|
Multiple GMs only suffer one potential scenario: Too many cooks.
You'll often find out that you and your co-GM have often different point of views on things, which may be good or bad, depending on what you are trying to portray.
Having someone help out is fine at the table, but doing multiple GMs, you really need to be on the same page.
I'm sure some people pulled it off but in general, I end up preferring to be a single GM.
One doesn't have to be a GM to help with rules questions. I have several players in my games that know rules as well as I do, so for rules issues I continue with plot while they help less experienced players.
If the second GM is there to help with world-building/plot/etc, they don't even need to be at the table, unless they're doing this and helping with rules, but even then, it's hard to do multiple things at the same time at the same table- most players don't want plot to continue while they're dealing with a rule issue- and most likely you'll end up tag-teaming, rather than efficiently handling two problems at once.
I've done the multiple GM thing, and it works nicely if the two of you are on the same wavelength with where the campaign is going and what the plot is. Much back-channel discussion should be carried on. Tag-teaming happened a lot (I'd run for a month, he'd run for a month, etc.)
For just rules questions and the like -- this is a good chance to get the rules lawyer in your group involved and helpful instead of hindering!
The group I play in atm, has been running the same campaign for almost 40 years, and follows the 'time in the chair' philosophy fairly loosely. I joined about 15 years ago and held the chair once, the current chai (GM) has been there almost 5 years after her husband was, but life has begun to destroy the whole. I'm the only remaining resident player, the next two are over an hour away and the only others in-state. All those 'current' live elsewhere. There are group rulings and such, but each chair runs their own game. The 'house rule bible' is a loose leaf binder maybe 4 inches thick, but it includes a number of debate pages on issues and stuff for the group game. When I joined, my world has NO half-orcs and they approved my thesis, so no half-orcs. When I joined, Eberron was coming out and several players got those races into the game, mainly due to the 'ooooo, ah' of new-ness. The Chair at that time tweaked a part of the common world and we were off.
I have done two GMs occasionally. Typically when the party is split or a player has had a character death to keep them involved in the session. In all cases I run the campaign and narrate, but the other GMs may run individual encounters.
Maybe don't worry so much about getting the rules exactly right, right away. Make a quick ruling, move on with the session, then research the correct answer later.
If you have a bunch of new players (or rules-lite players or casual players), maybe limit the number of options they have. Don't let them use all of the Pathfinder races and classes and archetypes and spells and feats and magic items. Maybe limit them to Core, APG, and maybe one other source. That way, there will be a lot less weird interactions that require immediate intervention on the GM's part.
Also, make sure players are using character sheets that are clear to them. In my group, I use a looseleaf sheet of paper I write on in pencil, others print out their character sheets, and others use electronic devices and web sources.
Maybe try to recruit a rules lawyer.
For just rules questions and the like -- this is a good chance to get the rules lawyer in your group involved and helpful instead of hindering!
This.
Whenever we have a rules dispute occurs, I ask the other rules lawyer at the table to look it up and move on.
Nobody wants to bog things down.
Our table has a guy who does super quick internet searches of rules questions. He gets the answer before we can find the book!
There are a couple of ways to handle multiple GMs:
1) Shared world, different regions. Each GM "runs" the adventures in one country, area, continent, etc.; this can either be with different groups of PCs (potentially setting up "cross-over" or "joining forces to save the world" plot-lines) or with the GM running the current scenario having their PC "busy with something else" while the GM that ran the previous scenario/arc plays a different PC (hopefully with some sort of tie to the party).
2) The "troupe" style of play. Similar to the way Ars Magica structures the campaign, the focus centers on an organization that the PCs are all members of. Everyone creates one or two PCs that are sent out in "teams" (each player selects one of their PCs for a given scenario, which can allow a greater degree of party tailoring when expecting certain types of challenges); those PCs not participating in a scenario can perform various downtime activities (magic item crafting, improving the organization and/or buildings, etc.; the rules in Ultimate Campaign may prove useful). There is a greater emphasis on the organization (which can provide ready plot hooks and motivation; such as rival organizations, doing favors for patrons, etc.), rather than just the individual PCs.