Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Had dinner with DHPorter tonight and the conversation came around to how people who usually (as in almost always) DM act as players. Our take was that the ones we know tend to be quiet, a little passive, and are more watchful than active. Any thoughts on this? Our sample set was pretty small, primarily based on ourselves and a few people from Garycon such as grodog, EOTB, etc.

I DM about 90% of the time, but as a player I play to beat the scenario (and not passively!).

I DM ... well, 100% of the time when it comes to AD&D, OD&D and so on. I'm a terrible player in that I will pick over things and play against the DM.

I went from solely DMing for a decade to mostly playing and it was a really big adjustment.

It’s a completely different mental excercise. DMing is having an infinite amount of information and having to keep it all straight and access it on demand. Playing is having no clue at all what’s going on and making the most of your limited resources and information.

I play con games differently: there I'm willing to hang back and let the others find all the traps! Er, I mean, I try not to dominate those games so everyone gets to shine.

I'm almost always the DM these days, but in the past when I did both I wasn't really what I would describe as a 'good player'. I tend to get bored easily if I don't have a clear task to accomplish and in that sense I'm not really a team-player, as I'm often more focused on what my character can do in a given circumstance rather than what the party as a whole can do. I guess that's why I like to play thieves as there are usually more options for creative thinking in almost any situation. I also don't play well with the party-leader type of guys.

The OP describes about half the times I am playing (and that's fairly rare these days). However, the other half is spent playing proactive, risk-taking fighter types who get themselves and everyone else in trouble. In an ongoing, slow-moving campaign I am involved in, I do it on purpose because the other participants are overly careful planners who'd slow down play too much if we didn't have an element of action (and chaos). This way, they are acting on their feet, and I move things forward, usually by breaking them.

Truthfully, I just enjoy sword-swinging and risking my neck.

I often have a hard time separating myself from my meta-knowledge of the game as a player. It can be easy to know how to play it safe and difficult to stop yourself from doing so.

I think everyone that knows me and has played with with me (where I'm a PC), know that I play with reckless abandon for the most part. At least until the clamavores show up. Then all bets are off and I'm heading for the exits.

Demons glowing with a blue fire? Fuck yeah, charge and attack.

Clamavores? Oh Hell No.

Welleran wrote:Had dinner with DHPorter tonight and the conversation came around to how people who usually (as in almost always) DM act as players.

Interesting discussion, how did it come up Keith?

Welleran wrote:Our take was that the ones we know tend to be quiet, a little passive, and are more watchful than active. Any thoughts on this? Our sample set was pretty small, primarily based on ourselves and a few people from Garycon such as grodog, EOTB, etc.

While more-recently I've mostly DM'd at GaryCon and NTX, in years past I was on the other side of the side of the screen a little more-often---generally in ASSH games or one of RJK's adventures before he stopped attending the shows. Russ and I played a memorable session of RQ at NTX under Jennell Jaquays one year too! More-recently, I've played Top Secret under Merle (and he runs an excellent game, although I've not played the new TS:NWO system yet), tried out The Strange last spring at a local quarterly TsunamiCon game day event, and at NTX this year, Henry and I both played in Zenopus' Holmes Basic game (along with austinjimm, too!).

I'm always mapping when I game, which I don't particularly consider a passive activity, but like EOTB, I do sit back and let others take the risks when I can

Allan.

Welleran wrote:Had dinner with DHPorter tonight and the conversation came around to how people who usually (as in almost always) DM act as players. Our take was that the ones we know tend to be quiet, a little passive, and are more watchful than active. Any thoughts on this? Our sample set was pretty small, primarily based on ourselves and a few people from Garycon such as grodog, EOTB, etc.

I would say that how I act as a player depends on whether I have run the particular module being played before. This last week I played in a ugh...5E version of white plume mountain. Despite the change to 5E I already knew the module since I ran it with my players a year ago or so. So I was not particularly active because I did not want to take advantage of my prior knowledge. I let the other players answer the riddles. I did not disclose my knowledge of the heat induction hallway or the room with all of the glass partitions separating various monsters. As it turned out....at least two other players in the group had also played the 1E version previously. Neither of them were passive despite already knowing most of it.

I only played in this adventure because my original table did not get any players (other than me) so I jumped to another table that was short one or two.

But when I do not know the material I tend to be an active participant. I think most other DMs would probably not want to ruin things for those who are not yet familiar with the game or with the material by making all of the important decisions for the group.

When I've had the chance to play at conventions, mostly LGGCs and GaryCons, I would play my character to the best of my ability without really going gonzo, knowing that some of these folks at the table with me paid a lot of money and took vacation time to get there - I'm not out to spoil anybody's fun at a con. If somebody else might lead us into a bad situation, I'll speak up, but I don't try to take the lead at every game I play.

In our home game, though, if I'm a fighter, I'm out to cause maximum carnage in the DM's plans. He knows it, and we have a lot of fun. Depends on who's playing the front line or a thief each game. Sometimes we let the player with the bad plan go first, and watch hilarity ensue. Home games are a lot looser when I'm not the DM - it's no secret that I run closer to BTB than our other DM.

Welleran wrote:Had dinner with DHPorter tonight and the conversation came around to how people who usually (as in almost always) DM act as players. Our take was that the ones we know tend to be quiet, a little passive, and are more watchful than active. Any thoughts on this? Our sample set was pretty small, primarily based on ourselves and a few people from Garycon such as grodog, EOTB, etc.

I tend to be bored, which sometimes makes me more reckless.

grodog wrote:Interesting discussion, how did it come up Keith?

It was a wide-ranging conversation, so I don't remember 100%. However, we both were commenting on having DM'd each other at various times. We were discussing our players in common and how we had to occasionally prod them to action. Don was saying how he crafted his character in my home campaign to be action-oriented to keep things moving, but would only do so when needed. I think we were at the local Irish pub for three hours -- it was one of those sorts of conversations!

Honestly, I wish I could go back to the days when I'd never DMed. When I didn't know what the hell the DM was looking at behind the screen (as Foster used to say, "not knowing how the magician was doing the tricks while sitting in the audience"). Makes for a better reality simulator

I'm not the best DM (technically) and prefer to be the player against the DM. My DMed games are probably fun to sit in (because I think I understand what makes for a fun time, a good challenge, a neat mental picture etc.), but I probably don't have things memorized like I should, and haven't done enough of the "homework" part before play. I think the types of people naturally drawn to be DM are probably those guys that had a greater sense of depth to them (that could really get sucked into something while others might get bored. Figuring out the puzzle was part of the excitement.). They liked to learn the rules and structure of things and then spend the time organizing themselves before play. They tend to feel this part is as fun as the actual game time. Typically they are strong readers, possibly book worms. I wouldn't be surprised if you had every serious DM take the IMBD (Myers Briggs) if they wouldn't be weighted toward introverts and possibly Judgers (prefer things settled and established rather then off the cuff) so ISTJs, INTJs. They are also good leaders (at the table, projecting a sense of excitement and fun, keeping the pace and helping players to keep the pace) and judges (keeping control of the "courtroom" at all times, knowing when to let things go and when to clamp down, knowing their role "as adjudicators of their impartial reality" as the players move threw it). These qualities certainly make for a good DM in the sense that the game will run more smoothly, and they are prepared (so the player gets a seem-less and fun experience). They also tend to be good off the cuff (when needed) because they have so much figured out (where a disorganized and unprepared DM might fall short; afterall its hard to off the cuff off the cuff.

DM players (the ones that rarely sit as player only), in my experience, seem to follow the "playing against the DM" as someone pointed out above. They say "oh cool, that was a neat way to handle this or that, I may incorporate that into my next module or understanding of the rules, or I disagreed with that etc.). But yeah, as a new player I wouldn't want to sit next to a bunch of experienced DMs. Where is the fun in that? The idea is to (at some level experience) "what if I really was doing these things" and that's easier if everyone involved is doing the same (or trying to at least).

Then there is the 50/50 guys (I suppose most of the guys playing 1E for a long time in small groups fall into this category). They have managed to figure out how to temporarily put away their DMs robes and hat in the closet and pretend not to know whats going on.

I remember when I first started playing 79-80', even then there were guys that were just natural DMs (and typically had similar personalities) and tended to not be great players (even got bored). So, you'd expect them to play in a similar way too.