I was just wondering what the general consensus was on pay to play DnD games. On one hand I understand that DMs want more commitment to their games from their players, and being paid to run a game seems like a way to maintain that commitment for both the players and the DM. It also doesn't seem like there's anything wrong with wanting to make a couple of extra bucks from a DnD session.
On the other hand, while the DM is doing the most work of anyone in the group, the players are all investing time and effort into the DM and his campaign. It's also not like the game is solely for the players either, at least in my experience the DM partakes in just as much of the enjoyment as the players, so it might seem a bit odd to charge people for what is essentially already a symbiotic relationship.
Anyways, just wondering what your overall thoughts on this are.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
I think that it all depends on the group dynamic. For friends, and friends of friends, food and drink is generally welcomed and appreciated by DMs, and appropriate.
For a table game of strangers at a game store, or other public venue or club, then monetary compensation makes sense. At such a venue, the demands on the DM to perform will be higher; there will be an increased level of stress on that person. All that makes the position more of a job. With some money to be made, a DM who can perform under such conditions may keep returning to that campaign.
Viewing paid DM'ing as being identical to social DM'ing is an error. It's like saying "Why would I go to a restaurant when I have a friend that loves cooking meals for our group?"
Nothing wrong with paid games. People can do whatever they want with their money. Just because a GM enjoys running a game does not mean they cannot charge for it. Players can charge too for playing and contributing to the game, and no one is stopping players from doing the same. The only difference is the level of demand. There is enough demand for GMs where players consider paying for one to secure their service. I do not think GMs are in any dire need of players; I cannot speak for all GMs, but if I cannot find anyone to play, I am content to just "play" D&D by myself by reading source books and adventure books.
Hell, a person in the forums even tested out ChatGPT recently to see how good the AI is as a player.
I commit time and effort into going to the restaurant. I still pay my bill. If I'm going to my friend's house every week for dinner, I bring some contribution on top of turning up and enjoying whatever they've prepared. Maybe it's a drink, maybe it's desert, maybe it's some money. It would be rude to do otherwise. DMing actually requires more commitment and resources than cooking a meal.
I've never charged for DMing, nor have I actually received gifts (which is fine), but if someone were DMing for me on a regular basis, I'd insist on getting them something. If they wanted a fixed fee...then assuming that it hasn't been done in bad faith (free sessions without mention of future cost, for example), then I can choose to pay or to not play with that group. There's no evil in that. If they were acting in bad faith, then that's a jerk move, of course. Otherwise, it's not unreasonable.
At the moment, if someone wanted me to DM for them, my free time for pure entertainment is already taken. You can persuade me to spare my family time, but you have to do it the way anyone else gets me to do something I don't want to - making it worth my while. I'm not expecting requests of that nature, but I'm no slave, so if you want me to work for you, then persuade me.
DMing isn't dependant on a rare resource, so if you're unable to find one in five of you and your friends willing to DM instead of playing, then you've learnt why maybe compensation for a stranger to do it for you is not unreasonable. If DMing isn't that much of a problem, then you don't need me to do it, paid or not.
People are free to do it without any compensation whatsoever, I do it for three simultaneous campaigns, but I don't look down on those who charge for those reasons. The only thing is that by attaching money to the game, you're communicating quality, which then brings you trouble if you don't give up the goods.
A note on using pricing to ensure commitment - in my experience, it doesn't work (I play most often in my FLGS, which does charge for seating). Bad players and uncommitted people still come and mess about or be flakey. The only difference is that they have one more excuse for being flakey - economic challenges.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It's a business like any other, dependent on supply and demand. If someone wants you to play guitar for them, you get paid by gig, or even by hour. If you're really bad you won't get many customers, if you're awesome you might even make a living from it.
Doesn't mean you're never jamming with friends, but that's private time off.
The core problem for paid DMing is that the amount people are willing to pay is generally lower than reasonable wages for paid work; the equivalent of minimum wage is (depending somewhat on your state) charging $100 per session (cost to be split between the players), and a real professional rate would be $200 or more.
The core problem for paid DMing is that the amount people are willing to pay is generally lower than reasonable wages for paid work; the equivalent of minimum wage is (depending somewhat on your state) charging $100 per session (cost to be split between the players), and a real professional rate would be $200 or more.
Wait, how do you get that number? According to a quick Google search the highest minimum wage in the US is 17 bucks, so to get 100 you'd need to be DMing for nearly 6 hours straight.
I guess you could factor in prep time? My sessions are like, 3-4 hours, but I don't think I was ever doing 2+ hours of prep for them. That's just a lot of time, what the heck are you doing that takes so long? Drawing all your maps by hand?
Should paid DMing be "minimum wage" work? That should be asked to anyone trying to tie DM rates to minimum wages.
I think DMing for pay on top of the restaurant/homecook analogy, there's a big difference in DMing for people socially vs creating the de facto business and customer (and customer service) dynamic that falls Into place once money transactions start taking place. This sorta does a judo flip to the whole "money breeds commitment to the game" argument. On the contrary, money changing hands leads to players not only dropping out but demanding raincheck when they do flake. Money changing hands can also create a sense of entitlement to a more bespoke experience, where the DM may have to cater to particular player expectations.
None of that is to speak against the idea of paid DMing (I've done paid GMing myself, but that was a fairly unique opportunity and really not worth getting into specifics beyond the general points I'm making here that agree with that experience), but just to make clear that traditional social ttrpg play and paid play are very different animals. And as sessions are getting tied to minimum wages, prospective DMs should also realized paid DMing done to any degree in support of actual livelihoods is a grind. Look at Star Playing Games (one of the arguably more successful platforms to facilitate paid TTRPG sessions). Those DMs play a lot of the same game (often starter sets) on repeat. As a GM, playing the same scenario a few times a months would likely put my head in a weird place, especially as I have to differentiate which group did which.
I think the only time paid GMing seems to work is when the DM/GM has already achieved a degree of "status" in the hobby through other content production (actual published game designer, YouTube or other social media presence in TTRPG spaces, Actual Play of some renown, etc.). Those folks can parlay their gaming community fame into a higher rate tier.
Conventions or being a house DM/GM for FLGS are another form where often some sort of compensation or perk is involved (free or partial credit to convention badges, store credit, discount or comped cafe item etc) but those experiences I think lean more to social side (kinda a gamer community service). Related are groups that may pay for a venue (like table fees at a FLGS), and the DM gets covered by the group. Conversely, I've play tested stuff where I paid the table fee so the only thing the players had to bring was a willingness to do some structured feedback after the playtest.
It all comes down to why the money is changing hands from the player and GM perspectives. If the player is paying to expect some sort of consistent quality experience, they need to consider what the experience is worth and what experiences are provided at different price points. If I were being paid minimum wage rates for a 4-6 hour session, I'm showing up with no prep and will just improv the session on the fly. I'd be clear up front about that, and can provide testimony that I'm one of those DMs who's got the tools to do that sort of session well, but that's the level of service I'm willing to provide at that level.
4 hours running, 4 hours prep time, $20 in overhead costs such as a streaming setup or room rental. That's ignoring advertising costs (the amount of time and money you spend finding players, or that you lose because you have the time to run something but don't have players).
For professional quality I'm assuming similar to hiring an entertainer for a party, then reducing it because it's not a one-off hire.
Should paid DMing be "minimum wage" work? That should be asked to anyone trying to tie DM rates to minimum wages.
I think DMing for pay on top of the restaurant/homecook analogy, there's a big difference in DMing for people socially vs creating the de facto business and customer (and customer service) dynamic that falls Into place once money transactions start taking place. This sorta does a judo flip to the whole "money breeds commitment to the game" argument. On the contrary, money changing hands leads to players not only dropping out but demanding raincheck when they do flake. Money changing hands can also create a sense of entitlement to a more bespoke experience, where the DM may have to cater to particular player expectations.
None of that is to speak against the idea of paid DMing (I've done paid GMing myself, but that was a fairly unique opportunity and really not worth getting into specifics beyond the general points I'm making here that agree with that experience), but just to make clear that traditional social ttrpg play and paid play are very different animals. And as sessions are getting tied to minimum wages, prospective DMs should also realized paid DMing done to any degree in support of actual livelihoods is a grind. Look at Star Playing Games (one of the arguably more successful platforms to facilitate paid TTRPG sessions). Those DMs play a lot of the same game (often starter sets) on repeat. As a GM, playing the same scenario a few times a months would likely put my head in a weird place, especially as I have to differentiate which group did which.
I think the only time paid GMing seems to work is when the DM/GM has already achieved a degree of "status" in the hobby through other content production (actual published game designer, YouTube or other social media presence in TTRPG spaces, Actual Play of some renown, etc.). Those folks can parlay their gaming community fame into a higher rate tier.
Conventions or being a house DM/GM for FLGS are another form where often some sort of compensation or perk is involved (free or partial credit to convention badges, store credit, discount or comped cafe item etc) but those experiences I think lean more to social side (kinda a gamer community service). Related are groups that may pay for a venue (like table fees at a FLGS), and the DM gets covered by the group. Conversely, I've play tested stuff where I paid the table fee so the only thing the players had to bring was a willingness to do some structured feedback after the playtest.
It all comes down to why the money is changing hands from the player and GM perspectives. If the player is paying to expect some sort of consistent quality experience, they need to consider what the experience is worth and what experiences are provided at different price points. If I were being paid minimum wage rates for a 4-6 hour session, I'm showing up with no prep and will just improv the session on the fly. I'd be clear up front about that, and can provide testimony that I'm one of those DMs who's got the tools to do that sort of session well, but that's the level of service I'm willing to provide at that level.
This is the best analysis I've seen on the issue. I'm not sure about your rain check assertion, but otherwise I think you've pretty much nailed it down here. Not sure what else can be said, really.
Should paid DMing be "minimum wage" work? That should be asked to anyone trying to tie DM rates to minimum wages.
I was more showing that even the low end is pretty high than trying to come up with a likely actual number. If we compare to paid entertainers a realistic price is at least a few hundred (it would likely be at the low end of the range because a repeated gig isn't going to be the same rate as a one-off).
I'm not sure about your rain check assertion, but otherwise I think you've pretty much nailed it down here. Not sure what else can be said, really.
Thanks. I don't think the potential for, let's call it "scheduling abuse," is a universal trait among paying gamers, but something the paid dynamic is vulnerable to. Rather it provides a whole level of expectation of customer service derived contortions for a paying player to justify flaking on a game and demanding a reschedule or refund.
It's funny, a lot of gamers these days put a lot energy into articulating gaming social contracts, safety tools, etc. Paid gaming moves the contract out of social into employment contracts and work agreements, and safety tools become working conditions and product safety assurances ... but I don't believe the paid space pays as much attention to that shift as the social supermajority of the hobby. I might be that the amount of paid gaming is still dwarfed by the amount of social gaming so the voices discussing these issues under a "paid/professional" perspective don't get the attention. I mean, a lot of creators are very willing to talk about the working conditions in the game design space, and a lesser extent the content creator space.
Should paid DMing be "minimum wage" work? That should be asked to anyone trying to tie DM rates to minimum wages.
I was more showing that even the low end is pretty high than trying to come up with a likely actual number. If we compare to paid entertainers a realistic price is at least a few hundred (it would likely be at the low end of the range because a repeated gig isn't going to be the same rate as a one-off).
Right, I wasn't saying you particularly were claiming paid GMing should be minimum wage work. But I think a lot of folks who step into paid game spaces, as players and DMs, if they look at $s per hour are placing paid GMing into minimum wage work and participating in the general devaluation of labor that occurs when there aren't hard bargained organized standards set by, let's call it a guild. Entertainment is the most apt sector to compare paid gaming to because 1.) we are talking bout entertainment and 2.) there are a number of different compensation models in entertainment beyond hourly rates to include busking to having points on revenue as part of a more sophisticated production enterprise.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
On the other hand, while the DM is doing the most work of anyone in the group, the players are all investing time and effort into the DM and his campaign. It's also not like the game is solely for the players either, at least in my experience the DM partakes in just as much of the enjoyment as the players, so it might seem a bit odd to charge people for what is essentially already a symbiotic relationship.
DMs spend a lot more time than players for each campaign though.
Designing the campaign (if it isn't a published adventure) - prepping things for each game session: setting up maps and tokens on a VTT, adding lighting to maps and maybe sound (to add that "professional" touch). This all takes time that players don't spend.
The commonly held belief is that a DM spends (or should? spend) as much time preparing for a game session as the game session will last.
Time spent preparing sessions is a very fluid quantity - not only in the literal sense but also in terms of definition. If I do a homebrew adventure, I'd spend ages prepping it. If it's a published one, I'd maybe need half an hour for the whole session. If it's one I've run over and over, like 5 minutes to refresh myself. That's not including painting minis and other stuff like that, so it really depends.
There is no amount you should spend, it just depends on how long you need. Whether that saving gets passed on depends on the nature of why it's quicker. If it's because they've chosen an adventure I'm super familiar with, then yes, I would charge less. If it's just because it's a published adventure, then not so much - I've had to buy the book and I'm (more) bound to what the book says, so that the time saved comes with other negatives. I might cut the costs, just not as much.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I was just wondering what the general consensus was on pay to play DnD games. On one hand I understand that DMs want more commitment to their games from their players, and being paid to run a game seems like a way to maintain that commitment for both the players and the DM. It also doesn't seem like there's anything wrong with wanting to make a couple of extra bucks from a DnD session.
On the other hand, while the DM is doing the most work of anyone in the group, the players are all investing time and effort into the DM and his campaign. It's also not like the game is solely for the players either, at least in my experience the DM partakes in just as much of the enjoyment as the players, so it might seem a bit odd to charge people for what is essentially already a symbiotic relationship.
Anyways, just wondering what your overall thoughts on this are.
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
I think that it all depends on the group dynamic. For friends, and friends of friends, food and drink is generally welcomed and appreciated by DMs, and appropriate.
For a table game of strangers at a game store, or other public venue or club, then monetary compensation makes sense. At such a venue, the demands on the DM to perform will be higher; there will be an increased level of stress on that person. All that makes the position more of a job. With some money to be made, a DM who can perform under such conditions may keep returning to that campaign.
The people who like them use them
The people who don't, don't
Viewing paid DM'ing as being identical to social DM'ing is an error. It's like saying "Why would I go to a restaurant when I have a friend that loves cooking meals for our group?"
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Nothing wrong with paid games. People can do whatever they want with their money. Just because a GM enjoys running a game does not mean they cannot charge for it. Players can charge too for playing and contributing to the game, and no one is stopping players from doing the same. The only difference is the level of demand. There is enough demand for GMs where players consider paying for one to secure their service. I do not think GMs are in any dire need of players; I cannot speak for all GMs, but if I cannot find anyone to play, I am content to just "play" D&D by myself by reading source books and adventure books.
Hell, a person in the forums even tested out ChatGPT recently to see how good the AI is as a player.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
I commit time and effort into going to the restaurant. I still pay my bill. If I'm going to my friend's house every week for dinner, I bring some contribution on top of turning up and enjoying whatever they've prepared. Maybe it's a drink, maybe it's desert, maybe it's some money. It would be rude to do otherwise. DMing actually requires more commitment and resources than cooking a meal.
I've never charged for DMing, nor have I actually received gifts (which is fine), but if someone were DMing for me on a regular basis, I'd insist on getting them something. If they wanted a fixed fee...then assuming that it hasn't been done in bad faith (free sessions without mention of future cost, for example), then I can choose to pay or to not play with that group. There's no evil in that. If they were acting in bad faith, then that's a jerk move, of course. Otherwise, it's not unreasonable.
At the moment, if someone wanted me to DM for them, my free time for pure entertainment is already taken. You can persuade me to spare my family time, but you have to do it the way anyone else gets me to do something I don't want to - making it worth my while. I'm not expecting requests of that nature, but I'm no slave, so if you want me to work for you, then persuade me.
DMing isn't dependant on a rare resource, so if you're unable to find one in five of you and your friends willing to DM instead of playing, then you've learnt why maybe compensation for a stranger to do it for you is not unreasonable. If DMing isn't that much of a problem, then you don't need me to do it, paid or not.
People are free to do it without any compensation whatsoever, I do it for three simultaneous campaigns, but I don't look down on those who charge for those reasons. The only thing is that by attaching money to the game, you're communicating quality, which then brings you trouble if you don't give up the goods.
A note on using pricing to ensure commitment - in my experience, it doesn't work (I play most often in my FLGS, which does charge for seating). Bad players and uncommitted people still come and mess about or be flakey. The only difference is that they have one more excuse for being flakey - economic challenges.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It's a business like any other, dependent on supply and demand. If someone wants you to play guitar for them, you get paid by gig, or even by hour. If you're really bad you won't get many customers, if you're awesome you might even make a living from it.
Doesn't mean you're never jamming with friends, but that's private time off.
The core problem for paid DMing is that the amount people are willing to pay is generally lower than reasonable wages for paid work; the equivalent of minimum wage is (depending somewhat on your state) charging $100 per session (cost to be split between the players), and a real professional rate would be $200 or more.
Wait, how do you get that number? According to a quick Google search the highest minimum wage in the US is 17 bucks, so to get 100 you'd need to be DMing for nearly 6 hours straight.
I guess you could factor in prep time? My sessions are like, 3-4 hours, but I don't think I was ever doing 2+ hours of prep for them. That's just a lot of time, what the heck are you doing that takes so long? Drawing all your maps by hand?
Should paid DMing be "minimum wage" work? That should be asked to anyone trying to tie DM rates to minimum wages.
I think DMing for pay on top of the restaurant/homecook analogy, there's a big difference in DMing for people socially vs creating the de facto business and customer (and customer service) dynamic that falls Into place once money transactions start taking place. This sorta does a judo flip to the whole "money breeds commitment to the game" argument. On the contrary, money changing hands leads to players not only dropping out but demanding raincheck when they do flake. Money changing hands can also create a sense of entitlement to a more bespoke experience, where the DM may have to cater to particular player expectations.
None of that is to speak against the idea of paid DMing (I've done paid GMing myself, but that was a fairly unique opportunity and really not worth getting into specifics beyond the general points I'm making here that agree with that experience), but just to make clear that traditional social ttrpg play and paid play are very different animals. And as sessions are getting tied to minimum wages, prospective DMs should also realized paid DMing done to any degree in support of actual livelihoods is a grind. Look at Star Playing Games (one of the arguably more successful platforms to facilitate paid TTRPG sessions). Those DMs play a lot of the same game (often starter sets) on repeat. As a GM, playing the same scenario a few times a months would likely put my head in a weird place, especially as I have to differentiate which group did which.
I think the only time paid GMing seems to work is when the DM/GM has already achieved a degree of "status" in the hobby through other content production (actual published game designer, YouTube or other social media presence in TTRPG spaces, Actual Play of some renown, etc.). Those folks can parlay their gaming community fame into a higher rate tier.
Conventions or being a house DM/GM for FLGS are another form where often some sort of compensation or perk is involved (free or partial credit to convention badges, store credit, discount or comped cafe item etc) but those experiences I think lean more to social side (kinda a gamer community service). Related are groups that may pay for a venue (like table fees at a FLGS), and the DM gets covered by the group. Conversely, I've play tested stuff where I paid the table fee so the only thing the players had to bring was a willingness to do some structured feedback after the playtest.
It all comes down to why the money is changing hands from the player and GM perspectives. If the player is paying to expect some sort of consistent quality experience, they need to consider what the experience is worth and what experiences are provided at different price points. If I were being paid minimum wage rates for a 4-6 hour session, I'm showing up with no prep and will just improv the session on the fly. I'd be clear up front about that, and can provide testimony that I'm one of those DMs who's got the tools to do that sort of session well, but that's the level of service I'm willing to provide at that level.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
4 hours running, 4 hours prep time, $20 in overhead costs such as a streaming setup or room rental. That's ignoring advertising costs (the amount of time and money you spend finding players, or that you lose because you have the time to run something but don't have players).
For professional quality I'm assuming similar to hiring an entertainer for a party, then reducing it because it's not a one-off hire.
This is the best analysis I've seen on the issue. I'm not sure about your rain check assertion, but otherwise I think you've pretty much nailed it down here. Not sure what else can be said, really.
I was more showing that even the low end is pretty high than trying to come up with a likely actual number. If we compare to paid entertainers a realistic price is at least a few hundred (it would likely be at the low end of the range because a repeated gig isn't going to be the same rate as a one-off).
Thanks. I don't think the potential for, let's call it "scheduling abuse," is a universal trait among paying gamers, but something the paid dynamic is vulnerable to. Rather it provides a whole level of expectation of customer service derived contortions for a paying player to justify flaking on a game and demanding a reschedule or refund.
It's funny, a lot of gamers these days put a lot energy into articulating gaming social contracts, safety tools, etc. Paid gaming moves the contract out of social into employment contracts and work agreements, and safety tools become working conditions and product safety assurances ... but I don't believe the paid space pays as much attention to that shift as the social supermajority of the hobby. I might be that the amount of paid gaming is still dwarfed by the amount of social gaming so the voices discussing these issues under a "paid/professional" perspective don't get the attention. I mean, a lot of creators are very willing to talk about the working conditions in the game design space, and a lesser extent the content creator space.
Right, I wasn't saying you particularly were claiming paid GMing should be minimum wage work. But I think a lot of folks who step into paid game spaces, as players and DMs, if they look at $s per hour are placing paid GMing into minimum wage work and participating in the general devaluation of labor that occurs when there aren't hard bargained organized standards set by, let's call it a guild. Entertainment is the most apt sector to compare paid gaming to because 1.) we are talking bout entertainment and 2.) there are a number of different compensation models in entertainment beyond hourly rates to include busking to having points on revenue as part of a more sophisticated production enterprise.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
DMs spend a lot more time than players for each campaign though.
Designing the campaign (if it isn't a published adventure) - prepping things for each game session: setting up maps and tokens on a VTT, adding lighting to maps and maybe sound (to add that "professional" touch). This all takes time that players don't spend.
The commonly held belief is that a DM spends (or should? spend) as much time preparing for a game session as the game session will last.
Time spent preparing sessions is a very fluid quantity - not only in the literal sense but also in terms of definition. If I do a homebrew adventure, I'd spend ages prepping it. If it's a published one, I'd maybe need half an hour for the whole session. If it's one I've run over and over, like 5 minutes to refresh myself. That's not including painting minis and other stuff like that, so it really depends.
There is no amount you should spend, it just depends on how long you need. Whether that saving gets passed on depends on the nature of why it's quicker. If it's because they've chosen an adventure I'm super familiar with, then yes, I would charge less. If it's just because it's a published adventure, then not so much - I've had to buy the book and I'm (more) bound to what the book says, so that the time saved comes with other negatives. I might cut the costs, just not as much.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.