Dividing the Traditional GM Tasks

[Andrew Cooper]

In recent history here at the Forge I've read several threads on how many of the social and game related tasks generally get shoved onto 1 person's shoulders and defined as just part of the GM's job description.  Ron and others have noted that this isn't the only way to divide these tasks up and probably isn't even the optimal way.  After reading and thinking about this for a while I was inclined to agree.  Part of my tendancy to "burn out" and need long breaks from gaming is that I was always the GM and thus ended up being responsible for all the social arrangements (when we play, where we play, etc) and all the in-game minutae also (rules interpretation, keeping track of all sorts of game information, etc etc).  It was a lot more work than it was fun.  I mean, everyone else just got to show up and play.  So, anyway, I decided that I was going to change a good bit of that and see how it worked out. 

The Group:

Me:  I'm 35, male, married and am traditionally the one who runs all the games.  I'm not sure how I got that job.  It might have something to do with being the only one in the group who is married and owns a home and therefore has a convenient place to actually play.  I'm also the oldest person in the group.

Trey:  Male, 33, divorced and one of my best friends.  I met him in the military and he eventually moved to my hometown after leaving the army.  He's played RPG's a lot longer than I have but generally just plays instead of running anything.  He has run some stuff that I've played in but that's a subject for another post altogether.

Fred:  Male, 25, single but pretty darn closed to married.  I've known Fred since he was born.  My wife and I introduced him to his girlfriend, he and I are the worship leaders at our church and we do lots of stuff together outside of gaming.  I introduced Fred to gaming a couple of years ago.

Seth:  Male, 21, single but dating Fred's girlfriend's sister.  I've also known Seth since he was born but the rather significant age difference meant we didn't run in the same social circles until the last couple of years.  My wife and I also introduced him to his girlfriend.  I'm not sure how this keeps happening except that my wife seems to gather young, attractive women around her and that in turn seems to attract the young men.  I introduced Seth to gaming a couple of years ago.

Lindsey: Female, 17, not married or attached and in high school.  I know Lindsey because she goes to church with my wife and me and she is one of my wife's dance students.  She recently showed an interest in playing some games, D&D in particular, so I let her start playing with us.  She seems to be having a good time.

The Game:

A month or so ago, Fred had seen The World's Largest Dungeon online and got all excited.  He went out and bought the $100 tome and handed it to me.  "Run this for us.", He said.  All the other players were pretty stoked about this.  Although dungeon crawls are not my favorite style of gaming, it is one I enjoy.  Also, I was pretty happy because the players actually took the initiative and found something they wanted to play and brought it to me rather than waiting for me to come up with something.  So I agreed to run it.

The module is huge.  It is 900 pages, 1600 encounters, includes every monster type from the 3rd Edition D&D Monster Manual, and it has 16 poster sized maps.  This kind of gaming is pretty heavy on GM prep and I was kind of leary about that.  However, the book is very well laid out and minimizes the number of other sources needed to run the module.  That, coupled with the recent threads on spreading out GM tasks, I decided to give running it a shot.

The Sessions:

First, I started with the social tasks normally left up to me.  I told the group that I couldn't be responsible for feeding everyone at all the game sessions.  For two sessions I handed out tasks to each of the other players about what kinds of things to bring so that food and such would be covered.  One sessions I didn't even do this.  I simply put Seth in charge of it and told him to handle the food.  This worked out really well.  Having most of the logistics of hosting the game (the food and drinks) handled by someone else put a whole lot less stress on me and my wife.  Now my wife tends to look much more favorably on game night because someone else is planning and everyone contributes to the activity.  She and I aren't solely responsible anymore.

Second, traditionally at least in my group, as the GM I've been the guy who looks up rules, interprets rules, keeps up with initiative order, keeps up with game state effects (ie spells and such), draws the dungeon map, sets up the battle map, plays the NPC and monsters, and well... just about everything else other than actually play the PC's.  I decided to unload some of this.

I assigned one player to be the keeper of the initiative order in combat and all the game state conditions.  In other words, during combat, I no longer had to keep up with who was next and which round we were on.  Fred did this.  In fact, he brought his laptop and set up a spreadsheet to keep up with the information.  He also keeps up with poison, diseases, spell durations, and all the other effects in D&D that has durations that affect how the game rules operate.  Now, giving this task to him meant that I had to give away some of the information typically reserved for the GM.  I had to tell him that there was a curse, it's effect, and how long it would last.  Things like that.  It was SO worth it.  Just this one change really made a huge difference.  We had several combats (obviously) and I could just play the opposition without worrying about all the minutae.  Combats ran quicker because I wasn't having to pause all the time to update stuff.  I just looks at Fred and said "That spell lasts 4 rounds." and he took care of the note-taking.  The game was smoother because the traditional behind the scenes stuff was now out in the open.  I didn't have to remember that Fred's PC was diseased and had negatives to certain rolls.  The information was tracked by someone else and when a situation came up, Fred just said, "Hey, does my being diseased affect that?" 

One GM task off-loaded to someone else... Yay!

For my second off-loaded task I appointed Trey (for 2 sessions) and Seth (for 1 session) to be the rule guru.  The rules were always a big pain to me since I didn't even own the 3.5 core books.  I quit buying the D&D books at 3.0.  So, if I didn't even own the books, why should I be the guy in charge of looking up the rules and shit?  I gave this to one of the other players who actually did own the books.  During the sessions if there was a question about a spell, I just waved the question towards the appropriate player and let them field it while I went on doing other stuff.  This also streamlined the game.  Everything didn't come to a halt because I was looking up rules.  Nope.  I didn't look up rules.  I kept the pace moving while someone else did that.  While it didn't come up in play, I intend to unload sole responsibility for rules interpretation also.

Second GM task off-loaded to someone else... Yay!

Conclusions:

I had fun for 3 sessions with very little stress.  Prep was easier.  Play was smoother.  Everyone was more constantly involved even if their character was currently the center of attention.  There are actually a few other tasks that I plan on sharing since they were still a pain during play.  The biggest one to come to mind is drawing the stupid dungeon map.  It takes too much damn time to keep drawing out corridors and rooms and whatnot.  I'm going to just plop down the poster map next game and point to where they are on it.  So, it takes out some of the "mystery".  It should also keep the game from halting while I try to draw out every little detail of the dungeon when the players move from one area to the next.  I figure 15% to 20% of our actual time at the table was spent with me recreating the map as the players moved around.  Recapturing that much time for actually playing seems a reasonable trade-off for losing the "mystery" of what's around the next corner.

[Filip Luszczyk]

When I've been still playing D&D 3.0/3.5 regularly (that is, before the massive prep required turned me off), I had an idea connected to the map issue.

Simply use the maps that come with the module, covering them with four big sheets of paper. Then, you can reveal only that part of the map the party can see. If that would be difficult due to the size of the maps from the book, try to copy them in some more manageable paper format, or cut the poster to smaller pieces (if you have no mercy) or something. That should solve the dreaded automapping problems.

[Eric J.]

Yeah, it's really interesting how that works.  The social interaction of the group not only affects the game but the game affects the social interaction of the group!  Dividing up a lot of those tasks is very important.  It might seem like things this simple wouldn't matter but in my case, I wasn't really able to start enjoying roleplaying until I recognised how important it really was.

Regarding the map, again I think you're on the right track.  I think the mystery is really what you encounter in the dungeon and not the dungeon layout itself.  And knowing the layout of a giant dungeon without knowing what's inside of it can still be mysterious and interesting.

I'm glad that you've been able to enjoy the giant dungeon so much.

May the wind be always at your back,
-Eric

[dreamborn]

Hi All

Dividing up the GM tasks is a great idea, in theory BUT doesn't it destroy the 'fog of war'?

In otherwords the players should have no knowledge of the following under most conditions:

• duration of spells on them,
• hit points, tactics, or spells of the monster or adversary,
• anything other than a general idea of what there own hit points are,
• severity or type of there disease (only symptoms),
• type, effect and severity of poisons
• intuitive, combat and most game state information.

The GM should have knowledge of the above and also be responsible for:

• Interpreting the rules
• representing the rest of the world for the players
• telling the story

The problem is that RPG games can overwhelm the capability of any one individual (GM) to properly handle all the above and more.  My solution is to design a game from the ground up that increases realism, playability, enhances game play, while simultaneously making the GM's job easier.  This is possible with the assistance of technology.  Omnificent Role-playing System is the RPG and the software will handle all of the tedious chores.  In the above example all of the items that a player shouldn't know and it even interpretes the rules in most cases.  This is the project I am working on.

Kent
www.dreamborn.com 

[Andrew Morris]

Kent, Andrew has obviously experienced positive effects from his efforts. Saying that what he describes is good only in theory dismisses the actual experience he's presented. It also misses the point. He quite clearly states that some of the "mystery" as he puts it (or "fog of war" as you say) is lost, but that the gain is well worth it. This issue is not whether this happens, but whether it's a good thing. His experiences provide a roadmap.

Also, please realize that not every discussion you take part in is an opportunity for you to market your system. Certainly, reference it when it adds to the topic at hand (and I see several ways that it could be applicable here, for example). Know that if you steer every conversation back to ORS, however, folks are going to start tuning it out like spam.

Andrew -- awesome. Is this the final form, or do you have other elements traditionally handled by the GM that you intend to offload in future sessions?

[Glendower]

I'm totally there with you Andrew, the two threads here and here have been a real eye opener to some of the really strange responsibilities that get put onto the GM's lap. 

Can you believe I used to pick people up from their homes and drop them off afterwards, because "I was the GM"?  And they all had ways and means of getting to the play area, I just thought that I was "supposed to".  Pretty damn screwed up thinking.

Happily I don't do that anymore.  We even have a system for food in all my games -> everyone drops a set amount of money for takeout (usually Pizza).

My Burning Wheel campaign has been an experiment in loosening Situational and Plot Authority, encouraging and asking for suggestions on what should traditionally come out of my noggin alone.  The results have been revolutionary, the players come up with ideas that I would never have even come close to imagining. They're pretty much the greatest source of ideas that I can draw upon.

One great example of this was when, before the game started, the players said "ok, what do we want to see happen in this game?"  And each player piped up with something they wanted to see dealt with or brought up in play.  This 10 minute conversation beforehand resulted in 3 of the most fun filled hours outside of Disney World.  The AP of it is here (there's some BW Jargon, and it's not a Forge link, sorry guys).

Weirdly, now that I let the players come up with ideas for scenes me running with them, it's utterly alien to even think of going back to the bad old days of having to balance all the plates on my lonesome.  This means I don't know what's going to happen next, they players pretty much constantly surprise me.  And let me tell you, this is the capital city of awesome,  otherwise known as Awesometown!

[Callan S.]

Dividing up the GM tasks is a great idea, in theory BUT doesn't it destroy the 'fog of war'?

In otherwords the players should have no knowledge of the following under most conditions:

• duration of spells on them,
• hit points, tactics, or spells of the monster or adversary,
• anything other than a general idea of what there own hit points are,
• severity or type of there disease (only symptoms),
• type, effect and severity of poisons
• intuitive, combat and most game state information.

Hi Kent,

What qualties does that grant the game?

I think once you can describe the qualties it would give, you can objectively weigh up whether those qualties important/worth keeping. Could you list them?

[dreamborn]

Hello Callan

What qualties does that grant the game?
I think once you can describe the qualties it would give, you can objectively weigh up whether those qualties important/worth keeping. Could you list them?

In my experience I have found, really I have played it both ways, and have actually witness this.
When a character knows exactly his hit points are he will make a decision one way and if if only has a rough idea he will make a different decision.  If a character knows that monster X has 4 rounds of stun he might decide to attack a different monster rather than finishing off the one he just stunned.  A classic example is the GM saying 'You see before you a band of 6 orcs armed with long swords and wearing leather'.  The characters will act one way.  But if GM said 'You see before you a group of approximately six humanoids of some type, they appear to be wearing leather and armed with bladed weapons'.  Time and time again I have seen a significant difference.  I as GM are giving them only the information their senses and the environment provides.  One is illuminated with 120 watt light bulbs, the other is rich in possibilities.

Based on knowledge (intelligence) tactics will change.  With perfect knowledge the tactics will change even more.  That is why it is called the 'fog of war'.  I would also say the the role-playing experience will change as well.

Now you could say that I as GM could play the monsters, NPCs and the rest of the world the same way and everything would be play balanced.  But I try not to do this because it is not realistic and not fair.

Furthermore I have found that the level of tension and excitement is significantly increased when the players don't know everything.

Hope I have expressed myself clearly.

Kent
www.dreamborn.com

[Filip Luszczyk]

Kent,

The GM tells nothing to the characters. He doesn't speak to the characters, but to the players. Also, it's not the characters that decide what they do - the players are the decisive force behind their characters' actions. Whatever the GM tells to the players, it doesn't affect the point of view of the character in any way (who is imaginary after all, and therefore has nothing to say). The players do.

Now, assuming, as you apparently do, that the point of the fun is "realism", why should any of the players damage the game by dictating "unrealistic" actions to his or her character? Given that the group strives for "realism", it seems natural to me that the players will use the information they get from the GM to steer their characters in a more "realistic" way.

Let's say there is a "realistic" game going on, and the GM tells the player that his character is approaching a bandit's surprise, not knowing about it. Because the player is all about "realism", he obviously should control his character "realistically" and walk into the surprise. And he should be grinning, cause he's doing something "realistic", and this is what the game is about. Cause, why should he use this knowledge improperly if the goal of play is producing "realism"?

Of course, if "realism" isn't a priority for the player, but, say, "winning" the scenario is, he will have no reason to walk into the surprise. But then, why would this hypothetical person play in a game that's all about "realism" in the first place?

Reading your posts I get an impression you are used to having similar situations. The GM pushes in one direction, the group wants to go in a different one (or, worse yet, each player wants something else). Probably, the group isn't at the same level because point of play wasn't discussed enough. So the GM needs empowerment to defend "his" game and "his" story. Otherwise, things are not fair, right?

The problem is, with this kind of adversarial relations in the group - with everyone pushing in his own direction, or one almighty GM forcing a "proper" course of events, with  a total disregard what others want - no computer software will help. At this point it's not even about dosing proper amounts of knowledge or making GM's job easier. It's all about having broken human relations that need to be mended in order to get anywhere.

[dreamborn]

Filip

The GM tells nothing to the characters. He doesn't speak to the characters, but to the players. Also, it's not the characters that decide what they do - the players are the decisive force behind their characters' actions. Whatever the GM tells to the players, it doesn't affect the point of view of the character in any way (who is imaginary after all, and therefore has nothing to say). The players do

.

The GM is the 5 senses of the character(s).  He tell the players what the characters sense.  The players roleplay the character.  The game is spun from the perspective of the characters NOT the players.  Your comments are confusing and non-consistent from a role-playing perspective.  (who knows maybe mine were too, but the preceding sentence is from a role-playing perspective)  Look I am not trying to start a flame.  I am relating what I have seen many times.

I have GM with over 100-200 people in the last 27 years.  I don't think more than 2-5 could consistently ignore information which their character shouldn't have known!

Kent

[Ron Edwards]

Guys - you're handling this like a debate, and it's not a debate.

Kent, nothing these guys are saying is challenging your experience or saying you're wrong about stuff. You're posting a little defensively and a little bit as if you personally own the entire concept of "GM." Let them talk about their experiences and the nuances of it without lecturing about what "a GM is" in an authoritative way. That doesn't negate your own experiences. This isn't about who's wrong and who then has to trudge away defeated.

Andrew and Filip, clearly Kent has his own views. Let him have them. I think you're responding to the lecturing tone in an equally defensive way, and that's not necessary. He's not going to agree with you or concede anything, so stop trying.

Best, Ron

[Callan S.]

That was a great description, Kent, I think I get what you mean.

One is illuminated with 120 watt light bulbs, the other is rich in possibilities.

Checking whether we have some mutual ground: Not everything needs to mined to the fullest for possiblities? Something could be rich in possibilities, but we can decide to pass it up? We both agree that's true?

I think Andrews passing on some possibilities, while keeping others. I think he's losing something too, but from his evident relief it's probably worth much more than what he's losing.

[Andrew Cooper]

I'm going to get back to this thread but I've been out of town.  Give me until Monday, thanks!

[TonyLB]

Hmmmm ... mapping, huh?

How do you feel about the prospect of trading an hour of your time pre-game for half an hour in-game?  'cuz you could have the map photocopied onto some card-stock, cut out the rooms, label 'em on the back and organize 'em in a folder ... then you could plop them into place like a jigsaw puzzle during play.

Or ... and here's the real fun, to my way of thinking ... if you're already comfy with the prospect of exposing the map to everyone, you could ask for a volunteer to do that task, and be Keeper of the Map during the game.  Then you spend an hour of someone else's time for half an hour of your in-game time.  They get the feedback of knowing the map layout (if that kind of knowledge appeals to them), being the one who preserves the mystery for everyone else, and maybe some compliments for any craftsmanship they do in terms of the map proper.  I don't think it would ever be a coveted position, but it might be one that someone got a lot of satisfaction out of.

[dreamborn]

Hi Tony

'cuz you could have the map photocopied onto some card-stock, cut out the rooms, label 'em on the back and organize 'em in a folder ... then you could plop them into place like a jigsaw puzzle during play.

I did something similar to this, where I photocopied it and zoomed it so it would work for 25mm figures.  It was a giant jigsaw puzzle and it was a relatively good compromise.  Before we broke for dinner it was all over the living room floor (big dungeon).  It work well, that is until a household pet decided to play with some of the puzzle while we ate dinner.  :^)

Kent