talenlee:
There’s this way of talking about tabletop games that just seems to imagine DMs as someone who isn’t playing a game with their friends who they know and like and I don’t get it. Are people hiring DMs in enough numbers that this is normal?
Or is the community just so brainrotted the fundamental relationship between players and dms has to be what, aersolised
As a game designer and player, “DM as a service” is really scary to me. Not from the DM side. Go make your money, game masters! Offer your services. Thats just fine. But from the player side, I think it CAN be really destructive.
Over the last few years I’ve noticed a huge shift away from player engagement in games. It seems more and more often players just don’t want to engage with the rules, beyond their character’s specific mechanics (and sometimes not even that). Or they dont want to engage with the narrative, beyond questions that they are directly asked. Or they don’t want to engage with other players, ignoring them almost entirely. Even in games that are about this kind of engagement, where the core mechanics demand players engage and take a share of responsibilities.
I think the “DM as a service” model encourages this. It allows the player disengagement by putting all responsibility on the DM. If the DM is being compensated for organizing and running the game, doesn’t all responsibility fall on them? Aren’t they responsible for every aspect of the game, including the vital roles and responsibilities of players? That seems to be the attitude, and it’s honestly pretty shitty. Most TTRPGs are designed to be shared storytelling experiences, where each player has narrative and mechanical responsibilities. Even D&D. When players shirk those responsibilities, when they expect the DM to do every bit of the game for them, it breaks the experience. It creates some other, lesser thing that isnt what the designer intended. It specificlly does not create the actual experience of playing the game. It’s also grossly unfair to other players who are participating as intended, especially the DM.
My game The Magical Land of Yeld is designed to be a collaborative storytelling game. This happens on more of an adventure by adventure macro scale than a scene by scene micro scale. At the end if each adventure, players tell the GM what they want to do during the next adventure. This is an important part of each adventure and an explicit rule, not a suggestion. An explicit way for players to influence the game, to focus attention on aspects of the narrative or rules they want to explore.
“I want to return to Boulder Town to learn the secret Cheesecake recipe.”
“I want to be in a situation where I can use my Backstab and Lightning Strike Special dice.”
“Lets learn to swordfight so we can impress the Prince when we meet him.”
That kind of thing.
Additionally, the role of GM is meant to shift to a new player every few adventures. This gives each player a regular chance to control the game’s narrative and explore ideas within the story and rules they are interested in. It gives everyone a turn in the GM role as often as they like and ensures players are building a story together. Because the story we build together is better that the story 1 GM makes up on their own. At least in this game.
And yet… so often we find players just ignore these rules. rules. When asked what they want to do in the next adventure, they give vague answers, or none at all. When it’s their turn to be the GM, they say they dont want to. They don’t want to engage with the game’s rules and create a story together. They want to be entertained.
I hate it.
