Me and a good group of friends like to play and we're looking into hosting a game at a friend's house on the weekends. The host and I are talking about who should DM the group as him and I have only been DM for a few half assed one shots we make up when we got nothing better to do. This led to the topic of him and I both taking the roll of the DM. We weren't sure if we should pick one or the other or if we could do it together at the same time or alternate who DMs the group. We tried asking our group who the think should DM, but no one really has an opinion. Any ideas on how to go about deciding?
And sorry if this doesn't fit here, figured this might be the best section to ask this in.
It is possible for two people to co-DM, whether that be a thing they do at the same time, or achieve by taking turns as the active DM for a session while the other plays a PC (which could also be shared, if desired). The logistics of making it work depend heavily upon the two people that are attempting it, however.
If the two of you agree that it sounds fun to share the DM-spot at the table, just talk out what that means to each of you to get on the same page, and make agreements as to how each aspect of DMing will be handled (i.e. will all the planning be done as a team, or will one of you handle that and provide the other with notes, how will you split the portrayal of NPCs and monsters, will you deliberate with each other to arrive at any rulings calls, or will one of you be appointed to handle them, and other such questions). Then adapt as necessary to keep things working for you and the group.
And if either of you are pretty sure that trying to share the DM-spot is going to result in any kind of negative feelings towards each other, flip a coin. Winner of the toss DMs this campaign for however long it lasts, and the other one of you DMs the next campaign (then you can take turns, either campaign by campaign, or running both of your campaigns but taking turns as to which is being played on a session-to-session basis).
I'd be intrested to see what a campaign with a two headed DM would look like. In any case, the basic issue would come down to what's hard prepped and how you'd handle improving. Working with a published setting would help a lot I imagine, otherwise your behind d the scenes coordination will have to be on point. Aside from that, it seems it be easy enough to divey up NPC's with minimal scripting for what they'd say.
Never 2 DMs. Always DM and DM Assistant (switching roles is fine). Always. Clearly delineate what the responsibilities of each one will be. Also be aware that what you might think are the advantages of co-DMing usually aren't. Resist the urge to split the party, even though you have the extra manpower. Don't expect prep-work to be halved (you'll be doing the same prep-work AND Emailing back and fourth to maintain a cohesive story)
We weren't sure if we should pick one or the other or if we could do it together at the same time or alternate who DMs the group.
Two DMs would be awkward. If you are both keen on DMIng then takes turns DMing for two or three sessions each. Maybe after awhile one of you would rather play than DM, if not keep taking turns or just have the group vote on who should DM.
We meet for coffee every week or two to discuss rulings, plan, and divide up the DM tasks for the current plots. I've found that we are coming up with better games than either one of us could have on our own, since we each have an area of interest - mine is running classic D&D archetypical plots that highlight the historical roots of the game (i.e. Underdark with the Kuo Tua / Drow / the Abyss), and the other DM really digs politics and worldbuilding, with an emphasis on clashes between civilizations. So, together, we're building a living and breathing world that the players dig.
The upside of this is our gaming group is really big - 15 people right now - and we set it up so people can come and go. So, the group is robust - it's not a small group that relies on every single person to be there or it falls apart, and it's survived a year that saw the core group slowly get almost completely replaced as the original group had 'life stuff' - like new babies, divorces, or relationship reconciliations - come up. And, each of us DMs have PCs, so we regularly switch between playing and DMing. I get to enjoy the game from all angles.
It takes a LOT of maturity, negotiation, and compromise on each DM's part. It also means both of you keeping some plot points secret from each other, while being mature about using meta-information your character can't know. But, like I said, the game world is richer and more interesting than others I've been in, due to the collaboration. If you're a people person, and can let go of some control, then it can work out - and relieve a lot of the burden of DMing since you have someone to share the load.
We handle the game prep West Marches style - we've created a bunch of adventure hooks and a few over-arching meta plots that will pay off at different levels, and then prep individual adventures after players set up a session date (with Doodle) and give us some hints about what they're after. It's not totally player-driven like a classic West Marches, us DMs are still guiding it somewhat, but we've only 'built' the wider world in a very conceptual way - i.e. it's like OD&D or classic Moorcock or Lieber fantasy, sword and sorcery with fantastic landscapes and regions where the world doesn't operate by the same rules. But, it's mostly evocative names on a big Hex map until the characters go there, and then we start building.
We also have an explicit collaborative setup - the characters have created regions of the world with their back stories. One of them comes from a country we haven't designed, and only has a name? They get to create it. Oh, they come from a line of Elven Sky Pirates? The world now has Elven Sky Pirates. As DMs, we only ask for a few things with these: create lore that's usable in the game as a potential story hook, and 'let go' of it once it's in our hands, so we can riff off of it to surprise everyone, including them, once the time comes to use it. So far, that's been awesome as well. Our players are invested in the game, the world feels rich and alive, and us DMs have only done a portion of the work.
You can both go as DM, there is no problem with that. Many years ago (when 2nd edition was on), we have created a one-shot adventure along with two friends. In the end, this adventure have been played with 3 DMs and 9-10 players as party. If you organize everything very well there is no problem with having 2 DMs or even more.
I always find this as to many cooks in the kitchen.
How my gang does it is we do chapters where one of us will run a few games to finish their chapter out and the next DM takes over from that point. All of us DM so we’re swapping between 5 of us.
On the off chance someone couldn’t think of one we just pass them over and bring them back up after the next rotation. I’ve had to do 2 chapter in a row because after my first one no body could figure how to follow it up.
I'm running a West Marches campaign with 4 different DM's. Each of us run our own individual tables and coordinate to keep the world and balance sensible.
In the past a group of us ran short story arc's (say 6 episodes per DM) before moving to a new DM. That let everyone tell a reasonable story and then pick back up later. It kept things fresh.
There are so many ways this can work - the key is you and your friend communicating really well, setting basic ground rules about game balance and house rules, and then staying on top of that!
I run a weekly AL style game, but there are weeks I can't make it. So one of the players is the backup DM. If I can't make it and he can, he runs the table that night. When we started we were using AL modules from the Storm King's Thunder series, and now we are (I am) doing Tomb of Annihilation (from the hardcover). Originally I thought he would run modules or pick up the TOA story from where I left off, but he has found it works better for him to create his own adventures. He's done a good job of creating things he can drop in and still connect to the ongoing storyline of the adventures I run. We have different styles and gifts. Especially with TOA, we worked together on how we would deal with some of the mechanics, but I've also learned to let go of needing us to handle the "rules" for jungle travel in the same way.
The last time he ran the table, it turned out I could be there. So I ran two of the NPCs (who are traveling with the party) for him; I had him do the same with one of those PCs when I next ran a table. He has a better handle on the specifics of spells, weapon damage, etc. than I do, so I often consult with him as we play. Beyond that, though, we don't co-DM in the sense of DMing the same session together.
Ok well I’m not sure if I supposed to ask this here or not but can you have a. Dungeon master and also have a game master and if yes would everyone agree that the game master would have the last say but like still have a dungeon master tell the story so essentially the GM is able to be a player in The story and the Dm is the one telling the story? I’m not sure but I think it’s an interesting concept and that it’s just food for thought but please don’t hesitate to give your opinion I truly am interested and would like to see what you all think.
Ok well I’m glad to hear that because I’m kinda thinking about setting up a campaign with a GM and a DM, so that is a relief to know that it’s possible and except able and allowed by dnd.
Multi Dm Campaigns can work really well, it is probably best if you define the campaign and the split up who will prepare which aspects of it. You can then each run your respective bits, but the strongest thing it lets you do is split up the party, if the party splits you can go to another room, run the 2 parts in synergy to each other, then when the parties re combine they have to describe what happened etc.
Make sure you communicate between DMs and have a clear understanding of all your NPCs and what they know etc. but give it a go, it works really well (and I wouldn’t bother with the whole DM and assistant thing, just split it all in half and work together)
I've been scouring forums for this take. My brother and I want to this but I'm worried about how sharing information would work so that we are still both surprised when we take out turns as players. I was also curious about the fluidity of having players come and go to help explain out characters absence as well as justifying a session when another player can't attend. Any insight would be appreciated.
I'm currently in the process of doing this with my partner. I find that we're very efficient at covering each other's blind spots when we plan, and we serve different niches when acting as game masters. It enhances the storytelling in terms of consistency, focus, character, pace and acting alike, with very few drawbacks as we're fairly synergistic and have worked together with storytelling before. I'd definitely say sharing a clear vision is necessary, and it's a structure that can easily fall apart if stressed in any way but when it works, it works better than having a go of it alone. You'd have to trust your co-DM completely for it to succeed, and this trust has to be well placed, but it is very satisfying if you can figure it out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Me and a good group of friends like to play and we're looking into hosting a game at a friend's house on the weekends. The host and I are talking about who should DM the group as him and I have only been DM for a few half assed one shots we make up when we got nothing better to do. This led to the topic of him and I both taking the roll of the DM. We weren't sure if we should pick one or the other or if we could do it together at the same time or alternate who DMs the group. We tried asking our group who the think should DM, but no one really has an opinion. Any ideas on how to go about deciding?
And sorry if this doesn't fit here, figured this might be the best section to ask this in.
It is possible for two people to co-DM, whether that be a thing they do at the same time, or achieve by taking turns as the active DM for a session while the other plays a PC (which could also be shared, if desired). The logistics of making it work depend heavily upon the two people that are attempting it, however.
If the two of you agree that it sounds fun to share the DM-spot at the table, just talk out what that means to each of you to get on the same page, and make agreements as to how each aspect of DMing will be handled (i.e. will all the planning be done as a team, or will one of you handle that and provide the other with notes, how will you split the portrayal of NPCs and monsters, will you deliberate with each other to arrive at any rulings calls, or will one of you be appointed to handle them, and other such questions). Then adapt as necessary to keep things working for you and the group.
And if either of you are pretty sure that trying to share the DM-spot is going to result in any kind of negative feelings towards each other, flip a coin. Winner of the toss DMs this campaign for however long it lasts, and the other one of you DMs the next campaign (then you can take turns, either campaign by campaign, or running both of your campaigns but taking turns as to which is being played on a session-to-session basis).
I'd be intrested to see what a campaign with a two headed DM would look like. In any case, the basic issue would come down to what's hard prepped and how you'd handle improving. Working with a published setting would help a lot I imagine, otherwise your behind d the scenes coordination will have to be on point. Aside from that, it seems it be easy enough to divey up NPC's with minimal scripting for what they'd say.
#OpenDnD. #DnDBegone
Never 2 DMs. Always DM and DM Assistant (switching roles is fine). Always. Clearly delineate what the responsibilities of each one will be. Also be aware that what you might think are the advantages of co-DMing usually aren't. Resist the urge to split the party, even though you have the extra manpower. Don't expect prep-work to be halved (you'll be doing the same prep-work AND Emailing back and fourth to maintain a cohesive story)
We do that in our campaign - and it's awesome.
We meet for coffee every week or two to discuss rulings, plan, and divide up the DM tasks for the current plots. I've found that we are coming up with better games than either one of us could have on our own, since we each have an area of interest - mine is running classic D&D archetypical plots that highlight the historical roots of the game (i.e. Underdark with the Kuo Tua / Drow / the Abyss), and the other DM really digs politics and worldbuilding, with an emphasis on clashes between civilizations. So, together, we're building a living and breathing world that the players dig.
The upside of this is our gaming group is really big - 15 people right now - and we set it up so people can come and go. So, the group is robust - it's not a small group that relies on every single person to be there or it falls apart, and it's survived a year that saw the core group slowly get almost completely replaced as the original group had 'life stuff' - like new babies, divorces, or relationship reconciliations - come up. And, each of us DMs have PCs, so we regularly switch between playing and DMing. I get to enjoy the game from all angles.
It takes a LOT of maturity, negotiation, and compromise on each DM's part. It also means both of you keeping some plot points secret from each other, while being mature about using meta-information your character can't know. But, like I said, the game world is richer and more interesting than others I've been in, due to the collaboration. If you're a people person, and can let go of some control, then it can work out - and relieve a lot of the burden of DMing since you have someone to share the load.
We handle the game prep West Marches style - we've created a bunch of adventure hooks and a few over-arching meta plots that will pay off at different levels, and then prep individual adventures after players set up a session date (with Doodle) and give us some hints about what they're after. It's not totally player-driven like a classic West Marches, us DMs are still guiding it somewhat, but we've only 'built' the wider world in a very conceptual way - i.e. it's like OD&D or classic Moorcock or Lieber fantasy, sword and sorcery with fantastic landscapes and regions where the world doesn't operate by the same rules. But, it's mostly evocative names on a big Hex map until the characters go there, and then we start building.
We also have an explicit collaborative setup - the characters have created regions of the world with their back stories. One of them comes from a country we haven't designed, and only has a name? They get to create it. Oh, they come from a line of Elven Sky Pirates? The world now has Elven Sky Pirates. As DMs, we only ask for a few things with these: create lore that's usable in the game as a potential story hook, and 'let go' of it once it's in our hands, so we can riff off of it to surprise everyone, including them, once the time comes to use it. So far, that's been awesome as well. Our players are invested in the game, the world feels rich and alive, and us DMs have only done a portion of the work.
Old school knowledge / without all the baggage
You can both go as DM, there is no problem with that. Many years ago (when 2nd edition was on), we have created a one-shot adventure along with two friends. In the end, this adventure have been played with 3 DMs and 9-10 players as party. If you organize everything very well there is no problem with having 2 DMs or even more.
I always find this as to many cooks in the kitchen.
How my gang does it is we do chapters where one of us will run a few games to finish their chapter out and the next DM takes over from that point. All of us DM so we’re swapping between 5 of us.
On the off chance someone couldn’t think of one we just pass them over and bring them back up after the next rotation. I’ve had to do 2 chapter in a row because after my first one no body could figure how to follow it up.
I'm running a West Marches campaign with 4 different DM's. Each of us run our own individual tables and coordinate to keep the world and balance sensible.
In the past a group of us ran short story arc's (say 6 episodes per DM) before moving to a new DM. That let everyone tell a reasonable story and then pick back up later. It kept things fresh.
There are so many ways this can work - the key is you and your friend communicating really well, setting basic ground rules about game balance and house rules, and then staying on top of that!
I run a weekly AL style game, but there are weeks I can't make it. So one of the players is the backup DM. If I can't make it and he can, he runs the table that night. When we started we were using AL modules from the Storm King's Thunder series, and now we are (I am) doing Tomb of Annihilation (from the hardcover). Originally I thought he would run modules or pick up the TOA story from where I left off, but he has found it works better for him to create his own adventures. He's done a good job of creating things he can drop in and still connect to the ongoing storyline of the adventures I run. We have different styles and gifts. Especially with TOA, we worked together on how we would deal with some of the mechanics, but I've also learned to let go of needing us to handle the "rules" for jungle travel in the same way.
The last time he ran the table, it turned out I could be there. So I ran two of the NPCs (who are traveling with the party) for him; I had him do the same with one of those PCs when I next ran a table. He has a better handle on the specifics of spells, weapon damage, etc. than I do, so I often consult with him as we play. Beyond that, though, we don't co-DM in the sense of DMing the same session together.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Ok well I’m not sure if I supposed to ask this here or not but can you have a. Dungeon master and also have a game master and if yes would everyone agree that the game master would have the last say but like still have a dungeon master tell the story so essentially the GM is able to be a player in The story and the Dm is the one telling the story? I’m not sure but I think it’s an interesting concept and that it’s just food for thought but please don’t hesitate to give your opinion I truly am interested and would like to see what you all think.
Ok well I’m glad to hear that because I’m kinda thinking about setting up a campaign with a GM and a DM, so that is a relief to know that it’s possible and except able and allowed by dnd.
Multi Dm Campaigns can work really well, it is probably best if you define the campaign and the split up who will prepare which aspects of it. You can then each run your respective bits, but the strongest thing it lets you do is split up the party, if the party splits you can go to another room, run the 2 parts in synergy to each other, then when the parties re combine they have to describe what happened etc.
Make sure you communicate between DMs and have a clear understanding of all your NPCs and what they know etc. but give it a go, it works really well (and I wouldn’t bother with the whole DM and assistant thing, just split it all in half and work together)
I've been scouring forums for this take. My brother and I want to this but I'm worried about how sharing information would work so that we are still both surprised when we take out turns as players. I was also curious about the fluidity of having players come and go to help explain out characters absence as well as justifying a session when another player can't attend. Any insight would be appreciated.
I'm currently in the process of doing this with my partner. I find that we're very efficient at covering each other's blind spots when we plan, and we serve different niches when acting as game masters. It enhances the storytelling in terms of consistency, focus, character, pace and acting alike, with very few drawbacks as we're fairly synergistic and have worked together with storytelling before. I'd definitely say sharing a clear vision is necessary, and it's a structure that can easily fall apart if stressed in any way but when it works, it works better than having a go of it alone. You'd have to trust your co-DM completely for it to succeed, and this trust has to be well placed, but it is very satisfying if you can figure it out.