I would agree that a home game is probably better in almost every regard.
If you are outlining what you believe as an explanation why you wouldn't participate in such endeavors, I can see that - and I would agree with you. Either being, or playing with, a paid DM has no appeal to me.
However your position throws up two warning flags for me:
"true, genuine value of TTRPG" - I think it's very, very dangerous, in any arena, to start defining our personal preferences as definitive ( they even named an entire logical fallacyafter that practice ). Elevating your personal preferences and vision to an elevated revered state, and declaring that as a true definition is - arguably - what is tearing apart politics in much of the Western world today.
"money is the death of creativity" - I see your point here, and would agree that changing ones focus from being creative to being profitable negatively impacts creative endeavors. But the very success of commercial D&D streams which haven't lost their creative focus, and yet are immensely profitable - like Critical Role, would seem to gainsay this. Artists gotta eat. Creative production takes resources, and distribution of that art takes resources ( and for those who would cite "free" distribution channels like Youtube - those aren't free; they just don't charge the publisher at first ). In fact it is the monetization of Critical Role which has lead to an explosion of creative output for Matt Mercer. Money has simply given him more and broader creative opportunities and outlets then he ever would have had just being a gig-oriented voice actor, playing D&D with his friends on weekends.
I also don't see this practice as being exclusionary - but that's because I don't see this as a viable practice for Players over the long term. I can see Players ponying up some money, for a time, to get exposure and experience in the game, but I would expect that these groups are very unstable, with Players dropping out to form groups with friends or acquaintances.
To use an analogy:
I can go out and eat in a restaurant. The chef, and staff are going to charge me money.
Technically, the restaurant is exclusionary to people who won't/can't spend the money. Yet we don't view restaurant as morally suspect because they're not universally inclusive. Partly because ...
We don't expect that people are going to go to a restaurant for each and ever meal, nor do they need to do so. They go to a restaurant for convenience, for cuisines they don't know how to make at home ( yet ), and for the experience. They might even eat out 3-4 nights a week, some exceptional weeks - but overall, we expect that most of the time, they're going to be eating at home.
We don't look down on Chefs as non-creative because they are professionals who get a wage and "money is the death of creativity"
We don't look upon restaurants as violations of the "true, genuine value of" home cooking.
Most of the time, I still cook at home.
In short, I share a lot of your attitudes towards paid DM'ing, and I would say it's not for me. But I don't believe that the people either offering that service, or partaking in it, are wrong. Their practice is not violating any true spirit, or core value of TTRPGs, and I don't believe that a commercial venture built around a creative endeavors necessarily make them less creative. While I admit that the creator can lose focus in that situation, there are plenty of successful professional creators, in many fields & industries which have not lost that focus. Paid DM's are also - literally - not the only game in town. Those that are unwilling, or unable, to participate in that economy have other options - especially in the age of the Internet - which are free, and are literally every bit as good or better, so I cannot see the practice as being exclusionary to Players.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'd like to add to the discussion that there isn't just ONE audience for D&D.
Someone looking to offer paid DM services is only appealing to those who can afford it. They are not looking for the folks who play with friends in someone's basement or a gaming club.
D&D has been around since the 1970's. There are a large number of folks who have played in the past, might want to play again, but have no immediate access to other folks with similar interests. Looking around local game stores, surfing the corners of the internet, looking for someone willing to run a "quality" D&D game, show up every week, remain dedicated even when folks can't show up or when real life raises its head is challenging.
Adventurers League is predicated on the idea of a drop in D&D campaign that can be played in four hour sessions at different locations when it is possible and convenient. If you can't make it because something comes up, you let the folks running it know and go on with life. You aren't letting your friends down and can deal with real life issues with the only regret being a missed D&D opportunity. However, the player can bring the same character to each session and the player has a sense of continuity even if there isn't an over-arching campaign involved.
Many of the game stores that run AL charge a sitting fee. Typically on the order of $5, because they are providing the space and organizing the games. Other stores manage to get buy on collateral game sales or sales of other products like food and drink at a gaming cafe.
There is very little difference between this and paid DMing and the objectives in the two cases are very similar. The player wants to play D&D, wants a DM who will show up and do a decent job and wants to play with other similarly interested folks. One big difference between these folks and the ones playing with friends are that they don't have a convenient group, they may be older, but they also have more disposable income. For these folks, paying someone to run a game may be purchasing a greater level of commitment to the game. The player will probably know after a session or two whether the DM is worth paying for and if they aren't, they move on. If the DM is worth paying for then the player has found some entertainment that they consider worthwhile at a cost they can afford.
This is what I meant when I referred to different audiences within the world of D&D. The folks looking for paid DM services aren't the ones connected to gaming communities with already formed gaming groups and local DMs. It is everyone else. :)
Finally, I don't see paid DMing as "the wrong way to play" or "leading to the death of creativity". The DMs involved, the better ones anyway, are being paid to be creative. The successful ones will craft fun, exciting adventures that keep the players coming back for more. They are motivated to do a good job because they are being paid for it. Running uncreative, uninspriring content is not likely to keep the players engaged so, to some extent, I can see paid DMing increasing the level of creativity for some DMs.
I was brought back to D&D this year, hadn't played in 25 years, via a surprise birthday party thrown for me. The party organizers, one was a gamer one wasn't, hired a DM for the event. It was great. The DM worked with both organizers to customize the session to include injokes about my life, work, etc. Moreover the DM was able to balance an experienced player, a player who had been out of play for over two decades, a new adult and two children one with some experience one with none and we all had a great time. The DM had a talent and I see no problem with the DM profiting from that talent. I've subsequently observed the DM's talent at a kids birthday party, and actually owe the DM a set of reviews for a sort of DM vetting/scheduling/hiring site.
Would I regularly subscribe to a DM's campaign? Probably not, but I could see some especially those who don't have the time to do prep doing so. Much like the way I'd see some miniature collectors pay someone with more talent to paint their miniatures. I know of firearms afficianados who will pay others in their sport for customizations etc.
Would many for hire DMs be able to make their hobby a livelihood income? Probably not. That's key. Some with the patience and talent to work say the birthday party circuit may make some serious supplemental income, but you're going to be talking about in most case beer money, maybe nice beer money but not quit your day job revenue.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
No. D&D is a game played with friends. You don't fleece your friends. You don't pay someone to be the banker in Monopoly, or pay the dealer when you are having a game of cards. The very thought makes me feel sick. I have run more games than I can count since I started playing in the 1980's and NEVER once have I charged or played in games that charge - unless it is a shared cost to hire a venue or event.
About your two red flags. My thoughts on the 'greater' value of TTRPG isn't a logical fallacy, it's an opinion. You are welcome to disagree that creativity, joy and inclusivity are the major values of D&D. (Although I frankly don't see why one would play without the motivation of the 'joy' aspect.)
Also, that is a gross simplification of the status of 'Western' politics, which is not relevant or accurate, nor does it serve a purpose in this discussion at all.
As for your second point, Critical Role is a business providing a 'podcast' service to an audience. It is comparable to youtube-shows, or companies like College Humor. However, it is important to notice that in Critical Role, every crew and cast-member is being paid. Not just Matt Mercer the Dungeon Master. Their income comes from subscriptions/business partnerships/sponsorships/advertisements etc. - it is not Marisha, Travis, Laura etc. who are paying Matt Mercer. In fact, they are getting paid, too.
So it is a false equivalence to say that a similar wage should be asked of a group of private players to receive "DM-services".
As I mentioned in my initial post, I do agree that it's fair to ask the group to contribute to expenses that come up in the game, like splitting the cost of a module on Roll20 between them. It is also fair for a DM to ask for money if they are being hired by a company/store to host an event for them. The real difference here in my head is when the DM is asking the players to pay them for playing the game with them.
Like you say, David42 and MidnightPlat, there are game stores, youth clubs, kids' parties etc. that hire Dungeon Masters to run events for them. Sometimes the store/club charges an entry fee (perhaps to cover the cost of hiring? Or to cover providing a location? Or perhaps to even cover materials provided to participate?) But I am not arguing against events, because I agree that if you're organizing a public event, you need to pay the people you hire for entertainment. These are private games I'm talking about. Not organized public events or actual entertainment businesses.
I just really don't think one should be charging Susan, Amir, Carla and Peter for playing Dragon Heist with them on Discord. Or even playing in your own fantasy world creation in Susan's home. I find this to be absolutely unreasonable, and outrageous. And as I said before, Susan, Amir, Carla and Peter could perhaps chip in a little for a big grid map, and everone (including the DM) could bring some snacks. But to charge them 20$ each to play this private game is to me absolutely absurd - besides, Peter can't play anymore because he's lost his job during Covid-19 and really can't put out 80$ a month. But **** Peter, right?
Additionally, Vexedent, your restaurant analogy is really not accurate at all. It's a false equivalence. Since you're so concerned with logical fallacies.
Try this instead:
(1) If I provide a catering service for an event, I get paid (2) If I work in a restaurant cooking for multiple customers, I get paid (3) If I invite someone over for dinner in my house, I don't ask for payment what the **** (And perhaps Carla can bring a foccacia)
The "well, play something else, then!" elitist and uninclusive attitude irks me, I'm not gonna lie.
No. D&D is a game played with friends. You don't fleece your friends. You don't pay someone to be the banker in Monopoly, or pay the dealer when you are having a game of cards. The very thought makes me feel sick. I have run more games than I can count since I started playing in the 1980's and NEVER once have I charged or played in games that charge - unless it is a shared cost to hire a venue or event.
You kinda blow your analogy when you introduce cards. While you don't, many people will pay an establishment to play cards, it's gambling so it's a little different but everyone knows that the house and the payroled dealer are going to be ahead at the end of the night. And sure no one's going to pay a Monopoly banker (and Monopoly banker is a really weak analogy to a DM). However, people do pay others to mentor them at tennis, golf, chess, etc.
D&D is not always played with friends (I played in a couple of groups where I liked the game, but definitely didn't socialize with the other players outside of game time). You only play with your friends and money never corrupts (in your point of view) the dynamic. That works for you. For others, a paid DM makes sense. It's certainly not the norm, as is the case with most forms of plays, but in no way does it ruin the hobby you play. You're both still playing a TTRPG. Other than the exception and positive experience I cited, I see myself as a social gamer too where money doesn't cross the table except to pitch in for pizza or whatever.
Outside of games, I like to tell stories, sometimes observational anecdotes about my life, sometimes absurd flights of fancy. I enjoy the company of other people who also like to tell stories, probably why I'm into gaming. Sometimes ... I'll pay for a ticket to see someone tell stories. Sometimes these people do their craft full time, others more as seasonal craft hobby sort of thing. That's ok, and in no way do these occasions corrupts, cheats, ruins, or harms the integrity of my storytelling past time.
This is one of those matters where I'm surprised people are staking hard yes or no positions requiring all caps assertions.
My thinking was game stores and youth clubs charged entry fees to help with the overhead of the game store or youth club, providing a space to play and try out games through standing game nights and supporting leagues and stuff seem to be a factor in a lot of game stores business models. But speaking of clubs, I don't think "going pro" or "going paid position" is a logical path for most game group's DMs. Yes, there are overhead costs to gaming, which is why I think matured groups evolve more into a club where there may not be dues per se, but everyone contributes resources and circulates materials on a sort of library system (DND Beyond makes this so much easier and was one of the main draws for me to check it out).
Speaking of Covid, my game group is bloated with children and consequently the narrative pace drags a little by the standards of my adult imagination as we keep coaching or rules an how to differentiate polyhedrals over video conference. Could I charge some of the parents online babysitting fees? Sure, in fact I know there are DM services that do precisely that. I don't for a number of reasons but I don't fault those who do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Additionally, Vexedent, your restaurant analogy is really not accurate at all. It's a false equivalence. Since you're so concerned with logical fallacies.
Try this instead:
(1) If I provide a catering service for an event, I get paid (2) If I work in a restaurant cooking for multiple customers, I get paid (3) If I invite someone over for dinner in my house, I don't ask for payment what the **** (And perhaps Carla can bring a foccacia)
The "well, play something else, then!" elitist and uninclusive attitude irks me, I'm not gonna lie.
Vexedent is talking about DMing as a business modell, not with friends. So, his analogy is correct. You both are talking about different things, I think.
Truth be told, I'm curious how many of the people who say DMs should be paid currently DM for randoms on the internet as opposed to friends in person. Food for thought.
Also, if a DM is so good that she's worth paying for (like Matt Mercer) she has the option to stream as entertainment (also like Matt Mercer) and make ad revenue. I wouldn't do it, but I'm also not a god-tier DM so I'm not judging!
D&D is a game. Sure, like most games it is usually played with friends, but there's no special obligation to do so, and pickup games (such as con games) are often played with strangers.
I have doubts about whether paid DMing is really a viable business model, but it's no different from any other type of paid entertainment.
I don't hate the idea of being paid to DM, but I do think it's not something that every DM should expect nor is it something for every group at the table. For example, I would never ask for payment from a group of friends to DM. There are some etiquette things that are sort of traditional- i.e. players bring snacks and that sort of things- but even then I mostly think that those are traditions that can vary significantly by group. I usually pay for the DM's dinner if we go out or order in as a group or something like that, but that's probably not what people mean by paying a DM.
I think the biggest reason why I'm pro paid DM'ing is player accountability. If you're in an online group, people no-showing sucks for the group, especially if it results in the session being cancelled. Imposing a trivial price per head just to get some buy in is fine, in my opinion. Some groups definitely do not need this, but I personally think this works better as more of a deposit than an actual payment- for example, in a real world meetup it could be "Everyone, put $5 in the pot towards pizza next week"- if you miss, you're out your fiver but if you show up it's a couple slices of pizza waiting for you. It gets the buy in that makes flakier players show up, but it's not a big pain and it's more of a courtesy thing. Obviously, this example doesn't go directly to the DM, but it rewards the people who do show up for consistency. Now, stepping away from this particular example to the hypothetical, I think a small fee is acceptable for most games.
The only reason I'm hesitant to say that paid DM'ing is good, however, is that not all DMs and not all campaigns are created equal. When you make the game transactional, you can erode the relationship at the table. You become an employee of the table, and you're responsible for delivering a service. Generally, I don't think this is much of an issue if it's a small fee just to promote buy in, but if you're actually trying to pay a DM at a professional rate (so, at least as much as they could make at a basic level for employment) factoring in prep time, availability between sessions, and actually running the game, then you do need to have certain levels of quality as a DM and you need to be really careful. Obviously, there are other occasions when things will be a bit different, but I think paying a DM a weekly rate, while reasonable, does require a bit more dedication and experience than a friendly table. Not only do you need to be an experienced DM to be able to deliver the experience people should expect for their money, you also need to be prepared to deal with the in game and real world consequences of being paid to run the game. It becomes a professional relationship, and while that can work (such as many actual play series) it does require a lot more preparation, management, and structure than just Friday night beer and pretzels D&D.
I think my brief conclusion would be a bit of advice; don't assume that your players owe you things if you're learning to DM or don't put the time into preparation and working with players. It's important, when D&D becomes about money, to keep your perspective on what you're trying to do for the table, not about your profit.
The only exception is if it was something like an online camp. Probably not even that, and the only case this should be done is to get money to buy more sourcebooks.
Ther is one other case were I could accept that DMs should be paid, and that is if they are running a completely hombres dungeon with players that had to other available DMs. Because if you are running a book campaign you are basically making money for reading and then expending as little energy as possible to keep the campaign going. I hombre was all my burgeons and campaigns and because I spend about a four hours for one hour of gameplay I would love to be payed, but It would ruin the game. Because then players feel they need to get there money’s worth and you can just laughs with friends.
Also instead of minis use spare dice it works great.
I've had several people solicit paid services on my Looking-For-Players/DM posts, and while I've clearly stated that I'm not interested in paying I have experienced been met with either aggression and accusations of "exploitation of DMs". It's why I got involved in this thread, too. For online community purporses, I really think there should be a forum category for paid services (like Advertisements) because it's already difficult to navigate the Looking-for-Players-and-Groups forum without every other post being about money and paid services.
Or there should at least be a #tag that we can sort them on. To separate them, so we don't end up with a bunch of unsolicited approaches for payment. And then the people who really think they should be paid 5$ an hour per player for running Curse of Strahd can have their own little forum.
I've had several people solicit paid services on my Looking-For-Players/DM posts, and while I've clearly stated that I'm not interested in paying I have experienced been met with either aggression and accusations of "exploitation of DMs". It's why I got involved in this thread, too. For online community purporses, I really think there should be a forum category for paid services (like Advertisements) because it's already difficult to navigate the Looking-for-Players-and-Groups forum without every other post being about money and paid services.
Or there should at least be a #tag that we can sort them on. To separate them, so we don't end up with a bunch of unsolicited approaches for payment. And then the people who really think they should be paid 5$ an hour per player for running Curse of Strahd can have their own little forum.
I wonder if it's a Covid economy thing. That said, getting a "hard sell" or aggressive pushback after you say no sounds like a toxic response to declination (and, ahem "unprofessional" marketing).
It was my understanding that the forums weren't to be used for commerce. It's pretty explicit in the arts/crafts section that "sales" are a big no no. If it's a pattern you're seeing, you may want to give the mods a heads up. There are sites and services out there where DMs can advertise "for hire." I'm pretty sure D&D Beyond doesn't want to be a forum host for that market for number of reasons.
I also don't understand the current among some of the "pay us" DMs that accuse exploitation by players. Yes a DM _may_ put a lot of time into campaign development, but without players the game world isn't alive. I mean even those folks that have digitally tricked out bespoke sound effects and musical atmosphere and motion capped animation of combat or whatever ... well if you had a great home theater and your friends won't come over to watch with you because you're charging them theater prices, you can at least watch the theater by yourself. If you do that with a tricked out real or virtual game table, solitaire DMing isn't a thing.
Julie Gris, I think your looking for DM post might be getting so many paid DM replies because of the level of commitment and how specific the requirements are. You want someone to run you critical role, [at least that is how it reads] which is fine, but might be hard to get that level of buy-in from some random on the Internet. I do agree that paid DMs should be replying to threads, especially if the individual has said they don't want to pay.
I'm pretty indifferent to paying. I am a player in 1 group and DM another. Both are made of randoms from the Internet. If I hadn't found the one to play I was considering paying but wasn't overly convinced. But I can see the appeal. So if people want to pay let them....
I would say that the idea that money kills creativity usually comes from people who have enough money already to be free enough to be creative. A better phrase would be if money becomes the goal that will kill creativity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All posts come with the caveat that I don't know what I'm talking about.
Well it’s like anything else in my opinion: if you offer a good service and people are willing, why not? There are some fantastic DMs out there. I would definitely pay if it was consistently good and engaging.
To me if you are a DM you should not be paid. It takes the fun out of DM’ing and makes it so that the DM has to modify their dungeon to make other people feel like they are getting their money’s worth. This system starts becoming a pay to win and paints DM’ing and overall 5ed in a bad light by saying it is a pay to win game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Head leader of the 42nd cult. Lower sorcerer in the cult of bacon. Member of the LeviRocks cult.
Super Yahtzee records: 12, another 12, 31 and another 31. Yahtzee of 4’s: 24
To me if you are a DM you should not be paid. It takes the fun out of DM’ing and makes it so that the DM has to modify their dungeon to make other people feel like they are getting their money’s worth. This system starts becoming a pay to win and paints DM’ing and overall 5ed in a bad light by saying it is a pay to win game.
I can understand your argument that a DM working in a paid capacity has fallen into what used to be "fun" becoming "work." That's a warning for the DM, not the hobby or the potential paying marketplace for the DMs skills or talents. Also, I can understand your argument that a DM doing so turns their players into customers and may have to cater to a market consequently. Again, that's a warning to the DM not the marketplace or hobby. I don't see how either factor creates a consequence logic path to "pay to win" or universalizing an understanding of 5e as a "pay to win" pastime. Moreover, this particular discussion is within a 5e forum, but the idea of paid game mastering isn't unique to 5e (many paid game masters offer a range of games). The phenomenon of paid game masters, which is an existing subset of the broader hobby (like birthday party one shots, or the Adventurers' League, and the gamut from decade plus old intensely developed campaigns to the beer and pretzels crowd), will not lead to the hobby being thought of as some sort of "pay to win" pasttime.
Let's remember this thread is close to three years old. Paid DMing is a thing. Has it affected the way you play the game? I've noted with some curiosity the various new tiers of "professionalization" within the hobby (new industries like VTTs, a lot more customizable materials, expensive bespoke editions from the likes of Beedle and Grimm, the Matt Mercer phenomenon and the intersection of TTRPGs with professional actors and creatives, etc). But while all that is worth a curious glance, and it feels a little less taboo to bring up the hobby around the uninitiated, what drives me to play is the energy and creative surges and drama caused by the cast of dice ... which was the same array of feelings that drove me to start playing over 30 years ago. Some DMs get paid, that's fine. The dynamics I enjoy in the game are unaffected.
Another analogy. Years ago, I used to be really really good at running, particularly trail runs. I was never an "elite" athlete, but I did well enough in my regional circuit that "joining a team" managed by one of the shoe mfrs. was broached with me. I would have been compensated in free shoes (which would mean like $500-$1000 a year), maybe branded clothes and affiliated gear if my performance qualified me for higher or more competitive tier events. If you were really good, you'd get access to training facilities and specialized coaching etc. I didn't do it, I had small children, a job that sometimes required long hours (and occasionally running after people), so yeah, the idea of having some sort of contracted obligation to race on a committed schedule didn't appeal to me. I still ran that circuit, and other runners were compensated to the degree I outlined, but that didn't in any way take away my enjoyment of running, and in this case I actually was literally competing with them.
I think you have a lot of excellent points.
I would agree that a home game is probably better in almost every regard.
If you are outlining what you believe as an explanation why you wouldn't participate in such endeavors, I can see that - and I would agree with you. Either being, or playing with, a paid DM has no appeal to me.
However your position throws up two warning flags for me:
I also don't see this practice as being exclusionary - but that's because I don't see this as a viable practice for Players over the long term. I can see Players ponying up some money, for a time, to get exposure and experience in the game, but I would expect that these groups are very unstable, with Players dropping out to form groups with friends or acquaintances.
To use an analogy:
In short, I share a lot of your attitudes towards paid DM'ing, and I would say it's not for me. But I don't believe that the people either offering that service, or partaking in it, are wrong. Their practice is not violating any true spirit, or core value of TTRPGs, and I don't believe that a commercial venture built around a creative endeavors necessarily make them less creative. While I admit that the creator can lose focus in that situation, there are plenty of successful professional creators, in many fields & industries which have not lost that focus. Paid DM's are also - literally - not the only game in town. Those that are unwilling, or unable, to participate in that economy have other options - especially in the age of the Internet - which are free, and are literally every bit as good or better, so I cannot see the practice as being exclusionary to Players.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'd like to add to the discussion that there isn't just ONE audience for D&D.
Someone looking to offer paid DM services is only appealing to those who can afford it. They are not looking for the folks who play with friends in someone's basement or a gaming club.
D&D has been around since the 1970's. There are a large number of folks who have played in the past, might want to play again, but have no immediate access to other folks with similar interests. Looking around local game stores, surfing the corners of the internet, looking for someone willing to run a "quality" D&D game, show up every week, remain dedicated even when folks can't show up or when real life raises its head is challenging.
Adventurers League is predicated on the idea of a drop in D&D campaign that can be played in four hour sessions at different locations when it is possible and convenient. If you can't make it because something comes up, you let the folks running it know and go on with life. You aren't letting your friends down and can deal with real life issues with the only regret being a missed D&D opportunity. However, the player can bring the same character to each session and the player has a sense of continuity even if there isn't an over-arching campaign involved.
Many of the game stores that run AL charge a sitting fee. Typically on the order of $5, because they are providing the space and organizing the games. Other stores manage to get buy on collateral game sales or sales of other products like food and drink at a gaming cafe.
There is very little difference between this and paid DMing and the objectives in the two cases are very similar. The player wants to play D&D, wants a DM who will show up and do a decent job and wants to play with other similarly interested folks. One big difference between these folks and the ones playing with friends are that they don't have a convenient group, they may be older, but they also have more disposable income. For these folks, paying someone to run a game may be purchasing a greater level of commitment to the game. The player will probably know after a session or two whether the DM is worth paying for and if they aren't, they move on. If the DM is worth paying for then the player has found some entertainment that they consider worthwhile at a cost they can afford.
This is what I meant when I referred to different audiences within the world of D&D. The folks looking for paid DM services aren't the ones connected to gaming communities with already formed gaming groups and local DMs. It is everyone else. :)
Finally, I don't see paid DMing as "the wrong way to play" or "leading to the death of creativity". The DMs involved, the better ones anyway, are being paid to be creative. The successful ones will craft fun, exciting adventures that keep the players coming back for more. They are motivated to do a good job because they are being paid for it. Running uncreative, uninspriring content is not likely to keep the players engaged so, to some extent, I can see paid DMing increasing the level of creativity for some DMs.
I was brought back to D&D this year, hadn't played in 25 years, via a surprise birthday party thrown for me. The party organizers, one was a gamer one wasn't, hired a DM for the event. It was great. The DM worked with both organizers to customize the session to include injokes about my life, work, etc. Moreover the DM was able to balance an experienced player, a player who had been out of play for over two decades, a new adult and two children one with some experience one with none and we all had a great time. The DM had a talent and I see no problem with the DM profiting from that talent. I've subsequently observed the DM's talent at a kids birthday party, and actually owe the DM a set of reviews for a sort of DM vetting/scheduling/hiring site.
Would I regularly subscribe to a DM's campaign? Probably not, but I could see some especially those who don't have the time to do prep doing so. Much like the way I'd see some miniature collectors pay someone with more talent to paint their miniatures. I know of firearms afficianados who will pay others in their sport for customizations etc.
Would many for hire DMs be able to make their hobby a livelihood income? Probably not. That's key. Some with the patience and talent to work say the birthday party circuit may make some serious supplemental income, but you're going to be talking about in most case beer money, maybe nice beer money but not quit your day job revenue.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
No. D&D is a game played with friends. You don't fleece your friends. You don't pay someone to be the banker in Monopoly, or pay the dealer when you are having a game of cards. The very thought makes me feel sick. I have run more games than I can count since I started playing in the 1980's and NEVER once have I charged or played in games that charge - unless it is a shared cost to hire a venue or event.
Vexedent
About your two red flags. My thoughts on the 'greater' value of TTRPG isn't a logical fallacy, it's an opinion. You are welcome to disagree that creativity, joy and inclusivity are the major values of D&D. (Although I frankly don't see why one would play without the motivation of the 'joy' aspect.)
Also, that is a gross simplification of the status of 'Western' politics, which is not relevant or accurate, nor does it serve a purpose in this discussion at all.
As for your second point, Critical Role is a business providing a 'podcast' service to an audience. It is comparable to youtube-shows, or companies like College Humor. However, it is important to notice that in Critical Role, every crew and cast-member is being paid. Not just Matt Mercer the Dungeon Master. Their income comes from subscriptions/business partnerships/sponsorships/advertisements etc. - it is not Marisha, Travis, Laura etc. who are paying Matt Mercer. In fact, they are getting paid, too.
So it is a false equivalence to say that a similar wage should be asked of a group of private players to receive "DM-services".
As I mentioned in my initial post, I do agree that it's fair to ask the group to contribute to expenses that come up in the game, like splitting the cost of a module on Roll20 between them. It is also fair for a DM to ask for money if they are being hired by a company/store to host an event for them. The real difference here in my head is when the DM is asking the players to pay them for playing the game with them.
Like you say, David42 and MidnightPlat, there are game stores, youth clubs, kids' parties etc. that hire Dungeon Masters to run events for them. Sometimes the store/club charges an entry fee (perhaps to cover the cost of hiring? Or to cover providing a location? Or perhaps to even cover materials provided to participate?) But I am not arguing against events, because I agree that if you're organizing a public event, you need to pay the people you hire for entertainment. These are private games I'm talking about. Not organized public events or actual entertainment businesses.
I just really don't think one should be charging Susan, Amir, Carla and Peter for playing Dragon Heist with them on Discord. Or even playing in your own fantasy world creation in Susan's home. I find this to be absolutely unreasonable, and outrageous. And as I said before, Susan, Amir, Carla and Peter could perhaps chip in a little for a big grid map, and everone (including the DM) could bring some snacks. But to charge them 20$ each to play this private game is to me absolutely absurd - besides, Peter can't play anymore because he's lost his job during Covid-19 and really can't put out 80$ a month. But **** Peter, right?
JADE OF HIGHGARDEN
Waterdeep: Dragon Heist
Additionally, Vexedent, your restaurant analogy is really not accurate at all. It's a false equivalence. Since you're so concerned with logical fallacies.
Try this instead:
(1) If I provide a catering service for an event, I get paid
(2) If I work in a restaurant cooking for multiple customers, I get paid
(3) If I invite someone over for dinner in my house, I don't ask for payment what the ****
(And perhaps Carla can bring a foccacia)
The "well, play something else, then!" elitist and uninclusive attitude irks me, I'm not gonna lie.
JADE OF HIGHGARDEN
Waterdeep: Dragon Heist
You kinda blow your analogy when you introduce cards. While you don't, many people will pay an establishment to play cards, it's gambling so it's a little different but everyone knows that the house and the payroled dealer are going to be ahead at the end of the night. And sure no one's going to pay a Monopoly banker (and Monopoly banker is a really weak analogy to a DM). However, people do pay others to mentor them at tennis, golf, chess, etc.
D&D is not always played with friends (I played in a couple of groups where I liked the game, but definitely didn't socialize with the other players outside of game time). You only play with your friends and money never corrupts (in your point of view) the dynamic. That works for you. For others, a paid DM makes sense. It's certainly not the norm, as is the case with most forms of plays, but in no way does it ruin the hobby you play. You're both still playing a TTRPG. Other than the exception and positive experience I cited, I see myself as a social gamer too where money doesn't cross the table except to pitch in for pizza or whatever.
Outside of games, I like to tell stories, sometimes observational anecdotes about my life, sometimes absurd flights of fancy. I enjoy the company of other people who also like to tell stories, probably why I'm into gaming. Sometimes ... I'll pay for a ticket to see someone tell stories. Sometimes these people do their craft full time, others more as seasonal craft hobby sort of thing. That's ok, and in no way do these occasions corrupts, cheats, ruins, or harms the integrity of my storytelling past time.
This is one of those matters where I'm surprised people are staking hard yes or no positions requiring all caps assertions.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
JulieGris
My thinking was game stores and youth clubs charged entry fees to help with the overhead of the game store or youth club, providing a space to play and try out games through standing game nights and supporting leagues and stuff seem to be a factor in a lot of game stores business models. But speaking of clubs, I don't think "going pro" or "going paid position" is a logical path for most game group's DMs. Yes, there are overhead costs to gaming, which is why I think matured groups evolve more into a club where there may not be dues per se, but everyone contributes resources and circulates materials on a sort of library system (DND Beyond makes this so much easier and was one of the main draws for me to check it out).
Speaking of Covid, my game group is bloated with children and consequently the narrative pace drags a little by the standards of my adult imagination as we keep coaching or rules an how to differentiate polyhedrals over video conference. Could I charge some of the parents online babysitting fees? Sure, in fact I know there are DM services that do precisely that. I don't for a number of reasons but I don't fault those who do.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Vexedent is talking about DMing as a business modell, not with friends. So, his analogy is correct. You both are talking about different things, I think.
Truth be told, I'm curious how many of the people who say DMs should be paid currently DM for randoms on the internet as opposed to friends in person. Food for thought.
Also, if a DM is so good that she's worth paying for (like Matt Mercer) she has the option to stream as entertainment (also like Matt Mercer) and make ad revenue. I wouldn't do it, but I'm also not a god-tier DM so I'm not judging!
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
D&D is a game. Sure, like most games it is usually played with friends, but there's no special obligation to do so, and pickup games (such as con games) are often played with strangers.
I have doubts about whether paid DMing is really a viable business model, but it's no different from any other type of paid entertainment.
I don't hate the idea of being paid to DM, but I do think it's not something that every DM should expect nor is it something for every group at the table. For example, I would never ask for payment from a group of friends to DM. There are some etiquette things that are sort of traditional- i.e. players bring snacks and that sort of things- but even then I mostly think that those are traditions that can vary significantly by group. I usually pay for the DM's dinner if we go out or order in as a group or something like that, but that's probably not what people mean by paying a DM.
I think the biggest reason why I'm pro paid DM'ing is player accountability. If you're in an online group, people no-showing sucks for the group, especially if it results in the session being cancelled. Imposing a trivial price per head just to get some buy in is fine, in my opinion. Some groups definitely do not need this, but I personally think this works better as more of a deposit than an actual payment- for example, in a real world meetup it could be "Everyone, put $5 in the pot towards pizza next week"- if you miss, you're out your fiver but if you show up it's a couple slices of pizza waiting for you. It gets the buy in that makes flakier players show up, but it's not a big pain and it's more of a courtesy thing. Obviously, this example doesn't go directly to the DM, but it rewards the people who do show up for consistency. Now, stepping away from this particular example to the hypothetical, I think a small fee is acceptable for most games.
The only reason I'm hesitant to say that paid DM'ing is good, however, is that not all DMs and not all campaigns are created equal. When you make the game transactional, you can erode the relationship at the table. You become an employee of the table, and you're responsible for delivering a service. Generally, I don't think this is much of an issue if it's a small fee just to promote buy in, but if you're actually trying to pay a DM at a professional rate (so, at least as much as they could make at a basic level for employment) factoring in prep time, availability between sessions, and actually running the game, then you do need to have certain levels of quality as a DM and you need to be really careful. Obviously, there are other occasions when things will be a bit different, but I think paying a DM a weekly rate, while reasonable, does require a bit more dedication and experience than a friendly table. Not only do you need to be an experienced DM to be able to deliver the experience people should expect for their money, you also need to be prepared to deal with the in game and real world consequences of being paid to run the game. It becomes a professional relationship, and while that can work (such as many actual play series) it does require a lot more preparation, management, and structure than just Friday night beer and pretzels D&D.
I think my brief conclusion would be a bit of advice; don't assume that your players owe you things if you're learning to DM or don't put the time into preparation and working with players. It's important, when D&D becomes about money, to keep your perspective on what you're trying to do for the table, not about your profit.
Made.
In almost all cases No
The only exception is if it was something like an online camp. Probably not even that, and the only case this should be done is to get money to buy more sourcebooks.
Ther is one other case were I could accept that DMs should be paid, and that is if they are running a completely hombres dungeon with players that had to other available DMs. Because if you are running a book campaign you are basically making money for reading and then expending as little energy as possible to keep the campaign going. I hombre was all my burgeons and campaigns and because I spend about a four hours for one hour of gameplay I would love to be payed, but It would ruin the game. Because then players feel they need to get there money’s worth and you can just laughs with friends.
Also instead of minis use spare dice it works great.
It is becoming so prevalent.
I've had several people solicit paid services on my Looking-For-Players/DM posts, and while I've clearly stated that I'm not interested in paying I have experienced been met with either aggression and accusations of "exploitation of DMs". It's why I got involved in this thread, too. For online community purporses, I really think there should be a forum category for paid services (like Advertisements) because it's already difficult to navigate the Looking-for-Players-and-Groups forum without every other post being about money and paid services.
Or there should at least be a #tag that we can sort them on. To separate them, so we don't end up with a bunch of unsolicited approaches for payment. And then the people who really think they should be paid 5$ an hour per player for running Curse of Strahd can have their own little forum.
JADE OF HIGHGARDEN
Waterdeep: Dragon Heist
I wonder if it's a Covid economy thing. That said, getting a "hard sell" or aggressive pushback after you say no sounds like a toxic response to declination (and, ahem "unprofessional" marketing).
It was my understanding that the forums weren't to be used for commerce. It's pretty explicit in the arts/crafts section that "sales" are a big no no. If it's a pattern you're seeing, you may want to give the mods a heads up. There are sites and services out there where DMs can advertise "for hire." I'm pretty sure D&D Beyond doesn't want to be a forum host for that market for number of reasons.
I also don't understand the current among some of the "pay us" DMs that accuse exploitation by players. Yes a DM _may_ put a lot of time into campaign development, but without players the game world isn't alive. I mean even those folks that have digitally tricked out bespoke sound effects and musical atmosphere and motion capped animation of combat or whatever ... well if you had a great home theater and your friends won't come over to watch with you because you're charging them theater prices, you can at least watch the theater by yourself. If you do that with a tricked out real or virtual game table, solitaire DMing isn't a thing.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Julie Gris, I think your looking for DM post might be getting so many paid DM replies because of the level of commitment and how specific the requirements are. You want someone to run you critical role, [at least that is how it reads] which is fine, but might be hard to get that level of buy-in from some random on the Internet. I do agree that paid DMs should be replying to threads, especially if the individual has said they don't want to pay.
I'm pretty indifferent to paying. I am a player in 1 group and DM another. Both are made of randoms from the Internet. If I hadn't found the one to play I was considering paying but wasn't overly convinced. But I can see the appeal. So if people want to pay let them....
I would say that the idea that money kills creativity usually comes from people who have enough money already to be free enough to be creative. A better phrase would be if money becomes the goal that will kill creativity.
All posts come with the caveat that I don't know what I'm talking about.
Well it’s like anything else in my opinion: if you offer a good service and people are willing, why not? There are some fantastic DMs out there. I would definitely pay if it was consistently good and engaging.
DM - And In The Darkness, Rot: The Sunless Citadel
DM - Our Little Lives Kept In Equipoise: Curse of Strahd
DM - Misprize Thou Not These Shadows That Belong: The Lost Mines of Phandelver
PC - Azzure - Tyranny of Dragons
To me if you are a DM you should not be paid. It takes the fun out of DM’ing and makes it so that the DM has to modify their dungeon to make other people feel like they are getting their money’s worth. This system starts becoming a pay to win and paints DM’ing and overall 5ed in a bad light by saying it is a pay to win game.
Head leader of the 42nd cult. Lower sorcerer in the cult of bacon. Member of the LeviRocks cult.
Super Yahtzee records: 12, another 12, 31 and another 31. Yahtzee of 4’s: 24
#42 #YeetusDeletus
Homebrew|Backgrounds|Feats|Magic items|Monsters|Races|Spells|Subclass|
I can understand your argument that a DM working in a paid capacity has fallen into what used to be "fun" becoming "work." That's a warning for the DM, not the hobby or the potential paying marketplace for the DMs skills or talents. Also, I can understand your argument that a DM doing so turns their players into customers and may have to cater to a market consequently. Again, that's a warning to the DM not the marketplace or hobby. I don't see how either factor creates a consequence logic path to "pay to win" or universalizing an understanding of 5e as a "pay to win" pastime. Moreover, this particular discussion is within a 5e forum, but the idea of paid game mastering isn't unique to 5e (many paid game masters offer a range of games). The phenomenon of paid game masters, which is an existing subset of the broader hobby (like birthday party one shots, or the Adventurers' League, and the gamut from decade plus old intensely developed campaigns to the beer and pretzels crowd), will not lead to the hobby being thought of as some sort of "pay to win" pasttime.
Let's remember this thread is close to three years old. Paid DMing is a thing. Has it affected the way you play the game? I've noted with some curiosity the various new tiers of "professionalization" within the hobby (new industries like VTTs, a lot more customizable materials, expensive bespoke editions from the likes of Beedle and Grimm, the Matt Mercer phenomenon and the intersection of TTRPGs with professional actors and creatives, etc). But while all that is worth a curious glance, and it feels a little less taboo to bring up the hobby around the uninitiated, what drives me to play is the energy and creative surges and drama caused by the cast of dice ... which was the same array of feelings that drove me to start playing over 30 years ago. Some DMs get paid, that's fine. The dynamics I enjoy in the game are unaffected.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Another analogy. Years ago, I used to be really really good at running, particularly trail runs. I was never an "elite" athlete, but I did well enough in my regional circuit that "joining a team" managed by one of the shoe mfrs. was broached with me. I would have been compensated in free shoes (which would mean like $500-$1000 a year), maybe branded clothes and affiliated gear if my performance qualified me for higher or more competitive tier events. If you were really good, you'd get access to training facilities and specialized coaching etc. I didn't do it, I had small children, a job that sometimes required long hours (and occasionally running after people), so yeah, the idea of having some sort of contracted obligation to race on a committed schedule didn't appeal to me. I still ran that circuit, and other runners were compensated to the degree I outlined, but that didn't in any way take away my enjoyment of running, and in this case I actually was literally competing with them.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.