?

Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Your opinion please 
23rd-Oct-2005 12:12 am
Sa-Ra
Admittedly I have no personal experience of this, but I know those who have. My question is this:
On the hole, is dual GM'ing a good idea, or to be steered well clear of?
Comments 
22nd-Oct-2005 11:42 pm (UTC) - Depends on the situation..
Basically, when you have a lot of players, dual DM'ing can be a good idea. Especially when you get an adventure where one half of players chases the dragon in the entrance while the other half runs in the back door to steal the loot.

23rd-Oct-2005 12:07 am (UTC) - Re: Depends on the situation..
Oh so true! Thankfully the person who normally clears off and does his own thing is one of the GM's, so that's one obstacle down.
23rd-Oct-2005 12:40 am (UTC)
It's fine so long as both DMs can coordinate and cooperate properly.

The way I've implimented it is to have one DM be the primary DM (the one actually running the session) and the other be the secondary DM (playing a PC during the session, but being able to make DMly decisions if necessary). This only works so long as there is synergy between DMs and the secondary DM can remain objective.
23rd-Oct-2005 04:12 am (UTC)
This also works well when you use the secondary GM as intelligence for your NPC enemies. Nothing like putting a real brain behind all those stats.
23rd-Oct-2005 05:02 am (UTC)
I agree, but I haven't actually tried it out.
23rd-Oct-2005 05:05 am (UTC)
Ohh good one.
I might have to try that some day.
23rd-Oct-2005 08:07 pm (UTC)
That's also nice, because it means you're not using GM knowlege of players weaknesses- sometimes that's a good thing to do, but not always.
23rd-Oct-2005 12:46 am (UTC)
Why do you want to do this?

If there is a large group then yes but you have to set some guidelines.
23rd-Oct-2005 10:35 am (UTC)
My other half is doing it, he doesn't seem particularly happy. He's the secondary GM, but seems to do all the leg work, i.e. gen characters, and the other GM comes up with the plot. Also, he's playing an NPC as a PC, but the other GM decided that he didn't like that character and got rid of it! I just wondered what other people thought about the concept. I personally couldn't cope with working as a team, especially as that would mean being more organised!
24th-Oct-2005 11:18 am (UTC)
..and therein lies the problem; it's not doing the work that's objectionable, it's being told an hour before the game "right I need 15 7th level characters for this session".
23rd-Oct-2005 01:27 pm (UTC)
palyed one game with two gm's,,,who rules lawered each other for a bituntill they could agree on something,,,like every 5 minutes,,it was bad,,very bad neither one wanted to take a back seat
24th-Oct-2005 03:34 am (UTC)
this reminds me of something my group had an idea of doing: Circle DM'ing.

Basically like a circle story, only one day one person DMs, then the next session, someone else, and around in a circle. This is mainly because about all of us are knowledgable enough (run our own games seperately), and it'd be interesting because of our different styles. The storyline would be like a circle story as well.

as per the idea of dual gming...that's just a scary idea.
24th-Oct-2005 07:04 am (UTC)
Two of my very experienced friends tried swapping GMship for different plots within a game. However, the person who thought up the entire background decided never to do it again. Though the other GM was very good, he was messing playing characters etc in a way that didn't seem right to the original creator.
24th-Oct-2005 11:17 am (UTC)
Keith's group used to do it successfully apparently.
24th-Oct-2005 12:02 pm (UTC)
but in a circle story that's the point. It's never YOUR story, you put in your spin, as does the next person, and the next...
The story going all bass-ackwards is to be expected.
27th-Oct-2005 11:53 pm (UTC)
I like the idea, personally. I wouldn't mind trying that out (making someone take over DMing a game every time).
This page was loaded Jan 23rd 2018, 3:31 pm GMT.