If there were a game or setting you'd really like to play (likely solo), but could never find a group, would it be worth it to you to pay a GM a nominal feel to run the game / campaign?

Or, as a GM, would you be willing to run something outside of your normal game for a nominal fee?

Just wondering.

  Depends on the cost, I guess.  But yeah, as a player I'd be willing, assuming a reasonable price/quality.

  Don't think I'd enjoy GMing it though.

Never in a million years. Ever. No GM is that good.

I'd definately GM for money.  Talk about a dream come true.

Because we have had it come up recently, I would like to state that any 'paid' type of game on RPoL is not allowed, and nobody should be using RPoL's resources to offer to run a game (or, for that matter, play in one) for a fee of any kind.

Please feel free to continue with the topic at hand.

My answer to the question:

Nope, even if it meant that I'd never play another RPG again.

I remember stories told from my old group about crazy sized D&D games with, like, 15 people all playing at once, back at the store they used to have Magic tournaments at.

My thoughts on that were, "Man, for a game that big, it'd have to cost money." Then one of my friends tried to convince me to do just that. No way, not with 15 people, that's for sure! LOL

The amount of time a GM puts into an average game, what price would be worthwhile?  If you paid him/her for that time, the game suddenly wouldn't be worth it.  Games seem to make sense only when they're free.

In reply to minioch (msg #6):

Maybe the game store could pay the GM for that kind of thing, but private people paying to game, not a chance.

Paying a GM only makes sense in MMORPGs.

  I think it depends upon what you mean.  I have paid for games at convention, but most of the money normally goes to the convention, not the GM.

  I've played with too many REALLY good GM's  (my DW for one) for free to be willing to pay on a regular basis. However, if I really wanted to play in a specific module for a table top game, and the GM was strapped for money, I might buy the module for him/her to run.

I always thought that's what paying for the pizza was.

It would be awkward to introduce money into a game session (as opposed to saying "if you GM, we'll buy the pizza").

I'd be tempted, to either pay a GM out of desperation, or taking money to GM a game for players.
Of course, the one taking money would probably have to be someone who wasn't a friend, since paying a friend or taking their money would be weird.
But, ultimately, it wouldn't work.  Money changes things, and would take the fun, friendly atmosphere out of the game, where the I would inevitably start feeling like the GM is only there for the money, or that I, as the GM, would feel like the players would be too demanding, since I'm being paid.

If that makes sense.

I would pay Robin Williams to run a game for me but that's about it.

I've actually found that offering to GM ensures that someone else will leap to the opportunity. No idea why ...

*laughs*  That's a good point.   I feel the same way about Stephen Colbert, too.

However, I'd add that anyone I'd consider worth really spending money to have as a GM (or a player, for that matter) is someone I couldn't afford.

I think adequate payment for the GM would be pizza. It's what *I* would accept as payment.

But as for money, though, money, while it's nice to have, gets in the way of relationships. That includes gaming relationships. So, stick with food. It's much less complicated :)

I would not pay any old GM. However, there are a couple of GMs I've had who are so spectacular that I would pay them. On the other hand, both of those spectacular GMs who I would theoretically pay both publish gaming books professionally (for Chaosium and Steve Jackson Games respectively). I have bought the books they've written...so I am paying them in a sense.

I would pay $2-3 to enter into a convention game...and that money might be going to the GM...probably a stranger. That would be fine...but it wouldn't be an ongoing thing...it would be a one time transaction.

As for an ongoing thing...I wouldn't pay a GM for an ongoing game. I'd chip in for pizza though. Mainly because that might be strange.

Now, putting the shoe on the other foot. Would I GM for money? Only under very specific circumstances.
1) It would have to be for people who aren't my friends. I don't ask my friends to pay for spending time with me.
2) It would have to be for D&D4e or Pathfinder...preferably a Pathfinder Adventure path. Not because I like D&D...but rather because I don't like D&D and running modules would take very little effort for me. By doing a D&D module, it would be unequivocally a job for me. It would be something I could put all my skill into, but not my soul. It would be like all those female prostitutes who are lesbians, or male prostitutes/rent boys who are straight. They have sex with men for money, but their actual sexuality is reserved for women. I'd run a hack'n'slash D&D/Pathfinder module for strangers for money, but I'd reserve the time and energy and roleplay intensive GURPS/etc games for people who I care more about.
3) The game would have a set of ending parameters. i.e. This game will run from Level 1 to Level 20, and then the game is over. I don't want to be stuck running some D&D group for ever.
4) I don't need the money, and I have other ways to use my time, so if I agreed to do this, if would be because the people who want to pay me have a compelling story that makes me empathize with their situation. I'd rather run this game for people who are new to RP'ing and want learn how to play and don't have anyone to teach them...I'd throw in GM training for free so they could end up doing it on their own after I left. Or people who are isolated and just don't have the social network to game...or...alternately...

I'd run a really in depth and intense solo or small group game for some crazy rich lawyer who has the money but doesn't have the time to play regularly and so needs to hire a GM to run for her or him.

I don't think it's actually a big deal aside from the fact that it's probably not often done so there's no qualitative gauge as to how much a game is worth and what exactly is expected out of it.  Gaming is a subjective form of entertainment, what's fun for one person may not be for another.  So there would be a lot of issues initially with figuring out how to communicate expectations both ways, and figure out expected and appropriate costs, etc.  But I don't think it would be insurmountable.

That said, I don't know that I'd be willing to get in on the ground floor of such a movement myself.

One of the gaming podcasts I listen/listened to (don't remember which it was so it might not be still going) actually discussed this concept as a group of people actually paid one of the hosts of the show to drive to them and run a few games for someone's (I think it was) birthday.  In that case I think it was more about travel expenses in addition to time spent prepping/running.  But in exchange the group got to experience some types of games none of them had any experience with by someone with a known track record of running them.

However, a lot of people actually engage in paying/being payed to play/run a game.  Most convention games employ this concept.  The players are usually paying to get in and possibly also to register for a game, and likewise the GMs are getting paid in free admission/other stuff to come and run.  Yes there are typically adders for both sides of the equation with access to vendors and panels and such, but remembering basic economics from a class years and years ago, all that stuff can be assigned a positive/negative cost if you want to get technical.

Wow, I never thought that I'd ever see someone make a sincere comparison between a Dungeons & Dragons module and 'gay for pay' prostitution.

My game group pay me for GMing our Call Of Cthulhu games by buying me beer. I would scoff at mere pizza. Maybe their logic is that if they get me drunk I'll be more likely to forget to call for Sanity Checks?

Should I take that as a compliment?

I think I will!

I'd pay for a GM if:

1) The game was very well prepared
2) The location is close by
3) The setting (ie. the GM's home) was clean, tidy and comfortable
4) The GM treats his group like customers (ie. no spending half the night throwing up in the toilet after too much cheap wine)
5) The players are a decent lot

The thing about GMing (for free) is that it's supposed to be fun - but if you're getting paid, your focus is on the customers, not on yourself. Which means it's no different from having a job/business, as opposed to the chamber of delights everyone seems to think it is  :)

As to reasonable cost, why not the same amount each participant would shell out for a movie ticket? And the GM could sell popcorn, candy and soda for an exorbitant markup to sweeten the deal.

I'd really really rather you didn't do it again though. Other analogies which are less inappropriate could be used.

Gaming is a hobby for me, and a diversion.  It's not the only one I have, of course, but paying someone to run the game for me would kill some of my enjoyment in it, because it would stop being something I did purely for fun, and start to become something where I was worried about whether or not I was getting my money's worth of enjoyment from.  It's one of the reasons I only play paintball once a year or so, now...because that one time a year is an annual event where I KNOW I will have a good time.  There's almost nowhere around here to play for free, anymore, and I have a hard time convincing myself it's worth paying the sometimes exorbitant field fees to play when I may find the field or the players or the management of the place lacking to such a degree that I feel ripped off.

So, nope.  I'm not THAT addicted to gaming.

If you're talking about paintball, technically its free if you wander into a nearby forest with your own gear...course, if somebody gets lost or falls off a cliff, it may cost a bit to call Search*Rescue.

Nah...around here, there's a shortage of convenient forests to wander into.  And the Forest Service tends to chase paintball players out, thanks to the ignorance and abuse of players in the past.

I'm one of those people who has a hard time talking myself into paying someone to get the right to do something that I used to be able to do for free.  So, I don't play anywhere near as much paintball.  I don't play laser tag very often (because it's too much like paintball, and there are even fewer places around here to play it).  And I can't ever envision myself enjoying a 'pay to play' RPG (I don't even do MMORPGs, much less the ones that charge a fee).

Something like RPOL, where donations are accepted, is different, to me...kicking something into the pot to keep the game running smoothly, here, is akin, in my mind, to bringing treats or soda (or the aforementioned pizza) to a table-top game...it's an expense born by individual players for the enjoyment of the group, rather than an obligation that's expected to be taken care of before play can commence.

How about in the city? Wear masks, and when the cops come charging down, well, paintballing should've given you decent enough sprinting/hiding skills to evade arrest  :)

But yeah, the big difference in roleplaying is that the GM is also having fun. To be honest, it's supply and demand - if GMing was unpleasant, boring and stressful (like a job!), nobody would do it for free, and people would charge for it.

Plus there's the whole, "I'm the GM.  I say you're dead."  "No, I paid you, that makes you my employee.  You're fired." scenario.  :p

Okay! can we e-mail you beer???? i have one sanity point left and I am saving that for the next family reunion....oh wait...you mean the character sanity rolls not mine.

As my loose knit groups only regular GM. pizza, fried chicken, and soda are usually part of the deal....I run they treat...not that I wouldn't run for a bag of corn chips and a warm Dr Pepper. But hey if the guy hosting the game can sweet talk his wife into cooking for us...before unleashing her sorceress to wreak havoc and mayhem...who am I to complain.

On several occasions I have put together various business plan feasibility studies on how to incorporate and get paid to be a Game Master. If it was even remotely possible to pull off, while still keeping a reasonable standard of living in the USA, and supporting a family, I would be doing it.

Running two 4 hour sessions a day out of your home, your wife cooking for each game group, 6 players on average per session, and putting 1 hour of preparation into each game on Saturday, you would have an ~55 hour work week. As a soul income provider, with a home big enough to have a largish extra room dedicated only to gaming, I can not see charging less than $15 per session, per person.

The question is, can you find 60 people willing to do that and show up almost every week. 2nd, could you resolve all the scheduling conflicts necessary to have them all game on weekdays evenings?

And the people who would pay 15$ each would want such intense, detailed adventures and interactions that nearly any GM would quickly get burned out.
It would be a horrible thing for one of us to get sick of roleplaying games.

90% of a game is the OOC banter in my group. In our last session we arrived at 5 got character sheets out at half 7 began playing at 8. Thats 3 hours. We finished at 11 but probbably only got 2 hours of gaming in. But we all still had fun.

If this were translated over to a payed game we would have payed for 6 hours and got around 30% OF what we paid for. No one would be happy and the entire experiance would change. We like the banter and chatter, Gaming as well and that causes more banter and chatter. when money comes in Things become serious and you no longer have people stopping half way through a game to discuss whatever. So i would never pay for a game.

As an Example I have to pay to LARP, when i go there things are serious and we get some good intense RP done, but the OOC banter isnt there. I would never ant my LARp to turn into a tabletop just as i would never want to turn my Tabletop into a LARP, (LARP Safe dice would be needed for a start).

I have no problem with people making money from these things but the way to do it is either to publish an adventure or run a festival of some sort. As in the End payinhg to RP is what larpers do all the time but most tabletop groups dont take it as seriosly in my experiance.

Paying someone also causes expectations to rise. If I pay 15 bucks for something I expect more than from something I get for free. I can imagine disputes at the table being loaded with "I paid for this, rule for me", either openly stated or discretely assumed.

Not for an online game. However, I used to run a game where I charged for 'advanced' players. My personal profit wasn't very high; most of it went to pay for robes, temple time, advanced spell components, and materials for summoning Satan. I got out of that though when I had kids; just didn't have the time.

Chick wants his tract back...

The more serious answer ... sure! As it stands, I expect to drive 30-40 minutes each way to get to the game, plus babysitter, plus take-out food, plus fuel. That means my "free" game probably costs about $20-$40, and an hour of commute. If I could pay a GM who is close to my home, who will provide food and child space, that seems like an excellent trade-off.

I have also accepted payment as a GM. I've set up space and provided food, and charged people for the cost of that. Normally they chip in enough that there's a slight profit. I've served as a GM at conventions and got paid (and paid to attend other games).

In the end, I would argue the natural price of GMing services is $0, however lack of availability or other factors may shift the market such that it favors payment. If it is worth that much to you, it's a good buy and you should make it. If it's not ... don't. The market will adapt.

Back in the day I "charged" my players $1.00 per session with the proceeds going towards new books for the game.  Players who were not paid up were not allowed to level.  It did not add up to much but it did help offset the cost of some expensive gaming supplies.

In my current group everyone (well except for one player) throws in for snacks, and the GM is exempt.

I don't GM tabletop games, but I do play in others' games. Usually the players in our games would bring general snacks for sharing, and would leave some of what's left over at the end of the game. If anyone, including the GM, orders dinner, they pay for it themselves. Usually we game at the GM's place. That can mean 2 to 3 hours travelling, round-trip for me.

One thing we have (though we don't really use it anymore) is a pun box.  If anyone comes out with particularly lame puns (especially if it's repeatedly), they put coins in the box.  So far the pun box has funded an L5R box set and pizza for the group. There's currently enough in there to buy one pizza, perhaps.

I don't think it's really possible to earn a living GMing, but writing books, etc is another matter. I think GMing all day, every day for money would sap the creativity from it.

It kinda depends.  I don't think I'd mind paying for somebody to GM at a convention, unless they're there doing a game demo.  I mean.... that person may have had to travel a fair distance, and probably had to pay admission to the con, just to run a game for my enjoyment.  I don't mind kicking in a few bucks to help defray that cost.  If the person is demoing a game though, far as I'm concerned, the game company should pay them because that person is trying to sell the game companies products to me.

How I usually do it is that when somebody volunteers to GM the game that we're playing, we usually play for long days.  Eight or nine hours sometimes.  When we play, we usually order dinner and the GM eats free.
This message was last edited by the user at 14:32, Thu 06 Oct 2011.

Under no circumstances would I pay for someone to GM, nor would I ever GM for pay.

This is a game, and a social gathering. IRL, I do this both because it's fun, and because it's a great way to spend some time with my friends. Here, it's just fun, and I can make new friends. :)

Money would make it less of a game and more of work. There's enough of that out in the Real World, why would I want to make my fun be work?

I was invited to a be part of a large D&D group (10+ players).  The GM for that game charged everyone a buck a session, but it was more like club dues than payment to the GM.  This was before cheap PCs and cheap printers and it was to cover his costs for copying and providing materials, plus a few snacks.  I have no idea if he ended up making or losing money on the deal, but it seemed reasonable for a large group.

Outside of cons and one-off celebrity type things, the only things I'd consider are food and materials costs. If I'm desperate for game X, it seems pretty fair to buy the books (or at least arrange for the loan of the books).

As does food, etc.

Only problem with doing something for money - or worse, to make a living - is that it tends to suck the fun out of it. It's the same for anyone in creative professions - sure, you might enjoy it more than being an accountant or financial analyst (at the price of much, much lower income), but it'll never be as fun as doing it for free.

A free GM can muck around, take part in the game, and generally treat it as a social event. A paid GM has to make a lot of preparations (get your money's worth!), deal with the business side (accounting, marketing, insurance, etc), not to mention keeping everyone happy. Paid GMs aren't running a game - they're running a business.

Generally, there's only one time I'd agree on GM's getting paid at all: When they're at a convention or other place where they are providing a service.
And there should be a disconnection between the payment and the game (so, essentially, the GM should be paid for helping the con out with running  a game, and the players should, if they pay specifically for the game at all and it isn't just included in the ticket, pay for access to the event)

Besides, there's supply and demand:
In a convention, there might be 20 players and 5 GMs, so while that still gives 4 people a GM, if you refuse to pay for a certain plot, there might easily be another player or five wanting to play that plot because it's better than most of the offered ones.
In a normal situation, you might have a group of 5-7 friends who like tabletop RPGs, and if one person doesn't want to pay for your game it's now 4-6. You would have to get non-friends in on it, which is generally a bad idea when most players are friends x3 (It's one thing to get a group of strangers together and get to know each other while playing. It's another to get 3 friends and a GM together and then bringing in a stranger)

So, yeah... Getting paid for GM-ing is a bad idea in my eyes >:3
But, in a game where people spend different amount of time GMing (for example because they are the GM for entire games at a time, but do change it in between games) you could have a rule saying that the GM doesn't have to pay his share for food and drink, which would be more than enough payment :P
It'd help a small bit when it comes to getting the lazy ones to actually do a game every now and then :P And if they complain about the pizza cost, you could just go "then run a game :P"

I've often thought a GM ran a game so well that he or she deserved to get paid, or tipped, or something.  Like you guys say, paying for the grub or bringing the drinks works for tabletop play, but that doesn't exactly work for online play (hence, I often find myself saying something like, "Hey, if you're ever in town, I'll take you out for dinner!" - but that sounds all stalker creepy).

But I'd be afraid that paying the GM would send the message that I expected something extra out of the game, a ruling to go my way, cool loot, that kind of thing.  I buy albums, games, and books and go to shows, but a GM's creativity doesn't get the same monetary reward.  But swapping out by GMing for the group works.  Kind of work in kind - you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.

I'm necroposting (Hope I don't get in trouble) but I've been researching Professional DMing for a while and this is a great article:

http://www.glixel.com/news/mee...unning-games-w479506

We had games that size and larger at the Sentry Box.

To make it truly feasible for a GM to make a living, you'd be having to charge at least $7.50 per hour per player with a minimum of a four hour game. Combine that with five games a week. Each game could potentially go longer and with probably two hours per game of prep time. With each game having at least five players.

In reply to Shaman (msg # 47):

Good math. Ideally I would love to run a site for play by post and use a top notch mapping system.

I don't think I would even want to run an in person game again. If everyone was close it would be cool to run in person occasionally to supplement the online.

Anyway. This is a pipe dream of mine but it's epic some people are doing it for real.

The way I look at it, we already have people who make a living doing things like:

1. Opening boxes on Youtube
2. Answering other people's emails
3. Playing video games
4. Arranging furniture and clutter in otherwise empty houses

I could go on, but there's a lot of "jobs" doing stuff that really has no inherent value in a "producing physical goods" or "providing a service necessary for life" sense.  I think since human labor has so man different outputs and technology increases the output of human beings, you'll just see more and more of this kind of thing over time.

So this could be a thing some day.

TL;DR: as more and more stuff is automated in the economy, economically what's happening is more and more previously frivolous uses of human labor became viable.

I used to GM semi-professionally. I was employed by a gaming store to run a game of whatever tabletop RPG was currently the popular in-print one (3.5, 4e, Star Wars Saga, and Pathfinder, over the years). I wasn't paid by the individual players, though.

I also payed a GM once or twice to run games that no one in our group wanted to run. Payment wasn't a lot, especially when split across all members of our group (7-ish at the time), but the game was enjoyable enough for everyone.

Overall, yeah, I'd do it again on either side. I'd take that job again, assuming it would pay well enough to be worth it, and I'd certainly pay a GM to run a game no one in my group wanted to run, but everyone wanted to play. A few bucks here and there to make sure that no one in my group was unhappy with their role in a game is super okay with me.

In reply to drewalt (msg # 49):

Very good point! :D

In reply to NowhereMan (msg # 50):

That's cool man. I think RPOL would ban something like this (unless it was advertised as off-site) and it seems very few games go un-started. However, it seems MOST games go unfinished.

I've been on the site maybe 2 months and I've already seen like 6 games fail I was invested in.

One thing I would love about being paid to DM is the likelihood the players would prioritize that game and stick around. But maybe not.

This is another reason I wish RPOL was an APP (easier notifications & update as well as exposure to new "markets"), or that Jase would accept money to pay outside developers to help leap the site forward. Hell, he could even do Kickstarter campaigns (or similar) to raise funds to develop certain features. Anyway, off topic. Sorry.

I love the idea of a paid membership site to do Play by Post. Maybe someday I'll tackle that. :D Or more likely, I'll just dream about it while working... :-)
This message was last edited by the user at 03:35, Sun 30 Apr 2017.

I personally feel that it would be tacky of me to charge money to run a roleplaying game, in most circumstances at least.

I think that if you are going to run something online, and you want to charge money, you should work at becoming a Twitch/YouTube personality and stream the games.  The audience can pay, while your players and yourself provide the entertainment.

I think maaaybe in a situation where they want a specific game run a specific way, I would be okay with charging a nominal fee.  Simply because the input I have into how things are setup and run is much less than I would have in a game of my own choosing.

If it's a charity event of some kind, then I'm okay with players (and GMs) being charged a nominal fee.

Anything else, I would feel poorly about asking for money.

In reply to byzantinex (msg # 51):

Oh, there's no doubt that a paid game would be banned from RPoL. It was mentioned specifically in this thread already.

In reply to NowhereMan (msg # 53):

Didn't read the whole thing :D

Anyway, I've got my own forum setup for some other games already anyway. No biggie.

I'll just keep dreaming... :D

In reply to byzantinex (msg # 51):



So even if somebody were running a game elsewhere, they could not advertise it on RPoL.

In reply to bigbadron (msg # 55):

Also good info :-) Thanks

Anyway. Cool pipe dream.

This pops up on several Facebook groups I frequent, and the universal truth is this:

If you're not offering something that's much better than what the players can already get for free, then you really shouldn't be trying to make a business^* out of it.  Find or create a need that's not being met and then meet it.

^* I consider this different from asking for compensation for the module, minor transportation costs, materials costs, or similar expenses.  That's reasonable and fair (if agreed to ahead of time), though probably not more than a few bucks.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 57):

I have from time to time bought modules for GMs to run as a way of giving back.  When a GM asks for money for the purchase of tangible assets, ownership of the assets sooner or later becomes a topic of discussion if it is not made clear at the outset.

I also have no problem with helping supply refreshments and snacks for a game session.  If we decide to order in for pizza or Chinese food, I do my part there, too.

I'm with most everyone else who says, in effect, that a pay-for-play game needs to meet a higher standard, for the reasons already explored.

That's the problem.  It's not that what GMs do isn't, at the heart of it, totally worth being paid for.  There can be a lot of real work to it, and I know I get more entertainment value out of, say, my GM's here (hi, guys!) than I do from any number of other things that I pay for without blinking - say, going to the movies, or from video games.

...But as long as I have this nice stable of people willing to do it for free, and who, frankly, do indeed do it very well... then, um, they totally have my deep appreciation.  And I do try to contribute to the community by doing a bit of GMing myself.  And... er, I hope your day job is going well.

(Now, would I trade my firstborn son for a solid game of TORG?  ...Well, he's a teenager, so I might be gaming the system a little there.  I mean, no!  No, I absolutely would not.  The very thought!  ..Unless maybe if I could run two-- no!  Never!)

In reply to Utsukushi (msg # 59):

Since he's a teenager, depends what day we ask you?  LOL  Of course on those days, he's not going to be worth much to anyone else either.

My friends and I have debated about this. My two friends who are awesome GMs want to run games for money and we kind of do that with one-shots that we make for conferences but the problem, in my opinion, is that the real value of RPGing is hanging out with friends and once money starts changing hands it changes things...

Would you consider someone your friend if you paid for it?

I would perfectly be willing to pony up for a one-shot like if Wil Wheaton did a charity thing or what not but it's really more like "I'm paying money to hang out with a celebrity for charity, this is the activity that we will do". I have also joked with friends about hiring escorts or strippers and plunking them down into a Pathfinder game :P

BUT the bottom line is that while I'm perfectly willing to fund books, dice, snacks...those are things I would do for friends anyway but to pay them to be in my presence just sours the whole underlying concept, in my mind.

This is a very salient point.  Money can change relationship dynamics.  It doesn't have to but it can and often does.  That's especially true when you consider that there's plenty of fun to be found in the hobby - we wouldn't do it if there weren't - but everyone can have an off night.  Sometimes sessions just... kind of suck.

And sucky sessions are generally just shrugged off as a part of the whole RP thing, because sometimes everyone's off their game.  But if you're paying someone to entertain you, then your expectations are likely to shift pretty dramatically in regards to what you get out of every session you pay for.  You go from messing around with friends of an evening, to actively paying for a service that, presumably, you expect to receive.

If the act of dishing out money to your GM damages the spirit of the game then I can see how it might be a disincentive.

However, NowhereMan makes a good point:

I can see a lot of benefit coming from this.  I can't count the times that members of my old troupe would say they wanted to play this, or try out that, but nobody was actually willing to run the game.  Someone (usually me) would get talked into doing it and would almost invariably find that when we were badgered into running games we, as the GMs, wouldn't enjoy it that much.  And when your GM doesn't enjoy the game they're running it probably won't be running for very long.

So what about a mid-way point, a compromised incentive?  Rather than offering money, offer to pay for their meal.  'If you run this game we'll pony up and pay for your lunch,' or whatever.  Most people would do that for a friend anyway, if someone was short on cash, so it's less of a social pressure, but still reimburses your GM for their time and consideration in doing the job that you, the players, don't want to do.

As people get older and move apart, as well, travel distance becomes an issue.  My old troupe now live scattered anywhere from an hour and a half to two and a half hours' travel from me, so joining in with them is no longer a reliable option I can pursue.  Which is sad, but oh well.  That's life.  In circumstances where a GM has spent a significant amount of money on travelling to the group, whether they're running a game that nobody else wants to or not, I think it's reasonable in most circumstances for the group to put money toward their travel costs.

I have never paid a GM, but I would be open to it if I felt it was worth it. The way I see it, I pay to read books, I pay to watch movies, I pay for other forms of art and entertainment. Why wouldn't I pay a GM for the work they do if I felt it was worth the deal?

If I did pay a GM, obviously I wouldn't have a same relationship with him/her as I would with close friends that I game with at no cost (outside of pizza or whatever). It would definitely differ from what I'm used to, but I don't necessarily think it would be better or worse because of that alone. It would depend on the totality of the circumstances for me.

I read an article written by a professional GM once. He explained how and why his business worked and I feel he made a pretty good case for it. Wish I could find it now.

All that said, while I don't think I'm a bad GM, I don't think I'm quite good enough to feel comfortable asking someone to pay me.

Oh wow - I've never even thought of this but I would LOVE to be paid to GM! There are two sides to this: first, its great for the GM (obviously). Secondly, it means the players have literally invested in the game, so they are going to want to get their money's worth. That should lead to a slightly different relationship between players and GM than usual, and I suspect it's one that I would love.

Can't believe this never occurred to me before.

As a player, I'd most certainly consider the services of a professional GM for a one time thing. Like a RPG themed birthday party, where I could invite a few guests and we could all have fun without any of my guests needing to take on the work of being the GM.

But other than that, I probably derive the most value from an RPG of spending time with friends and crafting a story for them or having one crafted for me as a shared experience. Having a third party doing it for me would diminish part of the appeal for me for some reason.

That said, I would definitely pay for the chance to play at Matt Mercer's table.

This message was deleted by a moderator, as it was a double post, at 20:27, Wed 31 May 2017.

My experience leads me to believe that one's enjoyment has two sources, the game, and the social gathering. The social gathering enjoyment woukd be there regardless of what is played. Could be chess even.

But I find that the enjoyment of the game comes primarily from the GM. I've had GMs that I'm thankful were nit my first, because if they had been, I would never have played a second session, ever.

I have had very few GMs that can run the game so well, that the enjoyment of the game actually surpases the enjoyment of simply spending time with friends. Those are GMs that I'd go be a player for even I didn't know the other players, heck, I'd go play their games even the other players were people I despised.

Such GMs make it seem like the difference between playing tag football in the schoolyard vs playing professionally. That difference is something I'd definitely find worth paying for.

Finding a GM up to snuff however, is a difficult task.

I myself, aim to be such a GM. I literally study playstyles and GM advice to become better, and not just casually.

Of course, knowing and implementing are two vastly different things.