love to hear stories about your groups when a former gamemaster takes a break and plays. I am in a current situation that has been fun.....but challenging when he interrupts or exclaims that "I wouldn't have run it that way!!!" combine this with a group of 6 other guys that seem to really enjoy this new change and want him to calm down and just play.everyone says that the game is great, but at least once every session we have to take a calm-down break because he is loudly questioning my gm style. i'm straight RAW from all the books and want to put a strong point on roleplaying. the fact that I have to remind him that I am currently running the game seems silly....we all changed our characters and current ap because his former campaign was not working out. any insight or funny stories would be great to hear so I can laugh and feel i'm not alone with what has turned out to be an uncomfortable and awkward weekly game night.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"If you want to run a game, run one. In this game, you're a player. If you want to question one of my decisions, do it after the game, or before the next one, so you're not interrupting the game."
|
I am GMing an AP that my normal GM is playing. My issues with him is he knows the game so much better he basically whipped my encounter's butt a few times. We've taken a break so I can adjust some things, but he's never questioned my decision. He's been quite helpful and admonishes me if I leave the curtain open a bit to let the players see what is going on behind the GM screen.
Sounds like your GM is a control freak and/or maybe is using OOC knowledge to interpret the encounters?
"If you want to run a game, run one. In this game, you're a player. If you want to question one of my decisions, do it after the game, or before the next one, so you're not interrupting the game."
I agree,
the other players are getting annoyed at his outbursts. makes me wonder why they voted him the party leader lol.... he also is stuck in 3.5 rules which makes it hard when we do take a break to explain that Pathfinder is a similar, but different game. my players are taking the time to study pathfinder, not d&d . it's kinda an "old dog-new tricks" situation that we are in. the grapple rules, charge rules, and combat situations just confuse him so he yells louder.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I GM a lot. I play a lot. I shut my mouth when I play unless something is grossly wrong that I would have spoken up about anyway.
Tell him straight up that you expect him to act in your game how he would expect you to act in his. That's all. If he continues ask the other players how they feel and if they're tired of his crap than eject him from the table.
GM genital waving is detrimental to the game no matter what side of the table the gm is on.
I am GMing an AP that my normal GM is playing. My issues with him is he knows the game so much better he basically whipped my encounter's butt a few times. We've taken a break so I can adjust some things, but he's never questioned my decision. He's been quite helpful and admonishes me if I leave the curtain open a bit to let the players see what is going on behind the GM screen.
Sounds like your GM is a control freak and/or maybe is using OOC knowledge to interpret the encounters?
true,
the fact that he took out cold iron arrows the first round of the first quasit fight raised a few eyebrows at the table....lolhe is also dealing with the fact that the other players really enjoy the new story and the way the game is being run. the last thing I want is a pissing match between us. he has been very helpful with game mechanics but, still feels the need to tell everyone that some of the things I put out there are stupid or badly run...sigh....what to do?
My group has one DM who runs everything, we play at his home, he provides the books, minis, etc... (that said we all in theory pitch in to ease the financial hit). He also kind of has the "Boss mentality" at home, at work, etc... so he likes the DM role where he gets to arbitrate and call the shots.
Now he's a great DM when it comes to the story telling, and providing challenges and such, but we run into problems with our Rules Lawyer. You see, the DM will houserule a bunch of stuff to make sub-optimal characters and players able to contribute more, so while our Rules Lawyer builds really well optimized characters, an un-optimzed character can perform at the same level or better without the feat choices or class features.
So the rules lawyer gets a bit miffed sometimes. Now one day, we decide to switch it up, the Rules Lawyer has a module and we decide we want to give it a shot to switch things up. He runs it while the usual DM plays. During the course of the game, the usual DM tries playing with his house rule modifications and at every turn, the Rules Lawyer DM says "That's not what the rules say" or "Your class can't do that."
The usual DM then tries to make rulings and the two get into a bit of a pissing match over it, leading to awkwardness for the rest of us.
Same DM, but entirely different game hosted and run by someone else (the one who knew how to play, and the DM tries making rules or arbitrating disputes with "But at my table...". It was like watching a baseball player walking into a tennis match and telling them they were doing it wrong, then playing baseball in the middle of a tennis match. It was kinda funny.
My group has one DM who runs everything, we play at his home, he provides the books, minis, etc... (that said we all in theory pitch in to ease the financial hit). He also kind of has the "Boss mentality" at home, at work, etc... so he likes the DM role where he gets to arbitrate and call the shots.
Now he's a great DM when it comes to the story telling, and providing challenges and such, but we run into problems with our Rules Lawyer. You see, the DM will houserule a bunch of stuff to make sub-optimal characters and players able to contribute more, so while our Rules Lawyer builds really well optimized characters, an un-optimzed character can perform at the same level or better without the feat choices or class features.
So the rules lawyer gets a bit miffed sometimes. Now one day, we decide to switch it up, the Rules Lawyer has a module and we decide we want to give it a shot to switch things up. He runs it while the usual DM plays. During the course of the game, the usual DM tries playing with his house rule modifications and at every turn, the Rules Lawyer DM says "That's not what the rules say" or "Your class can't do that."
The usual DM then tries to make rulings and the two get into a bit of a pissing match over it, leading to awkwardness for the rest of us.
Same DM, but entirely different game hosted and run by someone else (the one who knew how to play, and the DM tries making rules or arbitrating disputes with "But at my table...". It was like watching a baseball player walking into a tennis match and telling them they were doing it wrong, then playing baseball in the middle of a tennis match. It was kinda funny.
wow, you seem like you can feel my pain...lol
we are playing a fun game right?!?!?it's getting in the way of storytelling and fun. we all work and have busy lives and we want to get together once a week to escape reality.
love to hear stories about your groups when a former gamemaster takes a break and plays. I am in a current situation that has been fun.....but challenging when he interrupts or exclaims that "I wouldn't have run it that way!!!" combine this with a group of 6 other guys that seem to really enjoy this new change and want him to calm down and just play.everyone says that the game is great, but at least once every session we have to take a calm-down break because he is loudly questioning my gm style. i'm straight RAW from all the books and want to put a strong point on roleplaying. the fact that I have to remind him that I am currently running the game seems silly....we all changed our characters and current ap because his former campaign was not working out. any insight or funny stories would be great to hear so I can laugh and feel i'm not alone with what has turned out to be an uncomfortable and awkward weekly game night.
I can understand him correcting a rules mistake but as a GM he should know to be be respectful enough to not criticize your GM'ing method mid-game. I am sure he would not like it, if someone did that to him. He can give any pointers he wants to give after the game. There is more than one way to "do it right".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Much like doctors often make the worst patients, GMs often make the worst players.
I've just started a game as a player with the group who I'm usually the DM for. The new DM has quite a different play style to me. So far it's been fun. I've only piped up with rule disagreements when he's accidentally given someone too many/few attacks of opportunity, or when he's directly asked me a question about something.
I'm there to play, not complain about how I'd do it differently, and so far it's been really fun. I think he may turn out to be a better DM than me.
As a long time GM (~20 years now) that:
1) knows the rules extremely well
2) houserules extensively to match my taste and for better balance (this is why I know the rules so well)
3) runs games mostly off the cuff with no prep and just a strong sense of story structure (another good reason to know the rules so well)
4) is spoken of highly as a GM
it is very difficult to be a good player. I want to PC some times, of course, but ultimately, I'm constantly struggling to keep my mouth shut.
I try to help the GM with rulings, if such help is welcome--if it isn't, I try my best to grin and bear it.
I get frustrated by stilted speeches read from cards or books, but I try to look at it from different angles, that it's just a different style and is equally valid.
I am bothered, sometimes, that other GMs don't see eye to eye with some of my houserules (the balance ones, not the taste ones, since I do get that varies), so I am unable to play some of the characters I'd like--concepts that would only be mechanically viable in my own game.
When you know monsters and classes and abilities inside and out, it is hard to not know things--I end up having to play characters with high knowledge skills to justify my own knowledge. It's very hard not to pull out cold iron arrows when facing certain monsters, for example, or to run and take cover from a potential cone of deadliness that you know is only once per day.
The hardest, though, is being just one person, with just one personality and just one set of abilities. I seriously enjoy the challenge of solving problems from the perspective of just one person with just what they could do and affect at my disposal, with just one agent in the world--that's the enjoyment I get from playing--but the rest is hard. Harder than you'd think.
Give the guy some benefit of the doubt. He sounds like a jerk, but I don't know how much of that is filtered through you feeling that he's disrupting your game. Take a look at it through his eyes for a moment and if he's still a jackass, talk to him about it privately between games.
my party consists of 4 outta 6 players being dms and they dm for 3.5. Im constantly having to recheck and rego over things because they have homebrew so much stuff that they carry it over to this and I have to let them no thats not how it does. I get the arguements that if I do it this way, it makes it soo much easier for the player and dm to eep up with things, which I have to turn around and let them no they chose the class and thats comes with the class. Examples would be instead of eeping track of how many rounds for mage armor, have it last all day, etc etc.
My advice is be respectable but FIRM. If people wanna argue bringing homebrews they been doing and the way ur running things different than they would......u just politely bring up rule number 1. Dont argue with the dm. Stand ur ground but also listen. If it sounds like a good idea, then u decide if u wanna go that route BUT always always say that u will allow something with the minding that u can take it back. Dms can ne sneaky. I had one of mine say he wanted a certain type of quiver for his wife who was an archer and said that it basically does is have unlimited reg ammo. Imagine my surprise in a carrion crown when she grabs some undead bane arrows and states she now has unlimited ammount of them at lvl 1..... Lol
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been a DM since I was thirteen (will be 31 in a few months).
I very rarely get to play, which makes me very sad...
My background is in Illustration / Character Design & Development.
The plus side is I often end up with NPCs the characters love.
The downside, is I rarely ever get to actually play any of my ideas out. ;-;
I have a friend who's actually part of a gaming company that runs stuff at many conventions, and he's running a game now I get to play in.
He even let me go with a far-out notion: Half Dragon (Brass) Aasimar Paladin (Holy Light / Defender), child of a celestial dragon and an archon, who requested being banished to earth for his 300th birthday. He got sick of watching heroes cut down before their moment of glory by villains with foul tactics, and desires to protect the would-be champions of the world while they achieve their destinies. If people remember him more than the other party members, he feels he has failed.
I love this character dearly, when the story was more serious, but the player count has since dropped due to life issues.
Since it has become very hack-and-slashy, which doesn't contribute to a rich story element we had before, sadly.
As a DM in the party, I find it hard to bite my tongue sometimes, but it's never about condescension.
The guy I'm playing under has been running since 1st edition, but he still has gaps in his Pathfinder knowledge.
More often than not, I find myself involuntarily correcting certain situations, such as the difference in Cleave between 3.5 and Pathfinder.
(I don't have power attack - the fighter does - I'm totally defensive and intervening)
I always feel crappy for doing it, but he always seems thankful because he doesn't know the system entirely yet...
But I always worry that this habit will result in me someday stepping beyond my role.
There are two games I run, alternating weekly.
One game has a guy who reads every line of every resource in every book, and though never having run a game himself, he feels the constant need to chime in with: "I thought..." and "Actually...", often answering questions posed to me as the GM, before I can. In fairness, he's right 2/3 the time, but it's that last time that is irritating, because then the newer players (for 3 of the 5 it's their first Pathfinder game) keep remembering his false information, and it's a retraining effort. It gets worse that he talks out of character at game, a LOT.
"Normally these things are resistant to attacks that aren't..."
Then the new players start acting on that knowledge, because they're new, and confronted with the situation, "Oh, this won't work because..." based on knowledge they don't actually have. The funniest thing about this scenario, is despite his excessive knowledge and frequent (if not minor) slips of meta, he's not a rules lawyer. He doesn't min-max, or twink, or optimize... He does what he feels is right for his characters, and that gets a lot of respect from me, but his attempts to "help" often do more harm, and it seems impossible to break him of this habit.
In the other game, one of the players is the GM that taught ME how to play way back in 2nd. He's actually surprisingly tame about it. In fact, the prior game I ran with him in it lasted nearly 7 years, and ended about 8 years ago. He still talks with pride about his character, but he's far less of a problem than the player who has never run. I find this crazy ironic. Rather than assuming something is possible, he'll come up with the idea, then ask me: "Here's what I want to try. Is this possible?" - you know he's got a theory of how it can work, but he's very respectful of the fact that I might not agree with the method.
So the former DM is actually far less of a problem than the player who must read everything... Kind of ironic.
Personally, I wish he'd just stop reading all the damn books if he's not going to run something.
What reason does a player have to read through an entire Bestiary, cover to cover, let alone all three of them?
I had this issue with him back in 3.5 as well, when books had sections specifically for DMs in them.
He'd read ALL of that, which would make any attempt for me to actually use something from those sections totally worthless if he was in the game, because there was no surprise.
"Why would you read the GM section too?" I'd ask. "I own the book, so I wanted to read it. What's the problem?" He'd reply, to which I'd sigh.
I'm frequently having to create custom monsters and encounters, just so he can't be an involuntary pain in the ass. He's actually a nice guy, just accidentally annoying.
As a DM moving to player space, though, my biggest problem is the depth of the characters I create. A lot of random GMs don't put the depth into their combined campaign as I put into some of my characters... Which isn't meant to be demeaning, so much as to imply that the others I know who might run a game often go for a simple or light story theme, rather than a muti-tiered event world, where they're actively gauging what the player's choices change. This leaves me feeling that the character might be wasted on the scenario, which IS condescending on my part. Leaves me with an apprehension. Most of my ideas require a GM that's capable of getting waist-deep in story, and it's a gamble.
Personally, I have a really hard time playing simple character, like:
"Jim, the fighter that fights. I wanna fight stronger and stronger things, and be a total bad-ass!"
Totally can NOT play a character that simple.
Feels like a waste of time from my personal point of view.
I dodge the GM/Player switch hit issues, in that there are very few house rules we use, unless dipping back and allowing 3.5 resources into the Pathfinder game, but even then with my circle it's a shared consensus, which I guess I'm pretty lucky to have.
In the cases of 3.5 integration, I've personally gone through and done revision on almost all of the classes to bring them up to Pathfinder standards (though not prestige classes), except for the Diamond Mind school from Tome of Battle (still deciding how to handle it), and the Magic of Incarnum classes (cringing is understandable). I'm lucky the local group agrees with the updates.
Then again, my local group isn't... big?
There's like maybe 14 if us total, broken over 3 groups.
Whenever a conflict does occur, it can usually be settled with an evil eye, or a reminder that questioning the GM is a poor decision~
I also get to GM like 90% of the time I play and I never managed to bring a character above the mid-levels due to this being the case.
I think I'm quite a good player however sometimes I tend to steal the spotlight not by my actions, but by monologueing to much in character.
Be it a wizards philosophical interest in some weird ontological themes or my figthers trash talking to the villains. Which normally is great RPing can get out of hand sometimes.
When you know monsters and classes and abilities inside and out, it is hard to not know things--I end up having to play characters with high knowledge skills to justify my own knowledge. It's very hard not to pull out cold iron arrows when facing certain monsters, for example, or to run and take cover from a potential cone of deadliness that you know is only once per day.
Maybe you should try playing something really badass, devoid of fear at all. Like a Paladin or an awesome Barbarian.
"Axe no hurt puny demon? Me punch harder next time!" You are the Barbarian you don't need any fancy tactics. Just charge and keep hammering away on that thing!
You are to badass to dodge that stupid cone, just tank it(You got your Superstition Bonus anyway, so you're practically immune)!
NOTE: THIS PLAYSTYLE IS EXTREMLY DANGEROUS AND SHOULD NOT BE ATTEMPTED IN TRAP HEAVY ENVIRONMENTS OR WITH A NASTY GM!
I GM a lot. I play a lot. I shut my mouth when I play unless something is grossly wrong that I would have spoken up about anyway.
Tell him straight up that you expect him to act in your game how he would expect you to act in his. That's all. If he continues ask the other players how they feel and if they're tired of his crap than eject him from the table.
GM genital waving is detrimental to the game no matter what side of the table the gm is on.
isn't it funny how this situation has come full circle ?!?!? problems that were not dealt with have magnified and caused a sour feeling at the game table . these problems have lead to the other post "pc died and upset about rules"
I can see no other way to proceed than to ask this guy to quit
I GM a lot. I play a lot. I shut my mouth when I play unless something is grossly wrong that I would have spoken up about anyway.
Tell him straight up that you expect him to act in your game how he would expect you to act in his. That's all. If he continues ask the other players how they feel and if they're tired of his crap than eject him from the table.
GM genital waving is detrimental to the game no matter what side of the table the gm is on.
isn't it funny how this situation has come full circle ?!?!? problems that were not dealt with have magnified and caused a sour feeling at the game table . these problems have lead to the other post "pc died and upset about rules"
I can see no other way to proceed than to ask this guy to quit
I would give him a shape up or ship out sort of ultimatum. Talk to him about it one more time. Presumably this person is your friend, talk it out. Explain why his behavior is unacceptable and why it bothers you. "The next time you give me a 'I would rule it differently' speal you are out of the game. Talk to me before or after, send me an email if there is something you are worried about or think might be better a different way, but not at the table, period."
If that doesnt work, thats fine, but he probably doesnt realize he is doing something wrong, he is just trying to 'help' in his way make the game better. He shouldnt but I doubt it is malicious. Try having a conversation away from the game first.
I've both GMed and played. I found that within a game group, if you switch up the GMing role, you also want to change game systems. Less conflict that way.
This kind of worked for me. When one of the players wanted to try DMing, it happened to be right as 4E was coming out. I had a huge DM-as-a-player moment when our group first encountered the brokeness that was the early 4E stealth system. Through a comedy-of-errors style domino effect, it ended with the entire party dead. I was more angry at the game than the DM, but of course argument commenced because really, neither one of us knew the rules well at that point. We rebuilt the entire party after that encounter, and excluded the stealthy Rogue, opting instead for a dual wielding Ranger that took on the trapper role. We still used stealth, but not as a combat mechanic on the player side.
Fortunately, there were no repeats of that sort of thing, though we did sub another character... Wizard for Psion I think it was. The DM got several modules worth of experience before we kind of gave up on 4E... halfway through the middle tier, whatever it was called. I got more experience at trying to relax. :)
Different systems help, but it still won't remove the "know the rules" thread that is woven tightly into all DMs, even the loose, hand-wavey types (no offense to them, they tend to be more relaxed).
I've been resident GM for about 10 years now, while trying to play as often as I could. Unfortunately I recently moved very far away. I've GMed and played in PFS a couple, but it's not a regular thing around here. Int he past 2-3 months, I've played under two new GMs, new to me and GMing.
I understand that you have to learn at some point -and I absolutely love introducing people to pathfinder - but why are these people who are unfamiliar with the regular game already so interested in changing it so much? Outside of PFS, almost every GM I've seen is obsessed with giving players "powers". As my friend put it, "I don't want you to give my half orc barbarian powers. I chose my powers when I picked half orc and barbarian."
One of these GMs was selling staves for 300g and giving out +2 bane weapons at level 1.
I try to be by the book (my biggest house rule was the time we tried a defense roll instead of static AC, which I may try again). But I try to avoid throwing out overlooked rules as long as it looks like everyone is having fun. But I have a hard time sitting idly by when GMs are negating entire skills, feats, spells, etc by just commanding things to happen.
But really, knowing or not knowing the rules isn't all that big a deal when people who do know them are willing to help compared to the adventures. Rules knowledge can't save you from improper encounter design or poor story flow. That's why I'm a big fan of new GMs using the APs. It's like having someone with decades of experience help you out, because that's exactly what it is. When I started running my first AP, I saw a huge jump in my ability to GM in general. I could now fabricate and populate an entire encounter, dungeon, region as needed on the spot and have it be balanced and entertaining. WIthout insight into how this has been done for years, I couldn't do that. It's a matter of reinventing the wheel. I think typically new GMs don't want to use them because what they really want to do is tell this specific story they have in mind. And that's called starting off on the wrong foot. Not only is that a bad way to approach RPGs, but wouldn't that story benefit from you knowing what you're doing? And on top of that, they don't have fleshed out NPCs or pacing or anything. They have a cool idea and they think the rule of cool will dictate that everything they do will come out awesome. You can't tell a good story if you're still too afraid to talk in a fake accent in front of people.
So basically, I've come to the conclusion that it's more fun for me to GM well for a group of people than it is to play in that group while someone GMs poorly. It's not even close. If your GM pal would have more fun running, he should run.
Sidenote concerning "Rules Lawyers": Before I moved, my whole group was rules lawyers. There was a point when we could tell you the page numbers for what we were talking about. Arguments are exceedingly rare when there are no gaps in knowledge. And any disagreements? Well heck, sometimes a lively debate about RAW/RAI, balance, fun and all that can be just as fun as killing goblins. I'd take that anyday over a true neutral paladin commanding wraiths and a GM who tells you your character just killed someone.
I usually get the (or say) is that how you intend to rule it? the book says (explanation)
then the dm says... Yes. No. or okay, i didnt know that. Problem solved. We do not bicker, the players wont allow it. If neither side seems accurate, we let the dice rule. odds i am right, even you are.
It's not hard to be a DM who plays. Let the other DMs run their games as they see fit and enjoy the game. The chances of one DM at a table running the game the same way as another are pretty slim imho. As long as everyone is clear on how they plan to run (such as what houserules will be used, what sourcebooks are allowed, etc.) then there shouldn't be any issues with having DM's play in other DMs' games.
The issue I see arise is when the new DM is less secure about making decisions and defers to the "more experienced" DM which then puts the onus of making rulings on the player-DM. If you're going to be a DM then brush up on the rules that might affect a given session and be familiar enough with them that you can make a ruling. To me, that's one of the things about being a DM...I don't have to know all of the rules all of the time. I just need to know the impactful rules at the time they come up.
If a former-GM player says "I wouldn't have run it that way" try constantly saying "I wouldn't have run your character that way..."
|
If a former-GM player says "I wouldn't have run it that way" try constantly saying "I wouldn't have run your character that way..."
lol I agree. As a GM currently playing in my first game in forever, I consistently find myself thinking about how i would run something different, or what I would do next, yadda yadda. But then I remember how enjoyable it is to just relax and play.
The biggest thing I like watching is my former players pull their crap with the new GM. It gives perspective.
Once again I read the comments on a rather simple question and come away shaking my head.
I'm a GM. I'm the main GM for our gaming group. I've probably been the GM for 2/3 of our gaming sessions.
In the other 1/3 I'm a player.
When I'm a GM, I GM.
When I'm a player, I play.
BECAUSE I'm a GM, I do my level best to make the curren't GM's game experience be as positive as possible. That means, among other things, I don't challenge rulings at the table, don't say "I'd have done it this way" (except when I'm asked, which is fairly common, actually), and I do my level best not to meta game.
If something isn't going the way I would do it, I simply make a mental note that something isn't going the way I would do it, just so I have some future reference if the same or a similar situation arises.
To me this would be like an actor in a movie who had also directed telling the director what to do and yelling "Cut!" or "Action!" during the filming. That's an actor that wouldn't be in the cast very long.
Do other GMs really find it that hard to put their player cap on and leave their GM cap behind?
|
I've both GMed and played. I found that within a game group, if you switch up the GMing role, you also want to change game systems. Less conflict that way.
Maybe I've been lucky with the folks I game with, but that hasn't been my experience.
More than 30 years ago I was living on the East coast (in southern NH), and playing in a loose group of gamers in MA and NH. Gamers moved fairly freely between games, and most of the GMs also played in at least one of the other games. While there were differences in the exact ruleset we used, almost everybody played something that was pretty close to AD&D (except for magic; we all used spell-point systems).
Nowadays, on the West coast, I'm playing (and GMing) Pathfinder. Our weekly game alternates between Rise of the Runelords one week, and Jade Regent on the other week. Again, the GM of one game will be a player in the next week's game. In fact we're now running two tables each week (and are probably going to add a third table). There are some players who only show up for one of the games, but most of them have a character in each campaign (although players who sit at the same table for one game don't necessarily sit at the same table in the other campaign). Almost all of the players also play PFS, so that makes it easier to stick with a common (Pathfinder) ruleset.
The first time I became DM for the group I am in, I made a short list of a few things I was running differently from the previous. These were not house rules, but rather rules I interpreted differently. I went over them at the very beginning of the first session. There was a bit of discussion but it seemed we that in the end we were all of like mind on them.
I don't have any horror stories on the subject though.
Do other GMs really find it that hard to put their player cap on and leave their GM cap behind?
It can depend on a lot of things... the style of DM compared to the style of the game he plays in, the group dynamic between a former DM and the players he has DM'd for, and the changed dynamic between all the players and the new DM. There are a lot of factors at work, and I feel it's just harder (in some cases a little, in others a lot) for a person who mostly DMs to become a player. Any of them can do it, but for some it winds up at shouting matches over rules and for others it is merely tongue biting or silently letting a ruling slide. But whether it is hard or not, comes down to the individual person in question. It probably gets easier tho, the more often a DM plays on the other side of the screen.
Looking back at this slightly older thread in light of the new one, I noticed this:
we all changed our characters and current ap because his former campaign was not working out
My guess is there are some underlying hard feelings fueling his behavior. Did he decide to shelve his campaign or was it a revolt from below? That could have been a pretty bitter pill to swallow. It sounds like he's challenging you as his replacement.
I got not one, but 2 players who have been DMs before and... it's not bad. They play along just fine, but they also help me a LOT with the rules. They are like assistants without going over the line between players and DMs.
They do sometimes make snarky comments about how I run some encounters and stuff, but nothing major.
Do other GMs really find it that hard to put their player cap on and leave their GM cap behind?It can depend on a lot of things... the style of DM compared to the style of the game he plays in, the group dynamic between a former DM and the players he has DM'd for, and the changed dynamic between all the players and the new DM. There are a lot of factors at work, and I feel it's just harder (in some cases a little, in others a lot) for a person who mostly DMs to become a player. Any of them can do it, but for some it winds up at shouting matches over rules and for others it is merely tongue biting or silently letting a ruling slide. But whether it is hard or not, comes down to the individual person in question. It probably gets easier tho, the more often a DM plays on the other side of the screen.
I suppose this goes back to my "Gamer Passion" thread. I guess GMs who get emotionally invested in rules, story or structure might well let that passion invade their player role and create problems for the GM.
I just don't care that much if another GM does things differently, or even if they outright screw things up. If something goes off the rails so badly that I feel a need to say something, I'll talk to them out of game in a "GM to GM" manner.
But the point of the game is to sit down and have fun. I simply don't see anything fun about one person at the table arguing with another player at the table.
As my group's main GM I found it difficult this year to return to the role of player after running an ongoing chronicle for years. The key I learn was to be patient and relaxed. Focus on the story, not the rules, and let your fellow players shine. While the new GM will invariably make mistakes or simply rule calls you won't agree with, your first, second and third goal for the session is simply to have fun. This may take some practice.
When I get the rare chance to be a player, I turn off all GM programming. If someone asks for help on a rule, I'll help out as best I can with it, but I never tell the new GM he's wrong or that his story sucks. I feel my players put up with my mistakes and bad adventure ideas, so if something is going awry in theirs I stay quiet and simply enjoy the fellowship of the game. The latest game I'm a player in involved some straight up railroading by the GM to get us where we are, and I loved every second of it. It was still fun and it made roleplaying any frustrations the PCs might have had even better.
I love chance to be a player, and I am happy to just roll with the punches.
There are times I dont agree with another GM's rulings, but they are the GM, and I am not, unless it is something ridiculous I tend to let it go. No two people will agree on everything so I recognize that and have fun. Some people have trouble separating what is objectively the best way to do something, from what is subjective.
everybody at our table say "the gm has final say / gm is always right" ,but almost every session we have long-winded rules blowouts. gm tries to move on after making decision, but this one other player pouts and sometimes even walks out of the room. I play with the original poster and feel bad he is constantly being sabotaged by the former gm. We play at the former gm's house and he has all the figs and latest everything bookwise. Honestly, I'd rather play at OP's house and use bottlecaps and guitar picks for ogres and trolls. We would probably get more accomplished and have more fun.
everybody at our table say "the gm has final say / gm is always right" ,but almost every session we have long-winded rules blowouts. gm tries to move on after making decision, but this one other player pouts and sometimes even walks out of the room. I play with the original poster and feel bad he is constantly being sabotaged by the former gm. We play at the former gm's house and he has all the figs and latest everything bookwise. Honestly, I'd rather play at OP's house and use bottlecaps and guitar picks for ogres and trolls. We would probably get more accomplished and have more fun.
If the rest of the players feel much the same way you do (excepting the former GM), then I'd say go for it. If the former GM is being such an unrelenting pill, it's past time to get rid of him from the table.
|
|
Sadly I have seen this type of behavior for 30 years of playing. Some folks are great about taking off the DM hat and getting to actually PLAY a character and see it develop... and some are ultimately power hungry and selfish to some degree or another, and they just cannot give up the mantle of power, cannot reign themselves in and just play.
Sometimes it is well intentioned, if unsolicited, "advice" here and there, such as a rules clarification or an anecdotal "in my game..." slip. And other times the former DM turned player is just a schmuck who insists on being the final arbiter, freely acts up and causes disputes that they would never tolerate at their own table, sulks, mopes, makes comments and is generally a mood killer, or plays a character that is as disruptive as possible because hell, it's not HIS game being turned topsy turvy.
I have spent so much time DMing over the years that I yearn for the opportunity to play and I do my best to keep my mouth shut unless asked, and conduct myself in the manner I would like all the players to behave. And if I find myself greatly at odds with a new DM or his style and I realize that I just won't mesh as a player in their game, I excuse myself and do something else. I do admit though that I will gripe and grouse a bit during blatant DM fiat moments that take away the player's abilities/ability to act or react, and I will ask the DM for a sidebar if he pulls out some houserules that he has not shared with everyone at the table... I am willing to play with any rule changes, but I will not do so if they are not applied equally and known universally among the players. As far as metagaming, when I play I err on the side of caution and play my characters knowing only what they should and sometimes even short sheeting myself in order to make sure I don't stomp on an encounter.
As a long time GM (~20 years now) that:
1) knows the rules extremely well
...
3) runs games mostly off the cuff with no prep and just a strong sense of story structure (another good reason to know the rules so well)
4) is spoken of highly as a GMit is very difficult to be a good player. I want to PC some times, of course, but ultimately, I'm constantly struggling to keep my mouth shut.
I try to help the GM with rulings, if such help is welcome--if it isn't, I try my best to grin and bear it.
I get frustrated by stilted speeches read from cards or books, but I try to look at it from different angles, that it's just a different style and is equally valid.
...
When you know monsters and classes and abilities inside and out, it is hard to not know things--I end up having to play characters with high knowledge skills to justify my own knowledge. It's very hard not to pull out cold iron arrows when facing certain monsters, for example, or to run and take cover from a potential cone of deadliness that you know is only once per day.
The hardest, though, is being just one person, with just one personality and just one set of abilities. I seriously enjoy the challenge of solving problems from the perspective of just one person with just what they could do and affect at my disposal, with just one agent in the world--that's the enjoyment I get from playing--but the rest is hard. Harder than you'd think.
OMG. Except for your house rules, I'm exactly the same way!
Sometimes it is well intentioned, if unsolicited, "advice" here and there, such as a rules clarification or an anecdotal "in my game..." slip. And other times the former DM turned player is just a schmuck who insists on being the final arbiter, freely acts up and causes disputes that they would never tolerate at their own table, sulks, mopes, makes comments and is generally a mood killer, or plays a character that is as disruptive as possible because hell, it's not HIS game being turned topsy turvy.
this is exactly what he is doing....sigh
currently playing a rich parents trait arrogant ranger who wants to ride a dinosaur around town picking fights. He also wants the leadership feat even with a 10 charisma so he can control his character,dinosaur, level 3 cohort, npc introduced earlier, and a pig he bought which he uses a shield to avoid melee
|
Maybe I'm an oddball and I do things the opposite way...
As the 'nearly always tge GM' for the past 35 years when I get an opportunity to play, I behave the way I'd hope my players should behave so that when I am behind the screen, I can say, "Did I do that to you during your game?"
I never tell a GM that I would have run tthings differently but I have been asked how I would judge something. That's the only time I'd speak up... Well... In a perfect world, anyway.
One time a GM made what I thought was a blunder. I wasn't the only player to make an issue out of it but I think I could have handled that better. But, since en, this event has become a running joke so maybe we'd have missed out on several dozen laughs, too...
No one's perfect. Don't judge him a 'control freak'. If he causes a problem, just ttalk to him how you'd hope he'd talk to you.
No one's perfect. Don't judge him a 'control freak'. If he causes a problem, just ttalk to him how you'd hope he'd talk to you.
multiple problem over 15 months of playing
has admitted that he likes to see what "he can get away with"constantly told and re-told simple pathfinder 101 rules like 5ft steps and movement, what a full round action is, line of sight and distance attacks. he runs a pathfinder game of his own and still thinks he is playing 3.5...barks and bully other pcs and tells them what to do on THEIR turns in combat, tells pcs what to say in town when he is out of town looking for another animal companion, fudges rolls and wants re-rolls when doing hitpoints, ect ect ect
Sometimes it is well intentioned, if unsolicited, "advice" here and there, such as a rules clarification or an anecdotal "in my game..." slip. And other times the former DM turned player is just a schmuck who insists on being the final arbiter, freely acts up and causes disputes that they would never tolerate at their own table, sulks, mopes, makes comments and is generally a mood killer, or plays a character that is as disruptive as possible because hell, it's not HIS game being turned topsy turvy.this is exactly what he is doing....sigh
currently playing a rich parents trait arrogant ranger who wants to ride a dinosaur around town picking fights. He also wants the leadership feat even with a 10 charisma so he can control his character,dinosaur, level 3 cohort, npc introduced earlier, and a pig he bought which he uses a shield to avoid melee
He's used to playing many creatures and characters at once. If he can do it again without ruining the fun of the other players, I'd give him that at least.
But yeah, the behavior is inexcusable.
Have you asked if he wants to play your game, or his own?
he runs his own game on Monday
we all play on Tuesdaywe have all talked and we all feel(former gm excluded) that he is purposely going out of his way to make things difficult for me so I will quit running the game. He has told other players that he wants to play skull and shackles and has already bought(5 months ago) the source books, cards, and figs for this game. he has been asking how long this chapter will take and "I would have thought we would have finished this by now". when I took over as gm it was because his current campaign fizzled out and players stopped playing because his lack of rudimentary game knowledge killed one of the pcs. he would only let a prone pc stand up as full round action. we know it to be a move action...let him do his thing, after all he is the gm.....player beaten to death while trying to stand over 3 rounds