heavy use of techniques that many players simply object to or will resist to the last. Contrast with players you know personally and have the benefit of "reading" face-to-face as you play. A location or situation-based game is just that - throw whatever PCs you got in there and see what happens. You don't really have that flexibility if you're dictating a predetermined the sequence of events for a given adventure (the plot). To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to. *chuckles* Varied methods of DMing. Both ways can work if you have the right group for it. I think we can simply agree to disagree here. :)

Hypnos said: Heh, actually, that's very easy to solve. In this case, it helps to consider an odd source: Newton's Laws of Motion. Specifically, the Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Said bard, because of his actions, would likely gain reactions from those who do not want to see the monarchy displaced. This includes the city guard. Since the bard obviously was causing trouble, it would make sense that the guards would then find him and throw him into the dungeon. Sometimes, an example must be made: said bard in my games would likely be thrown into the dungeon for sedition and probably wouldn't be getting out. Time for that player to roll a new character. I would advise against this. If you're going to have the setting react to player ideas and actions, be sure that the "equal and opposite reaction" is at least interesting and not boring or punitive. To do otherwise is to set yourself up for conflict with the player who may start acting out in other ways. It is far easier to simply accept the player's idea and work with him or her to make it work in a fun way with complications everyone would like to be challenged by. Being attacked by town guards or thrown into the dungeon is almost always the sign of a heavy-handed DM who wants to block the ideas of his players to preserve his plot. There is a long sad history in our hobby about these sorts of interactions between DMs and players. If you find the limitations of the game or your own skills make working with the player's idea difficult, then at least talk to the player out-of-game and express your concerns with the idea honestly, rather than mete out "punishment" for fun ideas in-game.

Iserith said: I would advise against this. If you're going to have the setting react to player ideas and actions, be sure that the "equal and opposite reaction" is at least interesting and not boring or punitive. To do otherwise is to set yourself up for conflict with the player who may start acting out in other ways. It is far easier to simply accept the player's idea and work with him or her to make it work in a fun way with complications everyone would like to be challenged by. Being attacked by town guards or thrown into the dungeon is almost always the sign of a heavy-handed DM who wants to block the ideas of his players to preserve his plot. There is a long sad history in our hobby about these sorts of interactions between DMs and players. If you find the limitations of the game or your own skills make working with the player's idea difficult, then at least talk to the player out-of-game and express your concerns with the idea honestly, rather than mete out "punishment" for fun ideas in-game. Dude, she already said that she is trying to make LESS random situations. Respond within the bounds of what she asked. This is a thread for seeing why new DMs don't DM and offering advice to new DMs who are trying to start with things. Trying to basically tell everyone to just wing it left and right is not overly helpful, considering that people probably should start with trying to structure things first.

Hypnos said: To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to. *chuckles* Varied methods of DMing. Both ways can work if you have the right group for it. I think we can simply agree to disagree here. :) I agree completely. It's just important to note that there are two main styles of DMing (with some variations, of course) and that you were presenting a particular style. I'll present the other point of view, especially as I believe it relates to this topic. (Specifically, that one way is more work than the other and thus if we're looking to get more DMs into the hobby we should reduce that workload as much as possible!)

Terratani said: Yeah, doesn't work with players that have singleminded characters... my problems arose with a bard that wanted to raise the people in revolt to take down the monarchy and make it a parliamentary government and he resorted to setting places important to the monarchy on fire - destroying the next location to explore on the adventure path 9_9 I knew WHY he was doing what he was doing, it just really derailed the course of the adventure and made them miss out on maybe 2 levels worth of experience. In my experience (I used to run games with plots for years and years), this is a player who may be on some level rejecting your plot and how it constrains his choices. The use of fire is particularly telling and extremely common. This is a failure of getting buy-in. If you are using plots, it is a good idea to tell the players directly, "I am running a plot. It is a particular sequence of events for the adventure. The fun of this adventure is in following that path. I have not prepared anything for when you go off that path. I promise you it's a cool little scenario and you'll have fun. Are you okay with this?" If they tell you "yes" then you can count on them sticking to the prepared materials. If they go off the prepared materials, you are well within your rights to remind them of their agreement.&nbsp; The issue often is that the DM does not get that buy-in. They just assume they have it. Then the bard burns down the next adventure location. Oops.

@Terratani Opinions of varied individuals aside, go with what feels comfortable for you. Considering you mentioned it's hard to keep up with individual's random actions, go with the methods that you feel best with. I definitely suggest that all would-be DMs read the opinions and links given here, but to use what you want to use and go with what you feel works for you. That's the best thing anyone can do when trying out DMing and being new to it. Just don't overburden yourself, because overburdening can lead to intimidating yourself out of doing it in the future.