There are some easy rookie mistakes new GM's tend to make. These are not because they are bad GM's, simply that they don't know the best way to handle things since they lack experience.

An experienced driver knows how to drive fast, but when you get behind the wheel the first time a good instructor doesn't take you onto the autobahn with it's unlimited speed limit. Or onto a race track with other drivers on it all going 180 MPH.

Similarly new GM's should avoid certain things when first starting out. Eventually you will figure out when exceptions can be made, but avoiding them at the beginning will help you run things more smoothly.

This is supposed to be a place for new GM's to get tips from older more experienced GM's, and as such I think we should start here.

Here are a few things that I think new GM's should avoid:

1: NEVER play a character as the GM. The difference between a GM PC and an NPC, is leveling. If the character is sticking with a group of PC's and levels along with them, gets treasure, etc. That's a GM PC. NPC's should never divide XP, loot, or be a major directing force. NPC's are there to fulfill story points, plot devices, provide flavor to the story, and/or provide help on an as needed basis for the story. They should be helping the PC's but not holding their hands.

You may wonder why a GM PC is bad, it comes down to this. You already know what's going to happen, and how to defeat the monster, trap, puzzle, etc. Plus it is nearly impossible for a GM to not favor his personal PC. This will tend to alienate a large number of players. And lastly, separating IC knowledge from OOC knowledge is difficult for a lot of players, it's nearly impossible when you are the GM and a PC, because you know why something isn't working, but your PC doesn't.

Example: You're traveling through a dungeon. There is a wall with a small hole in it that is far too small for anyone to get through. On the other side you can see your magical gem that you are here to find and return so the curse on the land can be lifted. The hole is there so the PC's know this is the place they are supposed to be. They know it's here, they've seen it. But you don't want them bypassing the entire dungeon with a dimension door spell, or other quick magic. so you've placed a god level anti-teleport field on the dungeon. (The people responsible for the curse on the land are cultists to an evil entity, and this is unhallowed ground.) Your party's spell thief tries to Dimension Door to the gem and bypass the dungeon. But of course fails. The PC's get frustrated, they see some of the opposition and even a glimpse of what might be the boss fight, and don't understand why it's not working. They may ask your character why it's not working, now you have a dilemma you as a GM know what is going on, but your character? Does he know? If you simply always answer yes, you become the easy person to ask for all the answers when it gets difficult. If you say you don't know, the players will begin to see you as useless when figuring out the plot.

2. You shouldn't roll the dice for your players. This is a little less important during PBP games, since if someone can't get online during a critical scene and their turn is up you may have to do so. But in general it's best to let the players roll their own checks.


There are more to come, but this is the first post, and I'd like to get other GM's to post.

I think those are both excellent points, especially the GM PC. I don't see it happen much myself but you do get those situations and I personally can't think of a situation where a GM PC should be in play. A well played NPC or plot hints can do any job with less insult to the players than a GM PC ever could.

As for not rolling dice the one exception I can generally think of is if you want to say roll perception to see if the PCs spot/hear something without them knowing how well they rolled (if your players are prone to meta gaming and saying 'oh I rolled a 7 that means I'm not sure if there's something there, let's be extra careful'). But that should be a rarity.

I agree about the playing PC's in your own game.  I primarily run V:tM which doesn't include templates, so I build my NPC's like PC's, so I like to remind myself to separate them in my mind.  I feel that the main job of NPC's is to facilitate the stories of the PC's.  Getting too emotionally attached to NPC's is problematic, I've experienced that first hand as a player.

I do feel that it can be appropriate to roll for PC's for expedience in some situations, but I think that it is a good idea to avoid this as a new GM until you get used to how to do these things on rPol.

I'd also suggest to new GM's to be careful with respects to PC population.  I feel like some GM's will make games with massive populations to drive the posting speed, but it's important not to use post count as a gauge of success.  For one, the majority of posts in OOC don't actually bring anything to the game anyways.  The last thing you want to do is get yourself in over your head.  Spreading yourself too thin will allow for more details to fall through the cracks.  Better to have something smaller but excellent than something massive but mediocre.

Hoppa touched on another point I was going to make. Don't get too attached to either your story, or any particular NPC. The PC's will invariably mess it up. If you can try and be flexible, you might find the story is more fun the direction it ends up going. Have a contingency for if they do kill your big baddie too soon. Maybe he works for another even bigger baddie. Or maybe he's not really dead, and comes after the PC's for revenge later. The trick is to not get too attached to any NPC.

GMPCs can be very difficult to do right, and even experienced GMs can screw it up occasionally (as I have discovered in the last few days, as it happens... :/ ). I have largely had the good fortune to game with mature players who don't get petty over details, and I have built up a group of reliable players whom I will invite to any new game. I have confidence in them, and I like to think they have confidence in me.

However, using GMPCs with a new group can be a minefield.

If you feel you want to go down that route later, and/or you have a new group of players, you should start out with some 'recurring NPCs', and graduate to GMPCs when you and your players feel comfortable.

It's a good idea not to get attached to NPCs, particularly if they are the Bad Guys, because sooner or later the PCs will want to kill them, and you will be expected to let them!

If the NPC is on the PCs' side, it's perhaps less problematical, but if the PCs screw up an encounter with the Bad Guys and you don't want to kill them for it, your friendly NPC may end up as the fall guy, so it's best if you're not too attached to him when he takes the bullet (or arrow).

If you do have a GMPC or a significant NPC in the party, they should usually take a back seat, unless they have to step up in order to get the game moving or overcome an impasse. The last thing you want is for your GMPC to lead the party, either by design or accident, otherwise, as my colleagues have indicated upthread, the players tend to rely on them, and you end up playing a solo game with your players acting as little more than lurkers.

Getting it right is a very fine line to tread.

However, I always like to keep a background NPC in the party, because when the heroes stand there looking blankly at an obstacle with no clue how to overcome it, a redshirt with a bright idea (or better still, a wrong suggestion that's just close enough to give a PC a bright idea) can be less contrived than many other ways of pointing them in the right direction, and is much better than the game stagnating with nobody knowing what to do and everybody giving up in annoyance.

Rolling for PCs is definitely something else best avoided, unless not doing so will spoil the game. I usually run rules-lite games where there is less call to do this anyway, but definitely avoid this one where possible.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 1):

I have to disagree with the NPC's should never get xp, loot or any other form of reward.  There are occasions when an NPC should receive XP and a share of the loot.  There are 2 different types of NPC's in my book, Adventuring NPC's, those who travel with the group/party and are put into harm's way.  A fighter for example who was hired to help fight against the monsters and baddies.  These type of NPCs you want to gain experience, as will the players.  If they continue to adventure in the area, or return to the area of this NPC, they will be able to rehire this NPC and have the NPC be viable for whatever they are trying to accomplish.

The second type is non-adventuring NPC's, and they should never receive xp or loot.  Those are normally the ones we see in cities and towns; Sages, Blacksmiths, Innkeepers, etc.

    As a novice GM, it isn't easy to not grow attached to some of the villains/NPCs you've created. When I first started, I put a lot of thought and backstory into my NPC's, only to have them mowed down as cannon-fodder that left me frustrated. Since then, I've learned not to get too attached to NPCs (even the major ones, as PC's, can be so devastating to even the best-laid plans of your Big Bad)

   I have to agree with tulgurth - there are NPCs that travel with the group that should get experience, rewards and such. One of the PC's in my current 7th Sea campaign has a servant who travels along with the rest of the group and I've been tracking experience points and such for him with the full intention of promoting him at some point to being a full "H" Hero with the rest of the group. Having those NPC's along will give a sense of continuity with the group and a richer story as things progress, and will also promote a sense of time passage as the NPC grows along with the characters. Too many games, I've seen the old trope with regards to NPCs - "Oops, well ... there go whats his name!" played out. I'd prefer to make memorable NPC's that the players will genuinely care about when something happens to them.

   But you're right, those 'non-adventuring NPC's', I never worry about levels and/or experience for. The only thing that happens to most of them is their hair gets a little greyer.

Like your villains ??  I once had a number found (it was a tattoo) on the body.  The actual number was randomly rolled.  Yes, clones !!  So, now they can legitimately reappear, even more nasty than before.

In reply to tulgurth (msg # 6):

You could give them XP, but my advice is to not take any from the players for the NPC. I just have them level when the PC's do without giving them XP, but always keep them a little behind the PC's in level. That way the PC's are still expected to do the heavy lifting, and the NPC is still just a supporting role.

As to loot, that would depend on the agreement for the NPC. A fighter that's hired for part of the treasure would get loot. If he's hired on a rate, (daily, weekly, monthly, etc...) Then he wouldn't be expected to get loot. Good PC's would still outfit the NPC with good equipment that their not using, as that improves the NPC's ability to assist.

Then there is the option of having the NPC along for a specific item. "You can keep anything you want, but I must have the Eye of Baergon!"

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 9):

No, I would not take any from the players.  The XP would be divided equally among the players and then the NPC would receive an amount, although lower, commensurate with the PCs.  For instance, if I awarded the PC group 42,000 xp and there were 6 PC's, each PC would receive 7,000 XP.  I would redo the math including the NPC as part of the group and the NPC would receive 6,000 XP.

That's actually a good Idea. More work for the GM, but I like it.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 11):

Yeah it works out and the work is not that much really.  Just have the do the calculation a second time, including the NPCs in the second calculation.  I dont mind the second calculation as my chosen system is math heavy anyways.

another thing I remember from my days as a young GM.  I believe every GM goes through this phase, and yes I call it a phase, where they give out way to much loot.  PCs adventure for a few main reasons, the first is for Fame and Glory, the second is Gold.  Even though GMs use many different cover up the two reasons, working for a local lord, rescuing a damsel in distress, slaying the evil dragon, etc. it all boils down to fame and glory and the gold.

Gms have to balance the amount of treasure they give out to their players.  Give to much and the players become lazy and don't want to adventure.  Give out to little treasure, and whats the point?  The treasure and danger don't equal out.

Treasure can be many things, gold and other various coinages, spell scrolls, magic items, titles from high ranking nobles, treasure can be just about anything that has value to a player character.  The players normally will never tell the GM they are giving out to much treasure.  This means you have to develop the ability to decide what is too much and what is too little.

In reply to tulgurth (msg # 13):

   That's one thing that's always bothered me - giving out the right amount of 'loot'. I'm learning the AD&D system to try and DM at some point and I've always had trouble in trying to hand out 'just the right amount'. I understand that there are other methods of 'treasure' to give out, but is there some sort of formula to follow?

I'm not sure if this is quite the advise you're looking for, but I'd suggest starting with a later edition.  Then you will have charts that clearly state expected levels of loot at each level, which will help quite a lot.  Then again, I've never tried to run ADnD, I barely played it.  I didn't get into rping till 3rd ed launched.

It's an old (and wise) truth that the best way to kill any campaign is to let it grow too quickly.

Once your PCs are rich and famous, there's nothing realistically left for them to do, and they don't want to risk what they've already gained.

But likewise, if you persistently beat up your PCs and they don't feel rewarded for their efforts, you're going to lose players.

Each game has its own 'sweet spot', and finding it is one of the GM's goals. D&D is not the only system out there, and each one must be worked carefully by the GM to provide that elusive 'Goldilocks reward'.

You won't get it right first time, and even if you did, you'd get it wrong second time. It will take a number of attempts to get it right, but going through the maths a few times, doing a few 'what if' calculations in advance will help you to pitch your first shot in the right ball park.

It has been 20+ years since I have seriously played AD&D, so I am not that familiar at all with the later editions and the charts used for treasure.  However with 1st and 2nd Ed. I can say for sure there are tables for treasure.  Each creature has a Treasure Type that applies to a chart.  If you follow this chart and the treasure types you will get sufficient treasure for the encounter.  Pay attention though as some of the creatures have a type for individual creatures and the tribe's treasure.  Goblins and other humanoid creatures are good for this.

When it comes to the magical items, be creative.  Even though the treasure generation charts for AD&D will include them, magical items don't always come in the form of weapons, potions, scrolls, etc.  They could be a magical deck of cards that allow the owner to see the specific cards on each side, highly prized by gamblers.  Or a magical item could be a variant of the Bag of Holding in the shape of a saddle bag.

Also remember, bonuses on weapons do not have to be magical, they could have bonuses based just because of the material the weapon or item is made from.  For instance, the Rolemaster system gives mithril weapons a bonus of +25, just because of the material.  Although not magical, still highly prized because of the material bonus.

I do think DnD is a good starting system to run, since you can rely on the rules more.  I feel like the more I can point to what the rules say, the better I can judge impartially.  If tulgurth is saying that ADnD has treasure charts, I'd still say go by that for impartial fairness.  I also agree with what Ike said about making the reward seem worth it.  Killing a dragon will bring tons of loot, but killing a dragon is quite difficult, hey?

Remember that there are ways of correcting those overindulgence when giving out treasure. PC's getting too fat from laziness? They make rich targets for thieves. Or worse the local lord wants his taxes. Two things are certain remember. One they are good at avoiding, but taxes? Titles getting to easy for them? Suddenly they're being drawn into the noble political game, and have to watch their backs. Fame is it's own problem. They'll soon not be able to rest for a night without being asked for help form one person or twenty.

So don't fret if you over indulge, but keep some ideas on how to correct it if you have to.

Keep the players spending gold.

That works as long as you don't give them too much in the way of power.

I find it best to let them come up with new equipment, magical items, etc... The R&D costs eat up a lot of funds, and then working the bugs out. but when they finally succeed they are really happy due to getting what they were after. They usually don't realize that it cost more than a stock item, sometimes almost double. But if they do figure it out they don't usually care. It's what they wanted, and they earned it.

Remember that rewards don't always have to be items or money or titles, Sometimes the reward is them getting what they've been seeking for a long time. Finally finding and killing the six fingered man. Getting to the Dark Tower. Finding your way out of Wonderland. Etc...

Voice that makes a great segue into the next item, 'What do the players want for their characters?'.  The easiest way to get this information is to ask them, of course.  What are the Character's long term and short term goals?  Long term goals are of course those goals to be accomplished years down the road.  These goals could change, but rarely do.  A simple short term goal could be to travel from their home village to big city and finally join up with the same guild their father was a part of in his youth.  A fine example of this would be the 'Three Musketeers' movie from 1993 when D'Artagnan arrived in Paris to join the Musketeers.

Long term goals of course would take more time accomplish, but if the GM knows what these goals are for each player, the GM can tailor their campaign around these goals.  Each player gets the opportunity to accomplish their personal goals, but at the same time each player gets to have their character in the spotlight of the story.

   One thing I have found useful, and that most players hate, is the taxman or other fee collectors. If the PC's are getting too much money, and the local lord sees this, he might want a 'piece' of the action. (No matter your inclination, the fact that some people have more than others will incite envy, and a few deadlier sins along with it)

   I've even seen in some fantasy states that are pro-active about this, and have made laws that call for an 'adventurer's license' and that dungeoneering done without a said license will cause the group to forfeit a significant portion of their treasure to the state (or worse). To cut the PC's complaints short, it has been mentioned that the state has the best of everything - roads, drainage, mildly subsidized magical research - and not a few statues in the honour of past Adventurers - as a result of such licenses being bought. (That, and the 5% treasure tax afforded by the license, rather than the 10% normally)

I don't recall which book it is, but I believe it was a GURPS book, that discusses this very thing. Essentially there are all sorts of ways players can be drained of cash. A few examples:

• Taxes (or "taxes"), licenses, etc.
• Increased cost of purchases (if you're dumping money into the economy you're going to cause inflation - that raises prices... the more money you shove into the economy, the more expensive services and items will get[does anyone else remember when petrol cost less than a buck a gallon?]).
• There's always new, bigger stuff to build or buy - fortifications, soldiers, horses, whatever all get very expensive very quickly... there's a reason medieval kings were constantly in debt (http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/120D/Money.html).
• A massive pet project - maybe the character wants to build a monument to herself or her god (medieval churches bankrupted more than one powerful family because they believed it was for the good of the soul). There's also research to do ("This magic staff - how can I recreate it?"), economic investments to make ("I think a three field system will work better than a two field system - let's look into that"), what-have-you.
• Business. If your world is anything like the real world, the people that make money want to make more of it. You think the Zuck's okay sitting on his billions? Not bloody likely. I guaran-damn-tee once your characters get a taste of wealth they're going to want to figure out how to make more.
• Good old disaster. Can your "heroes" really stand on all that wealth while the people they care for suffer through a disaster, man-made or otherwise?
• War. I mean, I hate to say it but, at least in roughly historically-accurate stories, the wealthy try to gain more wealth by going to war with their neighbors. It may be a currency sink, but historical rulers care for real estate more than a few coins.

There are a load of other things, but I cant remember them all. I want to say it's in the GURPS dungeon books, but I could be wrong.

One of the big problems with all these solutions if one of player agency, however. Let's face it - if the character's all about the power and the shinies, there's not a lot you, as GM, can do to force them to get rid of it - it's then a matter of not giving them the shinies in the first place.

I have to disagree Story, a GM can do alot to get the shinies from the PCs.  You covered a lot of good ways to do so and KHB mentioned a very good way as well.  But instituting Training costs is a good drain.  I find a lot of GMs miss this very good gold sink into the players.

For systems that are not skilled based, but instead are gain XP and automatically level, this may be a bit difficult, but the skill based systems are really good for it.  Rolemaster, HARP and Hackmaster are 3 systems that come to mind and I am sure there are several more out there like the Whitewolf system.  There will come a time when the players will no longer require trainers, or at least have to pay for them as their skills will be advanced enough they can not find the trainers and have to rely on their own RESEARCH to advance their skills.

So new GMs, don't forget, training cost money and time.

There are a few ways to deal with player shinies/gold/equipment without being malicious or mean about it.

You can take the hardest way out, own up to the players and explain that you've been too generous and that you are concerned about keeping them challenged and not wanting to go through tedious means to remove some of their stuff.  You'll have to hope they see and understand, and allow themselves to be depowered/deprived a little.

However, another way you can go about it is to ratchet up the difficulty a little.  If they have money, they will probably not have problems dealing with extra healing, or buying scrolls for extra firepower, and so on.  Or perhaps they can outfit an army to help deal with issues bigger than themselves.

What falls right into this is having them acknowledged as lords and ladies of the realm.  Now they have to use their wealth for things that are bigger than they are.  They need to fund an army, see to the safety and welfare of their citizens, and so on and so forth.  Of course, you want to have a balance between their stewardship of the lands, and them going out to do things on their own, and so on.

In some games, I have used people's equipment (cars, guns, homes, etc) as a means to absorb damage.  So the player doesn't get shot, but their car's engine gets taken out.  You can't just arbitrarily do that, but I've found that after an epic car chase with all kinds of things happening, players are generally happy to have survived AND dealt with a bad guy who was after their hide, even if they lost a car.  Or gun, etc.

John Wick's a good example, the bad guys put a lot of effort into destroying his car, killing his puppy and setting fire to his house.  And we know how that ended.

This brings up another point. When a GM is starting out they need to be upfront with their players as to their level of competence. Just like when you first start riding a bicycle you need training wheels, they need to be aware of your limitations.

So don't be afraid to ask for help from other GM's in your game or out. Also don't be afraid to admit when you are wrong. Pride leads to more trouble than anything else. Let your group know if you screwed up, they will forgive you, and help you make adjustments to compensate.

One of the examples of this is when you accidentally send the group against a foe too powerful for their capabilities. Not where they have gone somewhere they shouldn't but the planned boss fight is just too powerful. When you realize this apologize for the mistake, and allow them to escape. It happens, we've all done it, and you just learn from it.

Eventually you have to take the training wheels off, but expect to fall a few times. Just like riding a bike, you'll get it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another thing. Your job as GM is to make a fun interesting and challenging story. Your job is not to kill characters. (Unless you are playing a horror game like Call of Cthulhu, then have at it. Or Paranoia. The computer is our friend...) I've seen too many GM's out there who think that their job is to kill characters. That will lose you players. I'm not saying never kill a character, If the story goes that way fine, or if the character does something really stupid, (jumping off a 1000 ft cliff and turning in to a goldfish halfway down,) sure kill them. But avoid the rooms of instant and assured death, and the 400 hp dragon at 3rd level.

Challenge yes, but don't be a killer GM. Allow your players the option to run if necessary, or to win if they come up with a clever way around an encounter that you had expected them to lose.

Just because it deserves to be repeated.

   Wish I'd known that many years ago, but the problem was that the games I was trying out in the 1980's were fairly brand new and we were all making mistakes (as players as well as GM/DMs. Thankfully, we just read the rules as we were going and learned 'on the fly' as best we could.

   But you are right, listing your skill with a particular ruleset is a good idea - at least the players will know what to expect and those that have played the game in the past can give you a hand with things until you're comfortable with the rules and the setting. (I'm doing that right now, re-learning the 2e Ad&D rules for the second time, and the "Birthright" Campaign setting for the first. I know, not the easiest setting to use, but I'm looking at it as a challenge.)

   But with learning the 'ropes' and such when you are a novice GM/DM, one thing to be cautious of are those players who know much more about the system than you do and possibly 'railroading' you into their perception of the game. Everyone plays (and GMs) differently, and although they might be helping you, you need to understand that your interpretation might be different than someone else's. Don't be afraid to step up and let someone know that 'this is how I'm working things.'

   On the flip side, don't 'railroad' your PCs with an adventure. Most people don't like to be told where to go and what they need to do, and setting them down a track with no way to go but forward is just sticking too much to the script and not giving the players any 'wriggle room' - and if you aren't, they will make it themselves. Be prepared to move the Wizard's Tower somewhere else, or even make it into something else, like a small town where the Wizard holds court and lords it over the townsfolk. Be flexible, if at all possible.

   Something I've come along and noticed on Youtube is a plethora of videos on both playing and running games. One that I subscribed to early on was the "How to be a Great Game Master" series that covers a lot of topics and gives some rather helpful advice on everything from World Building to running an "Evil" campaign.  I'll include one of his videos here - it's on how to create your own world and campaign - for everyone to look over. From that point, you can look through and find other videos that might interest you as well.

https://youtu.be/Dbbm5dLXGyI - Building your own world and Campaign

Happy gaming.

I have used that myself, and I've been GMing for over twenty years.

That's another thing, though not something that is exclusive to new GMs. Like anyone in the medical profession, you should never stop learning and growing as a GM. Twenty years or twenty minutes, you never know it all, and you should keep learning tips, and refining your technique.

It's actually a good idea for life. Never stop learning.

If you've stopped learning, you've stopped living.

One thing I might suggest is not to force your desired behavior onto player characters. If a PC is a ruff and gruff soldier, don’t force him to be a gentle boy scout. Don’t force a peaceful cleric to become a ruthless killer. Edit: By force I mean somehow punishing them for not complying.
Main reason is it doesn’t allow the player to play the character they signed on to play.

Of course, there are limits.
Actions might still have practical consequences. Bad behavior could get the law after them, being too merciful might allow foes to keep causing trouble.
You might also let the players know at the beginning what kind of characters you’re looking for. If you’re looking to run a kid friendly hero game, they may need to take their psycho murderer character elsewhere.


This has probably already been said or implied, but I’d say to be very flexible in your planning, and don't plan too far ahead.
If you railroad the players, they might feel like they don’t actually matter.
Players can easily mess up your plans with unexpected actions.
Outside factors can mess things up too (people leaving and joining).
This message was last edited by the player at 20:43, Sat 09 Dec 2017.

Here is another thing a new GM should avoid. Until you have both considerable experience, and a good group of experienced players who know how to not take IC personally, don't run an evil based campaign.

Running an evil based campaign is like being a ship captain piloting your ship through a series of icebergs. Just like an iceberg there are hidden dangers to this kind of campaign. Actions that a character takes will have consequences they might not foresee, and group infighting is almost universal. Better to avoid that until you know what you are doing, and whom you are playing with. The evil acts that your characters will do, really do need an experienced hand at the wheel.