Alright /tg/, teach me how to be a good DM. I only have a few

dungeon & dragons in 2017??? LUL

>>54770428
Don't be a dick, be ready to improvise.

>>54770451
haven't been on this thread too much, what does /tg/ classify as "traditional games"?

>>54770665
board*****************

fucking kms

>>54770428
IMPROVISE
Take all your notes, your maps, your aids, everything beyond your screen and your dice, and burn them. Make a big public ceremony about how you won't be using them ever again. Make everything up on the spot. It'll be better when you don't try to run a shitty railroad novel and let emergent playstyle come through. Your players will love you, and will offer to suck your dick, even though most of them aren't gay.

>>54770665
D&D does fall under "traditional games", but the systems carrying that name tend to be some of the worst systems you could pick, especially as an inexperienced GM.

That's actually a rule of thumb for you: "Don't be a DM. Be a GM."

Depending on what particular flavor of fantasy game you want, you're better off taking a look at Beyond the Wall, Dungeonslayers, Apocalypse World: Fallen Empires, Shadow of the Demon Lord, Ryuutama, Tenra Bansho Zero or Kamigakari, just to name a few.

>>54770665
He's being a dick don't pay him any mind, but as said before be ready to improvise, and be open to criticism from your players. Generally, at the end of each session, I ask for thoughts and do little things throughout the week to get the players excited for the next one.

>>54770797
Railroading has been the one thing I know I don't want to fucking do. When I found out the first time we were playing the world was already premade and shit my heart sank. I want D&D to be spontaneous and completely the product of the imagination, obviously with the help of the guidelines from the book.

However with doing everything on the spot I'm afraid that the story/game/whatever is going to lack consistency, know what I mean?

>>54770819
>D&D does fall under "traditional games", but the systems carrying that name tend to be some of the worst systems you could pick, especially as an inexperienced GM.

Can you elaborate? I know what you mean by the statement but just want some examples

>>54770822
check'd

>be ready to improvise, and be open to criticism from your players.

Not a problem, my dude. Been told by my boss at my old job that I take criticism unbelievably well.

>>54770428
You can try "the rpg academy" podcast. Really nice guys. My question gets answered 'on air' quite late on.

>>54770870
Well, anything pre-3e hasn't aged too well and has mostly been supplanted by the OSR movement.

3.5 (and Pathfinder, by extension) is notorious for its poor balance, meaning you have to research the relative power/utility of the plethora of classes and devise some major restrictions if you don't want some players inadvertently running roughshod over the other players or your plans.

4e is not too bad, but it still requires a bunch of houserules to really work as intended, on top of having a very particular and necessarily combat-heavy style of play.

5e is just a weird mess of rules that more often than not have the opposite effect of what they're described to do.

>>54770997
noice

>>54771055
>5e is just a weird mess of rules that more often than not have the opposite effect of what they're described to do.

Strong words. Got examples to back that up?