Hi,
In D&D I always was the DM, back in 2nd ed and also in 3rd ed (apart from two one-shots). Of course I also want to have a PC, develop it, fight for it and maybe mourn for it if he dies. But am I still able to sit on the other side of the screen. What experiences do you have (from yourself or someone else, switching from longterm DM to full time PC)?
I am happy to hear from you!
You have to surrender... just go with the flow and not try to lead... let yourself settle into being a player... if you find yuorslef getting in leadership postions... make sure you have been pulled to it... and not pushed you way into it.
Mostly be will to accept things from the DM.
You may not agree... but you have to be willing to accept.
You could try to play some of the time and then DM some of the time. Thats what our group does and it seems to work pretty well. The thing that you should prepare yourself for is to be occasionally annoyed by how the DM does things. For instance I have someone who is a fine player but has problems balancing the game and following some of the more important rules and doesn't really come up with in-depth storylines. Just be ready to roll with it when the DM does things in a way you don't like because they often get irrate when a player starts telling them how the game should be run.
|
Aunor has it correct. Since the group is used to looking at you for guidance as a DM, they will natrually try to do so as a player too.
When I'm playing, I try to not to assume a leadership role, which can be easy or difficult depending on how well the other players know the game. In the one game I play in, I and the other DM are the only ones who are really up on the rules, so I often get pushed into the leadership role even if I don't want to be. It's the same when the other DM plays a character as well.
I found the best way to combat this is to throw decisions back at the other players when they look to you for guidance (unless of course it's something your character would be the expert on). By simply asking the fighter "You've been in the military, what do you think is our chances are if we attack the goblins?" or asking the priest "You're in the clergy, who do you think is the best person to talk to about getting that raise dead spell?" does wonders to take the spotlight off you.
Depends on you, on group and on DM.
When I play, I do tend to throw in some OOC talk commenting on rules, especially more vague rule calls ("it would perhaps make most sense if that thing worked like this") but of course it is up to DM to decide what actually happens (some other players I play with tend to do the same). After all, we are in collaboration together, DM and players.
Might not work that well with groups which are more into competition and powergaming though.
I have a slight tendency to get on "party leader" roles but I guess that is more dependent on the fact that my characters are typically in parlay role...(and one DM pointed out that I play characters who are easy to motivate to do things...)
Generally I agree with everything everyone else has said. It comes down to "roll with the punches". Do what's fun and don't sweat the details. My favorite method of avoiding unwanted leadership rolls is to take a fighter with an IQ of about 8; not the brightest match in the box, but not so stupid that he can't figure out when the party is stiffing him on treasure. The first time they try, he goes berzerk and kills a couple of them. That puts them on the straight and narrow. They respect his fighting skill and his sense of fairness. From the on he follows around like a lost puppy, fighting at need and partying with his ill-gotten gains the rest of the time. Gives me a chance to experience the story without the leadership monkey sitting on my back. That's why I'm running a character to avoid.