This is what current day GM advice looks like from Brendan Lee Mulligan. This summary misses very little in detail of the pictured video. This is the advice that your average FLGS newcomer will see. Is the rise of this culture why we see changes in our hobby and the way games run?
>"Don't over prepare and don't under prepare" (yes, that's it)
>"If you under-prepare the world feels hollow"
>"If you over prepare the PCs could skip your content and you wasted time!"
>"Hit points games are different than gritty horror games because a character is just as effective between 1 to max hitpoints. So what mood do you want?"
>"If you want a gritty setting, consider not allowing healing or rules around resurrection to make it harder. "
>"It's hard to create a challenge with classic hitpoints. Check out online homebrews that add things like permanent injuries! But be prepared for a level 20 character covered in permanent scars and injuries."
>"One way of doing it would be for 20 or maybe 50 points of damage causing a permanent injury" (yeah, that was his idea)
>"Death spirals are bad and impossible to balance! It makes assassins and surprise attacks too powerful!"
>"Humans are way more interesting antagonists than monsters! Monsters are boring because they represent forces of nature/otherness which is dehumanized. Battles are only interesting if you don't consider moral weight of violence"
>"For example: what makes the movie Alien most horrifying wasn't the Xenomorph but when humans ended up being the villain!"
>"Have things happen outside of what the players do to make the world seem alive"
So now that we have an example of cliche and useless tripe. What's some modern, practical advice you guys have found useful?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Do the opposite of what anyone on Ganker says.
no.
God, you sound like a fricking whiny b***h.
Why do you care? Do you need beginner advice, or are you just looking for irrelevant shit to whine about?
every gm runs things their own way the rules you make and how you run it will effect how your campaign feels my thoughts on the points:
>Prep is important not micromanaging sessions is for the best but having broad details is good to help improv and you can save prep skipped for later
>Most of the gritty stuff seems fine making resurrection harder and injuries for 0hp can make a more gritty game, the 20-50 damage is moronic though
>Sentient antagonists are easier to work with
>Things happening outside the PC does make the world feel alive
Personally I don't watch much TTRPG youtubers but I would say if I had to recommend one for a new GM it would be seth sorkowski. I think for new GMs I would do good to prepare to fail or players to go off what you planned. But also to have broad ideas of what could happen taking other routes. For combat a few things that have helped me is having collective initiative for groups of creatures, using 1hp minions as fodder, and to keep in mind what your players have access to.
>seth sorkowski
This guy sucks and I knew it the second I heard all his advice about playing GM mind games
>guy gives decent advice that you can choose to take or leave
>this level of butthurt about it
have you tried not being moronic
I honestly really dislike BLMs style of GMing. Gygax forgive me, but even Mercer has better advice. All Mulligan knows is railroad, eat hot chip, and fudge die.
Seth is good. Sly is OK. Runeslinger is good. There's a couple Alexandrian articles.
Fricking this
It's railroad, exaggerated bullshit, and substitute freak bullshit lolrandom characters and settings for actual creativity. Oh, and he's basically just doing modern day improv. There's no actual "roleplaying"
>decent
This homosexual from Dimension20 is perhaps these creature I hate the most in this world.
To him ttrpgs are not games but storytelling devices, and that should be enough evidence that his opinions are absolutely irrelevant.
Now let me give you a good advice:
Dont brother about setting a plot. Set your game around concrete things: dungeons, castles, Lairs, trails, etc.
If you dont want to do a hexcrawl, do a game in which your characters pick adventures and are redirected to these things. Give them options every session, and use the weeks inbetween to prepare (maps, factions, simple motivations etc.)
Roll treasures randomly, always, but feel free to add one or two special "Dungeon treasures" that are guaranteed Magical items or special in some way. Also, try to make It matter. In my games, critical failures mean the weapon breaks. Characters have to spend time buying New ones. Armor is also pretty expensive, especially plate. For Lairs, hiring Mercenaries is a must. Try coming up with things that fit your game.
A Dungeon doesnt necessarily needs to be something indoors. Yes, I enjoy classical dungeons, but trilemma adventures hand plenty of dungeons that are set in open spaces, great place for inspiration.
Be fair and know your rules. No fudging, ever, you are not telling a story, you are playing a game. The story is what becomes of It after it is played.
If rules are too complex, simplify them, or pick rulesets that are less demanding of your memory. Also, stick with rulesets that offer procedures for things like dungeons and travels, npc reactions, etc. Handwaving this makes of combat the only real gameplay section.
And last but not least, dont be afraid of speaking in third person. You are not an actor, and if your players expect you to be, they are buttholes.
Good advice. Build a world with things to explore in it and the players will find or create adventure. If you try to build an adventure tied up entirely in future events, you'll have to force them into it and it will suck.
>In my games, critical failures mean the weapon breaks
Put down the crack pipe you stupid Black person. I don't want to lose my +2 sword because you think the game is fricking Breath of the Wild. Everyone in the party should play a halfling then, frick you.
i watch dimension 20 a bit because i personally enjoy brennan's style and most of the people he plays with so perhaps i'm biased in saying this, but why do any of you care?
normalgays not interested in roleplaying will structure their games in a similar manner, if they play at all, and people who don't like this style can simply choose to ignore it and play how they want
but for what they offer, D20 is fairly entertaining as background noise and does what it sets out to do.
Modern rpgs are a bit harder to give advice for, if only cause there's so many different approaches that trying to do a fits-all advice video is hard. If I had to suggest two pieces of advice I learned through constant mistakes, it's these;
>Talk to each player that actually seems invested in order to find out what kind of game they want so you can prepare accordingly
>If someone is acting disgruntled or whiny, don't try to guess what the problem is, take them aside when you can to see if it's an issue you can actually solve
And frankly, as long as your players aren't extremely stubborn autists, you'll be fine as long as you stick to these. Most everything else is window dressing up to a certain point, even the threat of railroading, but having the fundamental of getting the most basic of shit together and heading off problems before they fester is about the only real advice I could give without getting specific questions.
Wow, never heard of the guy.
And no wonder, his "advice" amounts to a weird mix of too specific to certain types of game, or too subjective.
I advise you to go back and read Gygax; the first edition DM's guide is full of stuff that was lost in later editions.
Somebody also mentioned Seth Skorkowsky, who has done some videos on stuff life "old school dungeon crawls".
I swear there was a more indepth video by this asian looking dude somwehere, regarding "living campaigns" in that Gygaxian style, but I can't for the life of me find it.,
I think this guy is certainly entertaining, because he clearly enjoys what he does and has a passion for it, but he's a piss-poor teacher regurgitating bland advice from other piss-poor teachers who also struggled to come up with meaningful advice that is actually helpful. The primary problem is that they're presenting a life hack-style approach to GMing that amounts to:
>Do smart things
>Do things that fit the theme or mood you are going for
>[optional rule that's been in most d20 games for decades but presented as a clever little trick to make things spicy]
>make your antagonists extra antagonistic
All technically correct and potentially useful, but not exactly helpful. Like if you need to be told that you shouldn't allow unlimited on-demand healing and infinite revives in your gritty mudpunk gorefest soulgrinder game, or whatever, I don't know why you are the one running the game. At the same time, a lot of this need for advice seems to come from people simply not reading their fricking books when they should have, but also that some systems are especially bad about actually teaching, not just telling, how to run a fricking game.
I think the opposite advice needs to be given more, that if you want a more lighthearted tone, softening death rules is good. Seems like nobody wants to touch the "death at zero HP" rule, but I think the way most people play the game just being incapacitated and taking a temporary injury would be better. Do the same for your enemies and that further reinforces the tone all the weebs are going for.
"How to compose a successful critical commentary:
You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”
You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
You should mention anything you have learned from your target.
Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism."
That's a very cool quote and food for thought thanks anon. And thanks to you too
since I missed it before.
Daniel Dennett is a very interesting man. I'd recommend reading his book, even if you don't agree with all of his beliefs you'll almost certainly learn something valuable.
>the most basic ass moron advice ever slurped up by the same pseudo intellectual homosexuals who read the Angry GM blog
Paragon monsters are a good concept. Angry GM is a total homosexual who's wrong about basically everything else though.
>(yes that's it)
>proceeds to elaborate
Just say he makes you mald OP
If you need GM advice you are a bad GM and should give up. That's my advice.
>I have nothing to learn
I like Brennan, but his advice is pretty mid, as is most of these guys, because it ultimately boils down to "lol, make it up."
Of the people I've read, the Alexandrian is the only dude who focuses on procedures and actual structures of play, which is more useful than just about every YouTube advice post I've ever seen, and like 99% of current rpg books.
>I like Brennan, but his advice is pretty mid, as is most of these guys, because it ultimately boils down to "lol, make it up."
Brennan has - innately or from childhood or whatever - a great talent for improvisation and excellent communication skills. His advice in these areas is likely to be weak because he doesn't have the problems others do.
It's like people trying to take advice from Jocko Willink but screwing their lives up. Turns out "just grit your teeth and do it" only works if you have the natural psychological resilience of a man who could pass SEAL selection at 19. If you're the average person who feels feelings and needs rest, Jocko hasn't got shit to tell you.
If you ever want advice in life, find a mentor who WAS bad at the subject in question and got good. Not a natural prodigy at the top of the field.
yeah, put it better than i could
the only way for someone bad at dming to get better is to play, read the books, and practice
there's really no easy way, especially not from some guru or whatever
>Excellent communication skills
>But not when it comes to communicating actual advice
Ironically, that's the problem. The advice IS excellently communicated. He's really engaging to watch or listen to, and very persuasive. He just can't construct advice that's useful to people unlike himself.
Those are completely different skills. That's why pitchmen make shit pedagogues, no matter what TED tries to claim.
You are asking /tg/ of all places about good GMing advice? You would unironically be better off trying r/rpg instead.
Thanks. Even if the OP is in bad faith, there's never a bad time to try and help make this place less shit
Well, homosexual, let's break this down.
>"Don't over prepare and don't under prepare" (yes, that's it)
>"If you under-prepare the world feels hollow"
>"If you over prepare the PCs could skip your content and you wasted time!"
Correct point, not entirely correct reasoning. Under-preparing means that, at best, you're wasting time prepping random encounters which you could've at least had ready in your back pocket, and at worst don't have a session at all. On the other hand, "over-preparing" requires some qualification- don't over-prep things you can't easily reuse. If the party never enters or scouts the dungeon, reuse parts of the layout for the next one, it's fine. If you draft up some gay-ass monologue and the party shoots the guy before he speaks, that's over-prep.
>"Hit points games are different than gritty horror games[...]"
Basic statement, not advice.
>"If you want a gritty setting, consider[...]"
Too many words, could be simplified to "try games that aren't WotC-era D&D". The game's for high-flying heroics, just let it work for that.
>"Death spirals are bad and impossible to balance[...]
-Quote from man that ran face first into the trap.
It's balanced by the party staying vigilant to avoid this, or on the flipside, carefully planning their approach to monsters. If you, as the GM, assure that it's preventable without exceptional efforts, it's fair.
>"Humans are way more interesting antagonists than monsters[...]"
This homie never watched Alien. That the "CREW EXPENDABLE" scene took things from bad to worse doesn't mean it wasn't scary to start with.
You can make a compelling villain of a monster, add moral weight to it, etc. Medusa is a monster, but a tragic one. Sometimes you don't need a moral quandary, just an evil fricker. Unless you're oversimplifying the statement here, he's wrong.
>"Have things happen outside of what the players do to make the world seem alive"
Yeah, sure. It's not hard to do and it adds to the campaign.
Nothing in this is bad advice. The thing about advice is that you have to put it in action yourself.
Brendan Lee Mulligan should stick to his comedy improv shows that are actually scripted but it's okay because söy cattle slurp it up anyway. His lolrandumb cartoon crap adventures are not DnD they are stupid shit dressed up in DnD mechanics. Surprised he hasn't been cancelled for running a magic school game since that's wrongthink now thanks to JK Rowling.
Fatt Coville has the most basic ass moron advice ever slurped up by the same pseudo intellectual homosexuals who read the Angry GM blog, and he has the kind of smile that would make me move my daughters to the opposite end of the country.
Matt Mercer has some actual talent but it's ruined by his players being lolrandumb frick stains, his settings are boring ass "DnD but different" and 90 percent of his talent is voices. Cool. So his advice ain't worth shit.
The Alexandrian had 2 good articles and needed to shut the frick after that.
If you need GM advice, you have no talent and will never make it. #facts
Lol, what did you do to get purged? You must have taken a swing at someone's hero.
while his reasoning is that of a homosexual, he is correct about having your antagonists be people.
what's the point of having an antagonist antagonizing the group if they can't gloat about it or attack the party's reason to fight?
The sense of desperation a person can feel as they struggle against an unforgiving environment is not something that can easily be recreated by a human antagonist.
Starving in an unfamiliar jungle as you’re stalked by creatures lurking in the shadows of the undergrowth. Surviving against all odds and defying nature. Exerting your power and dominance over life and death.
We as humans don’t appreciate this as much as we once did, as it’s not something most of us have first hand experience with anymore. Life is more likely to hand us an enemy in the form of another man than that of the world itself.
Expect the bare minimum from your players. They should:
>show up
>not be a dick
Everything else is optional. And holy balls, having that mindset makes you way less angry at your players.
Also, I suggest AngryGM. Despite what some nogames will tell you, his advice actually works, especially the ones on first time GMs
AngryGM has an article about how forcing the players to roll over and over again to climb a wall is compelling gameplay. He is a dunce of the highest order, any good advice he's given is by accident.
I'm pretty sure he's argued against that, unless it's advancing some sort of time pressure (like his tension pool or some such)?
Yup, he did exactly that. One of his advices that helped me a lot as well.
You only roll if an action:
>Is possible
>Can reasonably fail
>Failure bears a consequence and can't just be tried over and over again
In the example of climbing the wall, it depends. If the character is straight up too weak to climb, then you just tell the player that he can't climb up there.
Otherwise, if there isn't a bear chasing him or in pursuit of someone, just say he succeeded (after a few attempts)
One piece of advice that I had to make peace with is that everyone loses 20 IQ points at the table, so you should make every trap, puzzle and hint in the dungeon as explicit and telegraphed as possible.
Like, describe it in a way that's 1 step shy of giving it away.
Because that 1 step will feel like a chasm when actually at the table.
It's not so much about players losing IQ points. More like they have to constantly rely on the GM to tell them what their characters perceive. You might've told them that it's raining, but after 15 minutes, no one remembers the rain anymore (more often than not, the GM included).
So if you present the puzzle, you should always re-describe the room after every action a character does (even if it's tiresome repeating the same line 15 times)
Don't be a b***h anon
>not terrible beginner advice
>a few differences of opinion on specifics and the reasoning
The West has fallen. Billions must die. The pozzed cum tsunami is coming, and we will all become gay homosexual troony communist liberal globalist environmentalist Liszt-appreciating feminist atheists.
It’s over.
have sex
I will NEVER have sex.
Here's the best piece of advice anyone on this board, or on the internet, can give you:
Read the game rules, run the game, make mistakes, note the mistakes and things you don't like about the rules, learn from your mistakes. No matter how many YouTube videos or blogs you read nothing will ever teach as well as running games, fricking up and experiencing game mechanics in play. Apparently this is something the newer generations of TTRPG players don't understand - everyone wants advice to be a 'good' GM right out the gate, without any experience or learning.
>advice
>resurrection
Into the trash it goes. Dungeon masters are an embarrassment.
This isn’t GM advice. This is DM advice, given by someone who’s only ever eaten at McDonald’s.
Please, name your Michelin star game system so I can laugh at you
Maid.
*starts dry humping u*
>>>"Don't over prepare and don't under prepare" (yes, that's it)
>>"If you under-prepare the world feels hollow"
>>"If you over prepare the PCs could skip your content and you wasted time!"
Generally correct but poorly stated.
>>"Hit points games are different than gritty horror games because a character is just as effective between 1 to max hitpoints. So what mood do you want?"
>>"If you want a gritty setting, consider not allowing healing or rules around resurrection to make it harder. "
Decent advice.
>>"It's hard to create a challenge with classic hitpoints. Check out online homebrews that add things like permanent injuries! But be prepared for a level 20 character covered in permanent scars and injuries."
>>"One way of doing it would be for 20 or maybe 50 points of damage causing a permanent injury" (yeah, that was his idea)
With the caveat of "if you're trying to avoid killing characters" this could stand but I loathe this kind of coddling.
>>"Death spirals are bad and impossible to balance! It makes assassins and surprise attacks too powerful!"
Assuming that the DM is doing their job competently, the players lacking situational awareness is not the DM's problem. If it takes a TPK to learn not to sleep in a dungeon without setting a guard then so be it.
>>"Humans are way more interesting antagonists than monsters! Monsters are boring because they represent forces of nature/otherness which is dehumanized. Battles are only interesting if you don't consider moral weight of violence"
If we're folding "intelligent creatures" (Beholders, Dragons, etc.) into "humans" and distinguishing between "combat" and "narrative" for the purpose of "antagonist" then I agree somewhat; if not then this is pantsu-on-head moronic.
>>"For example: what makes the movie Alien most horrifying wasn't the Xenomorph but when humans ended up being the villain!"
HARD disagree.
>>"Have things happen outside of what the players do to make the world seem alive"
Agreed 100%.
Everyone has different styles, different problems as a DM, so everyone will come with the advices that help THEM, not the person to whom said advices are adressed. While I’m no exception, I do wish to share my opinion just in case it might help someone.
>Rule 0 : You are here to have fun.
What it says. You're here to play some ttrpg, like any other game, sport or any other hobby. At the very least, you must leave without the sensation you've wasted your time.
You don't need to be happy about the session, depending what the group was going for. No need to be all lolrandom or trolling every NPC you encounter. I could leave shaky because SOMEONE decided to frick the princess and my PC was nearly killed in the fallout that ensued. I could leave with dread or wondering about the implications of what happened after a gruesome horror scene. Or with sadness as my character did not survive to go back to his wife and unborn son. You know, catharsis, pathos and all that shit from Aristotle.
What I do not want is leaving after being sidelined the whole session. Leaving before doing anything because everybody keep bickering about how to open that FRICKING UNLOCKED UN-BOOBY-TRAPPED UN-ENCHANTED normal-ass DOOR. Losing my character in an anticlimactic way without closure or reason. You know, leaving without telling myself "why did I bothered coming to this shitshow".
Which bring us to the next fundamental rule:
>Rule 1 : Communicate.
Just by getting everyone on the same page on what kind of session you want to have can do wonder, if you are ROLLplaying, ROLEPLAYing or rolePLAYing, what kind of tone, ambiance or whatever else you are going for. Just talk to your players, explain them where you are going, so everyone will go along the plot. They can still go full murderhobo in the middle of a political scene, sneaking out of a murder mystery and derailing the campaign, but as they know the direction you want them to follow, most often than not, they will try to stick to it. They know you have prepared something for them that way, so unless they decide that doing something else would be more enjoyable, you are good to go. No pressure.
As you have a mouth and an opinion, so do your players, and you happen to have ears. They can give feedback and constructive criticisms to be a better DM. You can talk trough any conflicts that may emerge. You can also listen what they want and expect for their characters or from the campaign: what kind of narrative arc they wish to follow, what they prefer doing around the table, if there are any subjects they don't want to deal with...
The more in line you are with your players, the more they will trust you to bring them where you want them to be, as they know and expect you will give them what they want.
While you can talk about anything through the game, there's a way to bring it in. Nobody has the same tresholds nor the same traumas. As great as my distaste for trigger warnings is, I must aknowledge the importance of knowing where everyone’s limits are and talking about it with the concerned player. More than making someone uncomfortable, shattering the trust your players have in you is what’s at stake. Just talking about it will will give them power over and help them dealing with what they can’t.
>Rule 1.618 : The DM word is law.
At the end, you are the final arbiter of what’s going on. That does not means everybody must do what you want. It is not a question of railroading or fudging a saving throw, that’s an other issue and this post is long enough as it is. It’s about being the final autority on what the rules allow the PC to do, what rules are interpreted in witch way (frick the peasant railgun), witch homebrew and rules adaptations are in effect. It must alway be done with the intent of providing the betterest experience possible to you and your players, not to control what’s happening. You are no tyrant, but you are no Judge Dredd either, insert uncle Ben favorite quote, etc.
>tl;dr : read the greentext
>"For example: what makes the movie Alien most horrifying wasn't the Xenomorph but when humans ended up being the villain!"
uh
>only applies to DnD
frick off