Editing Gamemaster (section)

==How do I shot GM?==
[[Image:Werewizard.jpg|thumb|right|The best advice on how to be a good GM ever.]]
A lot of people come asking for advice on how to run a role-playing game, but the simple truth of the matter is that a game master is not born; rather, made. Only experience, reading and knowing the group of people you play with will help you become really good. Different GMs have different approaches, some improvise everything, others painstakingly prepare every map, encounter and NPC the players come across. This way of doing things rarely pays off, as players usually hold to long-standing player customs of shrugging off all over your meticulously-planned work, as they decide to take one wrong turn or ignore one person that was supposed to put them on the right track you laid down for them, and wander off in the complete opposite direction. Some GMs counter this by [[railroading]] their players, which is generally seen as an [[RAGE|douche]] way of doing things. When being railroaded, the players typically become little more than unwilling spectators to the GM's personal fantasy movie, which usually (read: always) sucks.

If you know what your players want you're one step closer to running a good game. Some just want to kick some goblin arse, others want to get involved in the political intrigue at court, others don't really know what they want. Try to lead them on adventures that involve all the characters and give them all challenges that depend on what they do best. If you have a rogue in the party make sure to have some sneaking or trap-finding to be done, if you have a barbarian be sure there will be opportunity to kick some ass and so on. Talk to your players.

===Tips for being a good GM===
No matter what your GM playstyle is or what your RPG is, there are a number of universal truths that help any GM run his game.

*[[Rule_0|Rule 0:]] '''Have fun.''' That's why you and everyone else is playing. When the game stops being fun, that's a sure sign to take a break for a while and come back another day when your enthusiasm has built up again.

*1. '''Talk to your players.''' Don't just "tell", otherwise your players can come to resent you as a tyrant or a railroader and be no fun to be around. Two-Way communication helps a lot even when you're in the middle of a long script of text such as clarifying points about the setting or the rules.

*2. '''DON'T''' be [[That Guy]]. It's just so much worse when it is the GM. You are presumably hosting the days event, so be a gracious host and that'll encourage them to come back. ''(note that doesn't mean providing all the munchies and other entertainment, just be patient with your group)''

*3. '''Improvisation''' is a MAJOR tool in your arsenal, even if you are running a heavily scripted adventure. Since you know the ending to your story you can incorporate player decisions into the overall plot and keep the story moving no matter what they do, which is kind of the point. A good improv can stop the campaign from being derailed and keep the players entertained by the twisting of events. 

*4. '''NO''' is a word you will probably use often, so learn to say it in different ways or come up with alternatives. For example: Sometimes a player will come to you with an awesome character build but unfortunately it may break your game, so finding ways to negotiate him away from it into something more suitable becomes a necessity. That might require some give-and-take on your part to keep the enjoyment factor in, but remember ultimately it's your decision, so don't feel pressured.
**Similarly '''No Beats Yes'''. This is a problem for very new GMs (and White Wolf storytellers).  Every group will have rogue players that try to do some foolhearty or unwise action that the rest of the group disagrees with. As a GM, it's important to allow the players to come to a consensus about the party's actions before listing the horrible consequences of an impulsive player's choice. The players don't ever need to be at each other's throats or considering ejecting a player for their ADHD if you as a GM give them a timing window to talk about group actions.

*5. '''Rolling the dice''' is an acceptable means of making shit up, even if you actually aren't making it up. Rolling the dice in front of the players ''(or even behind your GM screen)'' gives them the impression that a decision is out of your hands and that the events unfolding in front of them are completely even-handed and fair, even when you already knew what the outcome was going to be. Even killer GMs who throw 20 great wyrm red dragons at groups one after the other can generate less complaints if the players thought you rolled for them randomly.
**There is an argument for the GM not fluffing dice rolls, because it can lead to a reduction in the impact the players have on the game by negating their mistakes or triumphs. While this argument ''is'' valid, and when done egregiously it can ruin player experiences and immersion. It ignores the fundamental position of the GM: they are not a "player" in the same way that everyone else at the table is, they don't build their characters and monsters using the same methods and are not restricted by available resources when preparing encounters. The GM is instead a facilitator for the progression of the narrative; even if that narrative is only "Dungeon: what do?" they still need to make sure the game still moves forward and doesn't get bogged down, that everyone at the table gets their moment to shine, and that the continuity of one session (whether railroaded or not) are carried on to the next session. While this is not a justification for griefing the players, sometimes you simply ''have'' to let an unfortunate dice roll slide for the sake of the game, your ability to adapt to unexpected rolls can be dependent on your GM style and the result does not need to necessarily be good or bad, whether your players come back regularly will be the main indication.

*6. '''Work your players''' for their rewards. it's unlikely to be very fun if players find artefact-level gear all over the place / level up every hour / have the immediate and utter respect of every new NPC they meet (unless that is your particular thing). It's important to always have a carrot to dangle in front of the players and keep drawing them forward. When they catch it, give them another slightly shinier goal to chase, but keep it in small steps and don't overload them with rewards at the end of each adventure. This makes character growth memorable and makes the players more attached to their PCs in the long run.

*7 '''Do the Research''', when you use real-world or in-universe analogues that players might aleady be familiar with; such as military rankings, feudal titles, established figures or events ''(fictional or historical)'' or even technical wording of theories or philosophies. It's not hard, and you don't need a degree in the subject, but you'll look a fool when your players notice something wrong and could do a quick wikipedia search to point it out. ''GM fiat'' only gets you so far and you can start losing credibility if you expect players to buy into an anachronistic campaign setting without a suitable explanation. So basically: ''Know what you're talking about.''

*8 '''Learn Pacing''', especially when writing your own material. It sounds obvious, but figure out the difference between ''Encounters'' and ''Adventures'' then make them discrete things and break them up by having not have the same things happen twice in a row. Fight after fight after fight gets boring, even for hardcore hack-and-slash players; while repetitive adventure themes end up resolving themselves predictably and players stop caring.
**An encounter should take no more than a two or three hours, even if it's a combat when the game gets bogged down by turns and dice rolls, any longer and players lose interest. But don't extend them needlessly if the players seem to breeze through too quickly/easily. Adding "reinforcements" if the fight goes too quickly is just lazy, just move on to the next encounter.
**Adventures should be a handful of encounters and take around two or three sessions, it should not be the entire campaign setting itself. That means inserting sensible "start" and "end" points with reasonable objectives. If a single adventure takes weeks of gameplay to progress through, your players will forget key facts and objectives as the story goes on and it becomes harder to keep the group on track without forcefully railroading them.
**Campaigns can have goals, but are not necessary. If you plan for the party to kill the evil king, don't make that the group's immediate objective from the get go, otherwise you create one really long adventure, instead you should build your way to that episodically with a series of adventures.

*9 '''Don't write the ending before the players get involved.''' One of the most important rules of war is that No Plan Survives Contact With The Enemy, meaning that people's actions are very difficult to predict with meaningful certianity, and they will very frequently try something you didn't think of, so [[Not As Planned]] occurs exponentially more often than [[Just As Planned]]. The same is true with GMing.

In the end there is really only one rule, Rule 0, which states: Have fun. Meaning everyone at the table. Make sure everything is moving forward, try to avoid stalling and monotony. If the players are really stuck just throw something at them, even ninjas. Keep things happening and everyone interested.

If people aren't excited or interested it's often better to pull out another game, switch GMs, watch a movie or just WATCH ALL THE PORN (or play FATAL).

===Difficult Players===
As a GM you WILL find that some players will make your life difficult:
*Whether it be [[munchkin]]s who blatantly abuse rules, [[derp|''(or encourage you to house rule certain things that they could not otherwise do that just so happen to benefit their characters)'']]
*...or it could be endless [[powergamer|optimisers]] who constantly want to [[retcon|reroll]] their characters every time a new splatbook comes out, then get all moody when you don't let them play the character they want to play.
*...or it could be the uber-hardcore roleplayers that get extremely loud/overbearing at the table or [[Lawful Stupid|charge headfirst]] into trouble with a battlecry "LEEEEEEEEEROOOY" ''"because that's what their character would do"'' and make life difficult for other players. 
*...or it could be the lolrandom [[Chaotic Stupid]] PC that rolls dice to decide how their character acts and tries to do standup instead of playing the game.

There is one very handy piece of advice to remember: '''"The game will continue without them"'''. 
That is not actually a threat (though it can be used as such), it's more a reminder to yourself that no matter how bad a player attempts to [[The Henderson Scale of Plot Derailment|screw up your game]], your game will survive as long as you want it to.
Overpowered PCs compared to the rest of the party can generally be ignored or tarpitted while the rest of the party gets on with the actual campaign / abusersof numerical advantages can be comfortably "noped" behind your GM screen during stat contests / overbearing roleplayers can be executed or put in jail on the spot for stupidity.

The only thing that can actually ruin your game outright is a [[TPK]] or [[Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies|you just scream "fuck it" and give up]], which you as the GM are always the final arbiter of. If this one player has created a situation where they somehow managed to survive it all, then jolly for them... the game is still over and all of their effort has come to nothing.

====New / Replacement / Returning Characters====
As a subset of "difficult" players; there can be unseen difficulties when new players join your group, or return after an extended period of time and expect to play the same character. Furthermore you can often find players ''(usually [[Powergamers]])'' who contrive of flimsy excuses to kill/retire their character in order to roll up a new build that they like, essentially introducing a "new" character to the game which is already ongoing. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of this, but it can introduce a few problems to the table:

One problem is the plot rationale for the introduction, particularly at high levels. If the players have been playing for a long time and have established themselves as influential figures, then why is the new guy just as good as ''([[Powergamer|or better than]])'' they are? without having done any of the legwork they they have? and why hasn't he shown his face before now? This is most often covered in Dungeon Master Guides and rulebooks, it generally needs some degree of creativity to make sense of the new introduction and some give-and-take on behalf of the whole group to accommodate the new arrival. The new player/character will be left out of a lot of the group history and the in-jokes, and presumably won't have any of the unique artefacts or unique campaign options that can only be achieved through actual time spent at the table ''(quite a lot of [[Prestige Class]] prerequisites come to mind)''.

The second issue is the sudden jump of experience their "new" character receive, as any player presented with a rulebook and a specified sum of experience and cash will cherry pick their favourite options and powergame with the system, even if it wasn't their intention in the first place. This is less apparent with groups that haven't been playing long, or with particularly small groups who really need all the help they can get. But in large groups or groups with a lot of history; the introduction of a freshly minted Space Marine or a level 18 [[CoDzilla]] that never existed before can really upset the group dynamics. At the start of a campaign, players will write their back stories, then branch their characters as the story progresses, picking up feats, talents or skills based on the circumstances of the plot, such as the ability to swim, drive, speak new languages or have fighters being able to cast low level cantrips, or wizards multi-classing as rogues out of necessity when the group changes or the plot moves forward. Contrast with freshly joined players who will usually build the character first then write the story for that build, utterly neglecting the sacrifices other players needed to make to get to the same point.

While RPG groups are not necessarily fragile ecosystems and players do their best to get on with what their characters do best, some players can come to resent [[That Guy|"the new guy"]], even if the actual player has been with the group from the start. This goes double in rulesets which have persistent meta-characteristic based on [[Black Crusade|infamy]], [[Legend of the Five Rings|status, honor]], or include [[Dark Heresy|persistent injuries]]. Grizzled adventurers with psychological problems, troublesome injuries or particular levels of corruption can find it difficult to keep up to a Paladin fresh out of the packet being played with a lot of enthusiasm.

There are a number of schools of thought on the matter that help resolve this:
*'''Have the player start out at level 1:''' This allows the player to create a fresh new character and see them grow as the campaign develops, as well as allowing them the opportunity to change their mind over their build when the story moves forward. It can be a harsh option that is only really suitable for low-mid level groups. Otherwise it can make new players feel useless or superfluous when there are large level gaps and big differences in ability. However because the distance between levels usually increases in most RPG rulesets, the new player will catch up relatively quickly often jumping whole levels after a few encounters, but will usually remain behind the rest of the group, which at least recognises the work the existing players have put into the campaign. It should also be the go-to option for brand-new RPG players who don't know what they are doing, since the paperwork of playing a high level character can be daunting for those not familiar with the rules.
**Hand in hand with this option is the ability to run separate side-quests for the new player(s) in question. Giving them their own plot advancement that does not unfairly elevate their power level without the benefit of actually ''earning'' the experience. This often gives a satisfying experience for everyone involved without complaints.
*'''Have the player start out at the equivalent to the lowest level player:''' This is perhaps one of the fairest options, especially if members of the group are itinerant and only show up in dribs and drabs between sessions. It provides a basic entry level for the player to meet that is not too far behind the rest of the group with the opportunity to catch up and possibly overtake if they become regulars at the table.
*'''Have the player start out equivalent to the rest of the group, with caveats:''' Some parties allow a new character to join at an equal level but impose certain conditions on the player's character. Usually providing direct input on the characters backstory and build. This is often based on the party's needs, so if they are missing a key element such as a Rogue or a Cleric, then the new guy is guided down a path set for them, or required to take certain options that are necessary based on the way the campaign has developed. This might wreck a powergamers lv1-lv20 netlist build, but considering that the experience is ''free'' when everyone else already did the work, they can't really complain if it allows the GM to more easily slot that character into the world without upsetting the balance of the party and the setting.

There should be no substitute for actual time spent at the table. In all situations: If a character build is dependent on certain external factors such as permissions from in-game entities like commanders or royals or is dependent upon the intervention of divine figures, then they probably shouldn't be hand-waved just so the new player can get his build unless you were also willing to hand-wave these for the existing players who have been there longer. If one player has to play through several sessions of his own specific character arc just to get access to certain options or abilities then you should firmly insist that the new/returning player stop trying to argue that his character spent his downtime doing cooler things than the players.

===A Rebuttal From [[That Guy]]===
[[File:Enchanted Piss Forest cropped.png|300px|right]]
What kind of after-school-special-carebears-bullshit is this? As the GM your one and only duty is to '''win'''. Why in the name of Tiamat would you want to help the players anyways? They sit around your basement, drink your beer, [[herp]] their [[derp]]s, and shit all over your carefully constructed masterpiece. They aren't your friends, they are ''animals''. [[TPK|And there's only one way to deal with animals]]. That chest? It had a [[Sphere of Annihilation]]. The new [[Exalted|warstrider]] you built? It gets [[Rock of Doom|one-shotted by the imperial manse]]. Your [[psyker]]? Fails his perils roll and summons a bloodthirster. Oh you survived? [[Rocks fall, everyone dies|Deploying rocks now]]. They might hate you for it but [[Railroading| its the only way to keep the story progressing in the right direction (yours)]]. After all to rule one must either be feared or loved, and who could love you?

<strike>''And this elegan/tg/entlemen is why we never let [[That Guy]] GM.''</strike>

Shut up. Just shut the hell up. You know what? You're dead. You died. Orcus reached through a tear in the abyss and pulped you like an orange. Now get ready to roll a new character, we're playing my ''[[Magical realm|erotically charged]] [[My Little Pony]] [[Ponyfinder|homebrew sys]]-'' {{BLAM}} '''Oh, don't mind me, I just crawled out of the 40K Section.'''
'''''Praise the Emprah.'''''