| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Just popping in to say I’m still thankful toRD for making endless threads asking questions I would possibly ask too about rules minutiae and interpretations. I sometimes have so many 2e questions I feel like making an “Answer all pf OSWPF2’s irritatingly simple questions here thread” just to keep it all in one place. But I don’t, for obvious reasons.
And that isn’t a veiled or even bold jab at you RD, I genuinely am glad you make those threads. I need the answers too!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would expect, RD, if you're going to run a "professional" game of Extinction Curse, it would be a good idea to jump into the Extinction Curse subforum and peruse the threads there. There are a few trouble points with the campaign as written and it could help you avoid a potential TPK early on, as well as other areas.
Also, really prepare your knowledge of the Running a Circus subset of rules, and the potential recruits along the way. Part of any session zero for this campaign should focus on how much or little the players care about that aspect of the campaign.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In an effort to get this thread back on topic, I'm going to start limiting my responses to the topic at hand and outright ignore the provocateurs, as I should have done from the beginning.
It was the way I was treated, the general dismissive attitudes, and that--once my LFG listing was put into the correct place--my posting was deleted after the rule change rather than being grandfathered in. (For those unfamiliar with the phrase, that means allowed, since it was made before the rule change.)What do you expect us to do about it?
About that in particular? Absolutely nothing. Nothing can be done anyways. Those that said it's a private community that can do what it wants are absolutey right.
This thread, though it has gone way off topic in the last day or so, has always been meant to serve a discourse/discussion on why the roleplaying community seems to be (at least to me) 50/50 split on accepting or condemning pay to play GMs.
I for one would like to know WHY people feel the way they do and, in the case of those who actively condemn it (as opposed to leaving it be) what they hope to accomplish by doing so. Getting those answers, and promoting discussion on the topic are the sole reasons I started this thread, regardless of what others may believe, or how I've since been distracted and waylaid.
The leaders of the Reddit community in question have since apologized to me for their actions and have explained that it was done to quell conflict within their community caused by those who could not tolerate the idea of others daring to ask for renumeration for their time and effort in their beloved hobby.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm glad there was that bit of closure, then, RD.
I know before I took the "jobs" to GM the games I did, it felt weird to me collecting money for "a hobby". Both times, it was at the players' insistence, that they were happy to pay for a reliable, consistent game they could play with each other under a DM that wasn't going to "flake".
In both cases, I was also teaching people the rules and interactions with the VTT I used as well, so I was kind of mentoring as well as GMing.
Taking those things as a value worth marketing isn't something to be treated poorly for/about. It has been compared here to prostitution, which I find pretty rude and completely off-base, and a form of shaming for those who would dare accept something so base as money for a talent they possess and the work they put into developing it.
As long as you are honest about what you're offering, what it will cost, and your expectations of the people involved (all three of these are met or exceeded by your recruitment post), no one should be railing against your efforts to make an honest income.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't expect this thread to derail that much when I made my previous comments. I feel I need to state my position because there are things I read that I dislike.
- I'm sad this thread derailed into politics.
- I consider any comparison between Ravingdork's situation and segregation inappropriate.
- I consider legitimate to have a strong negative reaction to such a comparison.
- I consider such a reaction should be respected.
The original subject was interesting but I hope this thread will be closed or at least cleaned now.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is peak Paizo forums. And what timing over the holidays.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the major issue with pay to play GMing is that we don't really have a well established and accepted system for handling it. Organized play campaigns could provide that system, but they are currently set up strictly for amateur GMs. PFS GMs do get some perks (early access to some modules, extra XP credit for GMing rather than playing a scenario, and the like), but that is about it.
The reason some sort of organization would be needed is that it involves getting GMs and players who are strangers to each other together and providing a standard contract as to how much the GM would be paid, where and when the games would be played (and compensation for the host, if he is not also the GM), what happens if someone cancels the game or fails to show up, and so forth -- and many players would be reluctant to sign such a contract if they have no idea what a campaign with this paid GM would be like. It is a lot easier to work such things out informally if everyone already is acquainted with at least one other person in the gaming group and no money is changing hands.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the major issue with pay to play GMing is that we don't really have a well established and accepted system for handling it. Organized play campaigns could provide that system, but they are currently set up strictly for amateur GMs. PFS GMs do get some perks (early access to some modules, extra XP credit for GMing rather than playing a scenario, and the like), but that is about it.The reason some sort of organization would be needed is that it involves getting GMs and players who are strangers to each other together and providing a standard contract as to how much the GM would be paid, where and when the games would be played (and compensation for the host, if he is not also the GM), what happens if someone cancels the game or fails to show up, and so forth -- and many players would be reluctant to sign such a contract if they have no idea what a campaign with this paid GM would be like. It is a lot easier to work such things out informally if everyone already is acquainted with at least one other person in the gaming group and no money is changing hands.
All very good points. I think the situation would be easier for short term agreements. I can very much see a use-case for paid GM's who help new players for 1-4 sessions. I might very well pay to play in various RPG systems under that paradigm.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
All very good points. I think the situation would be easier for short term agreements. I can very much see a use-case for paid GM's who help new players for 1-4 sessions. I might very well pay to play in various RPG systems under that paradigm.
I think the major issue with pay to play GMing is that we don't really have a well established and accepted system for handling it. Organized play campaigns could provide that system, but they are currently set up strictly for amateur GMs. PFS GMs do get some perks (early access to some modules, extra XP credit for GMing rather than playing a scenario, and the like), but that is about it.The reason some sort of organization would be needed is that it involves getting GMs and players who are strangers to each other together and providing a standard contract as to how much the GM would be paid, where and when the games would be played (and compensation for the host, if he is not also the GM), what happens if someone cancels the game or fails to show up, and so forth -- and many players would be reluctant to sign such a contract if they have no idea what a campaign with this paid GM would be like. It is a lot easier to work such things out informally if everyone already is acquainted with at least one other person in the gaming group and no money is changing hands.
This is why I decided to make Session 0 free, like I've seen many other premium GMs do. It allows everyone a chance to discuss expectations and get a feel for their GM and fellow players before committing any money. Though the written correspondence can be seen as a contract, I (and most GMs that I've seen) don't include any penalty fees or anything like that for not meeting a specific term (not that it'd be terribly enforceable in its current form anyhow). If someone DID do that, and the participants all agreed to the contract, then I don't think there'd be anything especially wrong with such an arrangement.
I've even seen at least one GM allow for payment AFTER their respective games, so if you weren't satisfied, you didn't have to pay. I won't be going that route though as it seems too easy to end up with lots of unpaid work hours that way. Maybe I'll change my tune to stay competitive if I see more GMs doing it though. More like a day job where you get paid after you deliver and not in advance that way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've even seen at least one GM allow for payment AFTER their respective games, so if you weren't satisfied, you didn't have to pay. I won't be going that route though as it seems too easy to end up with lots of unpaid work hours that way. Maybe I'll change my tune to stay competitive if I see more GMs doing it though. More like a day job where you get paid after you deliver and not in advance that way.
One common freelance contract template if you're doing a fixed-cost project, is to collect 1/3 of the fee at the beginning (to cover fixed costs and materials costs), 1/3 of the fee half way through the deliverable timetable, and the final 1/3 when the project has been completed and the customer has given final approval.
Your biggest problem, of course, is that you are trying to deliver a single shared product to multiple independent clients, who may or may not agree on whether your project actually met the deliverable benchmarks.
And I've seen a number of creatives who use the "pay what you think it's worth" model to really rake in money.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Been away from my computer on which I check the boards for a few days, so just saw this.
I just want to express support for Ravingdork...
I generally have no problem whatsoever if someone wants to offer a legal service and someone else is willing to pay them for that service.
To be honest, my answer may be different if someone were offering what I considered to be a reprehensible service (and that does make this subjective as different people will consider different services reprehensible), but GM'ing an RPG game is not reprehensible.
To be clear, by reprehensible service, I mean the service itself is reprehensible, not the fact that someone is paid to do it.
I would also like to point out that the pay to play model has been around for decades. In the 1970's and 1980's there were individuals and companies that ran play by mail strategy games. I played several games of Hyborian Age by mail where I paid a fee for each turn of the game. Even today, games have moved on-line with many games, like Warcraft, requiring a monthly subscription to play. I just don't see why a GM couldn't charge for his game as well. If he's too expensive, or people don't like the service, he won't get business. If he meets a need and people are okay with the price and service, he will get business. You don't want to pay, then go the free route - hopefully you have a GM available or are willing to GM yourself - not all of us do.
I for one would love to play in a game run by Ravingdork (and no, I've never met the guy). My problem would largely be an inability to play in his time slot and, given the demands of my job and the separate, but equally (if not more) compelling, demands of my wife, an inability to commit to his game.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking of creation jobs, RD, maybe you could offer (as an option to your GM gig or as a different service) to create optimized PCs to players based on their concept, like you do your many out there builds ;-)
Players who do not care for diving into the intricacies of character building, and optimization even less, might be quite happy to pay you for this.
Thinking of creation jobs, RD, maybe you could offer (as an option to your GM gig or as a different service) to create optimized PCs to players based on their concept, like you do your many out there builds ;-)
Players who do not care for diving into the intricacies of character building, and optimization even less, might be quite happy to pay you for this.
How many of those people are paying to play Pathfinder though? Like, I know players like that, but they play Pathfinder because that is what their GM runs, not because they especially dig that part of the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just my drive-by comments:
* I have no issue with pay-to-play GMs.
* I have seen a fair few kicking around, including locally, and talking themselves up.
* I haven't seen many of them pull it off.
* I note a general lack of explanation as to their unique selling point or even a clear value proposition.
* It is not a service I personally would expect to use.
* The prices being generally thrown around appear a bit steep (especially when missing the info above - 'what do I get for my $?')
I wish RD the best in his venture and hope it works out, and can appreciate the fact that he's trying to turn an honest buck and make ends meet by seeking a market for his skills.
And RD, always get the cash up front. It's like $15 or something. They can pony up. If you feel super generous give a 'buy 5 games upfront get 6' or something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... to create optimized PCs to players based on their concept, like you do your many out there builds ;-)
And a short summary of how the mechanics of that character work - otherwise the person wont necessarily know how to drive said beast :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's amusing that people react negatively to the idea of paying a GM - but think nothing of people paying to play per session at a gaming convention (on top of the convention pass and hotel costs).
It's okay to pay the convention organizers, and its okay for the convention to reward GMs indirectly with convention memberships and housing discounts. So paying to play isn't the hang-up. It's the direct solicitation of payment by the GM that is seen as crass, apparently.
-----
What would concern me more about this concept is, how do you handle a disruptive player when they are a paying customer? I've had cases where I needed to kick someone out of a gaming group, due to how they were treating others in the group. (And in one case due to rampant, obvious cheating, but that's another story.) RD, my main advice is that, either during Session 0 or preferably in your pitch to find players, list out your ground rules for acceptable player behavior - whatever you think, based on your experience, needs to be said to head off the types of player misbehavior that particularly drive you nuts. Think through how you want to handle it if someone isn't a good fit, or is antagonizing the rest of the players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am both astonished and saddened at the amount of snarky crap-posting, political shoe-horning, and general bad form that has erupted in this thread. MANY of you should be ashamed and plenty of you have arguably broken forum rules. Dial it back.
To RD - there is nothing at all wrong with pay to play. Consenting adults agreeing to an arrangement that harms no one should not be objectionable. Some people don't have a regular group of gaming buddies or live near a gaming store that hosts games, and so paying a fee for a game is worth every last penny. Objecting to or getting in the way of that person is what I find objectionable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What a strange journey this thread has been.
I don't see any problem with the concept of hiring a GM. The actual dynamics of the group are another thing, but that's really the bed you're making. Seems like a hassle.
More power to ya.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's amusing that people react negatively to the idea of paying a GM - but think nothing of people paying to play per session at a gaming convention (on top of the convention pass and hotel costs).
As an organizer, I can say that there are plenty who complain about table fees, especially if the con didn’t start with them.
As an organizer, I can say that there are plenty who complain about table fees, especially if the con didn’t start with them.
I also have found this - I was shocked and horrified to see the Conorgs at one of our local major cons get griefed publicly by some attendees who didn't like the type of free pizza that was being supplied from a local pizza shop that the Conorgs had laid on out of their own pockets.
Gamers can be an incredibly entitled group.
With that said, there are also plenty who are ok with paying a premium for a good game or an interesting event - last year I ran a con on a cruise ship and it was fantastic - people forked some big dough for some epic staterooms for gaming in.
Director of Game Design
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Folks,
Much of Paizo is out over the holiday break and moderation is not the top of any of our to do lists. Since this thread has broken down in a variety of ways, I am going to go ahead and lock it in the interest of keeping things civil until we are back up and running in the new year.
Be kind to each other folks.. and if you cant find a way to do that, then take some time to find your calm. We are all here to play games and have fun.
This thread is locked.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect my New Year's resolution will be something along the lines of "think twice, post once." ;P
@Just popping in to say I’m still thankful toRD for making endless threads asking questions I would possibly ask too about rules minutiae and interpretations. I sometimes have so many 2e questions I feel like making an “Answer all pf OSWPF2’s irritatingly simple questions here thread” just to keep it all in one place. But I don’t, for obvious reasons.
Happy to be of service! :D
I'm closing in on 30,000! Will have to step up my game for the new year! XD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect my New Year's resolution will be something along the lines of "think twice, post once." ;P
That is absolutely great advice that I wish I followed more often myself.
Or also, "Am I contributing or just talking?"
|
If there are people willing to pay for the service and think it a
Is worth the value I dont see anything wrong with it.
Me personally i do not see any value in it. For starters I have had a terrible experience with a paid Gm. I tried it with a DM for 5e because i wanted to experience a hardcover adventure and thought it would be a good way. It wasnt. The Dm was greedy, barely prepped, admitted to not even paying for the books (only had the pdfs. Note wotc does not sell pdfs...) Could not even been bothered to line up maps properly in Roll20. It was a disaster. I paid for two sessions and counted my losses and left..
I also dont see what problem it solves. If money is the motivation to Gm, what happens when a better opportunity comes along? Are the players out of luck? I find a GM with a passion and love for the game will give a better experience.
I would highly recommend that at the very least you know the Gm you are playing with before dishing out cold hard cash. Make sure you get along good and share the same style of gaming.
To the OP consider doing a free session or two for players to get an idea what they are getting in too, make sure everything is going to click etc.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is an interesting thread. Of course, I only saw it after Sara Marie cleaned it up... thanks Sara Marie!
I think the biggest issue is that it's one thing to be a GM, and another to be a good service provider. The two aren't necessarily found in the same person by default. That's why I personally wouldn't pay to play with someone I didn't know already or at least admire by reputation. I have donated at several cons to play with "name" GMs and it has always been a great experience, but that's because I chose the GMs carefully. Not sure I would pay to play under a GM I didn't already know. (But see below.)
I've also had people pay to be at my table for scenarios I have written. The money goes to charity, so I wasn't the one getting paid, but I sure felt the pressure of a group that had paid for the experience I was responsible for. Prep takes on a new level, and this would be even moreso if it was content I didn't already know intimately.
I think it's a big uphill slog for someone to start something like this. Not impossible, but takes a lot of work and hustle and building a whole brand, not just hanging up a shingle and saying, "pay me to GM". You need to be on social media (not just the forums), showing people what you're like. You need to be creating and giving away content, so people get to "know" you and your style and feel comfortable paying for your games. Run free games at cons as promo, to get players and spread the word.
I also think pricing matters. If you're charging as much as a movie, you're competing with multi-million-dollar productions in an established business model. If you're charging less, it may not be worth your time, but it may be easier for people to take a chance on a relative unknown. There's a delicate balance, but it is always easier to raise prices later than to price yourself out of a very small market and get nowhere.
Good luck to the folks trying it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're charging as much as a movie, you're competing with multi-million-dollar productions in an established business model.
I'm not too sure what the point of your comparison is here. No one person could hope to compete against an establishment like Hollywood.
Are you indicating that GMs should get accustomed to charging less than their time is worth, or not at all?
If you're charging as much as a movie, you're competing with multi-million-dollar productions in an established business model.I'm not too sure what the point of your comparison is here. No one person could hope to compete against an establishment like Hollywood.
Are you indicating that GMs should get accustomed to charging less than their time is worth, or not at all?
One thing to remember about Hollywood productions: They spread the cost of creation across a huge customer base.
While it may seem rational to charge your first few gaming groups the full cost of your prep time and acquisition of materials, it may make more accounting sense to spread that cost-of-goods amount over one or two years of professional GMing.
So yes, you might be charging less that your actual prep time is worth, and less than it cost you to buy all the maps and scenarios and TTT subscriptions, because you're avoiding dumping the whole cost-of-startup burden on your first few groups. You may want to amortize some of that investment over a few years.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From my perspective it just runs counter to the way I see roleplaying games - as games we play together (including the GM) where everyone's contributions are valued fairly equally. I say this as someone who is behind the screen about half the time.
It basically validates the GM as servant / Story Teller model which is just the opposite of what I want from either side of the screen.
I see streaming differently because there people playing a game together. I know allowances are made to make it more entertaining to the audience and are generally more scripted than I would like at the gaming table, but it feels less off to me.
If it's your thing go ahead and do it. Have fun. It's just a different experience than I would enjoy on either side.
I guess I can throw in my opinion.
If anything, the vitrol is because tabletop games are seen by many as a cooperative game where players and dms hangout and make stories together. I'll admit, I'm not really comfortable with paid dming myself because it turns the game into a transaction (and I heard horror stories about paid dm games gone wrong), but I can see why there's a demand for it, and I don't have anything against dms who do charge for their services. Still, I don't see why people have to be rude to you about it.
If you need help with searching for the right spot, I think there was a subreddit specifically for pay to play tabletop rpgs, I think it was called lfg premium or something. Pathfinder lfg I think allows pay to play dming, but just regular r/lfg/ banned it (granted, the vast majority of the stuff there is 5e posts).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I was going to do this I would be aiming to hit episodic gameplay from an established organised play campaign (be it DDAL, PFS/SFS, etc) which would allow:
*Certainty: players pay for you to GM a scenario. They know that their $ gets them an end to end game with a clear start and finish. You know that you are on the hook for the length of the scenario.
*Prep: Assuming you ran that scenario more than once for people, you achieve an efficiency of your preparation time as you are effectively defraying it over several tables.
*Flexibility: You aren't wrangling a group who needs to sort a group booking, customers buy a slot and turn up.
*Consistency: Players wont turn up finding out you have some odd houserule in place, and you wont be surprised by their homebrew half drow/dragon ninja-sorceror with unique abilities. Just no. Existing established campaigns are going to really help cut down on long and unwanted chats where you put off customers because you have to say no to their ideas - established systems and campaigns are a must.
*Timing: You could notionally have the game good to go out the door the day after it drops, this might be a good selling point for GMs (like myself) who eat loads of scenarios and might not otherwise get to play it first. They get to play the game AND slot 0 it. Also a good market to sell your prep to ("Hey, as an upsell, for just $3 you can have my prep files!")
Further to that you could add value in the online space by having whatever platform at a high level (eg Roll20 Premium) or whatever.
A paid GM is (from what I can see) providing convenience (games at a sensible time that fits my non-working hours), can stick to the times set (I know how long the game will be), and can adjudicate fairly.
I think the common fault of a lot of the wannabe pro-gms is this idea that they will be creating bespoke campaigns for set groups and wowing them with mad GM chops and huge production values.
Also these people who keep bringing up a comparison between the 'Hollywood' GMs and what you'd be expecting are miles off the mark. You aren't aiming to be a celebrity gamer with a huge following - more a reliable and efficient GM running product in a consistent professional manner. This isn't the school of cool.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been against pay-to-play GMing since... Always. I'm never one to stop anyone from their "hustle," but turning a game into a job seems so antithetical to what I think a GM should be doing. I don't tell a story because I'm incentivized beyond having a good time. That's personal for me, and I understand other people have different motivations for gaming, but I think paying the bills is a really awful/woefully capitalistic one.
I would also be against paying for friends which this feels like it butts up against.
Whelp- guess all these Paizo developers "hustling" their trade is just evil capitalism.
I'd gladly pay Jason Bulmahn to be my GM if I could afford it. In a way, I pay GM at conventions to run the games I play with them, too. Guess all those folks who do online entertainment play throughs are "grifters," too.
Good GMs, if their players are willing, should certainly be able to get paid for GMing! It's ridiculous to tell other people what they can spend their money on.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been against pay-to-play GMing since... Always. I'm never one to stop anyone from their "hustle," but turning a game into a job seems so antithetical to what I think a GM should be doing. I don't tell a story because I'm incentivized beyond having a good time. That's personal for me, and I understand other people have different motivations for gaming, but I think paying the bills is a really awful/woefully capitalistic one.
I would also be against paying for friends which this feels like it butts up against.
Whelp- guess all these Paizo developers "hustling" their trade is just evil capitalism.
I'd gladly pay Jason Bulmahn to be my GM if I could afford it. In a way, I pay GM at conventions to run the games I play with them, too. Guess all those folks who do online entertainment play throughs are "grifters," too.
I understand anger-posting, but please just read a little bit further down the thread.
I think that everyone is taking the wrong meaning from me typing "hustle." I'm not implying its scamming anyone. I mean hustle in the sense of "side-hustle" or "your efforts."
I don't think that pay-to-play GM is a scam. I'm certain that there's room for scammers (as other people have already covered), but that's not at all the point I was making (which was just to say, "Hey, make your money however you want, but I'm not about it.")
Now I want to also point out that massive difference between creating a game, producing books, hiring staff - writers, illustrators, marketing, and someone who takes that game and charges others to play it with them. There's also a difference in media, like Youtube playthroughs (who get their revenue through Youtube, who gets their revenue from advertisers on the videos - the consumer pays nothing) and Twitch streamers (who make their revenue through donations - the consumer pays nothing). To take your analogy a step further, I would be saddened to see someone selling the chance to play a game with them, especially a non-celebrity or influencer.
I am not against RD going the route of pay-to-play, he asked for - and I quote - "Why is there so much disdain for pay to play GMS?" I explained my stance and still stand by it. You can spend your money on anything you want, I just think that commercializing your hobbies is just... (and I have to choose my words carefully here, as I have to keep explaining) I find it personally very depressing.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m a little surprised at how many in this thread don’t seem to know “hustle” is now slang for “income stream”, usually specifically referring to a side gig or something that is not a job. Like selling your services as a GM, or knitting scarves in your spare time, or delivering groceries.
I hardly expect everyone to keep up with all slang; Aroden knows I’m old enough that I’m no longer plugged in to everything, but I thought that was more a generally recognized term. Even if it’s a Very Online term, this is an Internet forum.
This is not snark. I’m genuinely surprised.