This post was stemmed from several posts on lfg and various encounters I've had with players I've talked to. There is a plethora of players within this community looking for games. There are GMs but the majority of them are fresh and new. A great deal have never gmed before and those that have are 5 years or below and still very much trying to hone the craft. It seems a great deal of them are looking for games because the current game they are in is not to their liking.

I have my own opinions to why this is but I'm curious as to what the rest of the community thinks. Many of these gms have had trouble finding a game so are becoming a gm or just couldn't find the game they wanted in other gms so decided to try to pick up the mantle themselves. 

How exactly are these gms learning to be gms? What books are they reading? What tools are they using? What media are they consuming in an attempt to be better? From what point are they starting their career that makes a disparity in the games the players are a part of and what affect does this have on the hobby and player expectations in general? One look at the lfg tab would reveal that players are flocking to games like cockroaches. Games that quite frankly seem like a mess and waste of time.

I do not pretend to be an amazing gm. I've been doing it for many, many years and still improving each session as we all do. The point I'm trying to make though is that the simplest and bare bones ideas are something the players are eating up as if it is the best idea they've heard. I'm not on the players side of this community so my interactions with other gms is limited but what are they doing so wrong that keeps players coming back to this site looking for games? They seem to last a couple sessions and then the players look for a different game because of the gm. What are they doing that seems to leave players in a constant search for a game? 

I'm just curious of the communities opinions on these and many other matters and wanted to ask the community collectively for a general discussion on it.

Please do not use this post to name call or call out any specific player or gm. If a story is in order then use a made up alias.

To get a handle on your question, are you asking why I think there are still more players than there are DMs? Or more pointedly, why the discrepancy is so great that players are seemingly playing in substandard games out of raw desperation for the ability to play at all?

Not to dogpile, but I"m also wondering if there's some orthodox "way" to DM you see other DM's deficient at.  

I mean for someone who wants a safe and productive discussion, avoiding call outs and what not, I'm not sure you're aware of what you're inviting when you refer to games people play as seemingly "like a mess and waste of time" or describing folks flocking to (bad) games like cockroaches.  

There's nothing wrong, in that it doesn't make you a necessarily horrible person, to hold your own game playing to a high standard.  But there's a lot of self-styled frank assessments of games (you're playing, you're discussing with other players, you're just browsing LFP?) based on evaluations whose methodology I'm not exactly trusting given the broad brush you're beginning with here.

I'd say this forums LFG/LFP subforum is probably the last resort forum for finding games.  DDB hasn't invested in a more robust LFG/LFP system, nor do I think they need to.  That said, from the folks I've actually interacted with on this forum, at least some folks in that space are playing good games by my standards, and I recognize the rest for what it is.  A lot of people only know or largely know D&D through DDB and a lot of folks, both players and DMs, are figuring it out.  And there's a great community here to help out those folks with questions on how to improve their games as players or DMs if they feel the need to do so.  

I'll agree with the responses above: the phrasing of this topic makes a more than loaded question, and without being explicit it suggests an answer (many, especially new, DMs are bad, so players leave games because those are bad and go looking elsewhere) that, frankly, is baseless. It's a matter of supply and demand first and foremost. There are more potential groups than there are DMs to run a campaign for, and most people prefer playing to DMing. Sure, there are bad campaigns too (for many reasons, not just because of a failing DM) but the big issue is simply one of numbers. When it comes to campaigns on this particular forum, that's compounded by the fact that PbP campaigns have some extra hurdles compared to in-person gaming or even playing via discord or some other live digital medium: it's just not as engaging because communicating through posts is slow going, written text is prone to losing nuance and it's harder to connect on a personal level.

Following up on Pangurjan's comment: On other PbP forums that I have experience with, many people are playing/running 4~8+ games simultaneously. However, it is much harder to GM multiple games simultaneously.

Some games are long running campaigns, while others are short running adventures, and others still are open entry arenas perfect for experimenting with new builds. There are certainly bad GMs and bad campaigns, and sometimes the group as a whole simply doesn't click, causing great opportunities to wither.

As for the Newness of new players/GMs: the combination of popularized media, such as Critical Role, and the social impact of Covid-19, has obviously caused a massive uptick in D&D engagement. Add to that the fact that 5e was specifically designed to be easy to run and play, and we get the perfect storm for an enthusiastic green community.

As for the Quality of the Games: GMing, at its core, requires a certain level of obsession and social awareness to pull off well, regardless of individual style. In the "Olden Days", the pool of players and GMs was limited, and by that exclusive nature, only those who were already deeply invested were in a position to engage with the content.

By contrast, modern D&D is far more accessible, thanks in large part to DNDBeyond. People who would otherwise be intimidated by the prospect of running a game can much more easily get their feet wet. As a result, the average quality of any random game will drop, but as those new GMs gain experience, we will also see a vast increase in high quality games. (Regardless of the standards we apply.)

New players/GMs are often drawn toward fantasy cliches because it satisfies the craving that brought them here. They want to be heroes, they want grandeur and purpose. As those basic "needs" are met, players can begin to appreciate more nuanced experiences. Those high contrast games may not be particularly refined, but they are pillars of the genre. Tropes and memes give us a common language. Once we share that common language, we can begin to communicate and build on a deeper level.

I don't believe the LFP/LFG. forum is exclusively for PbP here.  There are discords and even Roll20 and I presume other solicitations on here.

In fact, the fact that LFP is so often spammed, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't pay to play "DM Mills" that are trying to profit by quantity over quality on a number of channels.

It has taking me a little bit to get back to this sorry. I was referring to calling out specific users. I didn't want someone joining just to talk poorly about other users by name.

What I meant by many of the posts looking like a mess was the fact that some of them can't even spell simple words properly and give no basis to the game at hand. That doesn't speak directly to the game that GM runs but it just looks like a mess. It looks so thrown together almost in a spur of the moment type of way. Games that are trying to play a type of game that 5e certainly can not run properly without homebrewing it to the point it's no longer 5e. That kind of stuff.

The main question was not why there is a disparity between the number of gms and players. That has always been around. It's that I've had several potential players and current players that came from "bad games". I've heard many stories. I tend to take the GM side in matters that I do not know. If someone's first couple of responses to me are about how bad their last GM was it's a real red flag for me on that player being a possible problem. Case in point I had a player tell me in the second response back that if I was going to lie and yell at him and call him a cheater it wouldn't work. That was a red flag for me for good or bad that I may not want to play with this player. Similarly several players are a part of a campaign they wish to leave because it's "bad". Have I just been running into a lot of players who may be problem players or what?

I've just seen a lot of that here since I joined and was curious of everyone's opinions on the hobby. Mainly from me being a gm I don't see other gms games much. Was just curious why this seems to be prevelant. One of the big questions being that since I've been gming for a long time I wouldn't really know how new gms get their foot in the door anymore. Or if it's just players being hard headed.

I think several of you may have hit some of the points as this probably is one of the last places people go when looking for games. None of my post was meant to be derogatory though I can definitely see how it was taken that way in one of the paragraphs. 

I did mention I had my own thoughts and opinions so maybe sharing them would shed a little light. I think 5e has a larger target audience and there are far more people playing it. That includes newer players. This means newer gms and new gms do not equal bad gms they just need to be allowed to grow. Players online simply find it easier to ditch games than those in person. I've for the most part always stuck to in person games. Having been running games online now I think I'm just seeing a larger crowd. In person you see and hear bad things a lot less. With people of the hobby gathering here I just simply think maybe it hasn't changed all that much I'm just simply seeing more of it from there being a larger gaming pool.

I wanted to hear other people's thoughts on it and maybe newer gms would pipe in and say I learned this way. Or I've been reading this book. Was just curious is all.

Self selection bias has a role here.

It's a sad fact of life that people are far quicker to complain than they are to compliment. If it takes any effort at all, and to come to forums to do so is an effort, then people are very unlikely to make the compliment. On the other hand, they'll go to he'll and back to leave a scathing comment if their experience was in any way negative - or if it wasn't quite perfect enough.

When I ran a shop, our service was actually pretty good. However, we, for example, once had an official complaint that the person serving them gave them extra food. On the other hand, guess.how many compliments received, even though several times a week our staff would run out of the store and chase people down because they'd forgotten something? More than once I'd run out into the rain with someone's expensive iPhone to try and catch them. That wasn't convenient or comfortable, but we'd do it...yet not once did we receive a compliment for doing anything like that.

Another problem is self reinforcement. One person posts something positive, people smile and move on. One person posts something negative and it's like permission to be nasty and other people are more likely to also rant. Either in response or to put their own rant another time.

You're on a forum, and it takes effort to make a comment. It's going to be heavily skewed by that. The negativity also creates a positive feedback loop. You're going to see a lot of negativity, even when there isn't a lot of things to complain about.

I always thought a service could do quite well matching players to DMs. Everyone could set up resumes, and DMs and players could answer a number of questions about their play styles and the types of games they are running or are looking for. Kinda like a dating app.

Everyone could rate everyone else. For example, if a player ghosts a game, the DM and players could flag that, and the ghosting player could respond to those comments.

Using a subscription model for say, a buck a month or a buck a game, would help weed out the the MANY players and DMs who love to join games just to cause trouble.

Just a thought.

Quote from Socratos >>

What I meant by many of the posts looking like a mess was the fact that some of them can't even spell simple words properly and give no basis to the game at hand. That doesn't speak directly to the game that GM runs but it just looks like a mess. It looks so thrown together almost in a spur of the moment type of way. Games that are trying to play a type of game that 5e certainly can not run properly without homebrewing it to the point it's no longer 5e. That kind of stuff.

 

Thanks for clarifying Socratos.  I'll just speak to the writing quality.  While I think it helps, especially as a DM with a "writerly" bent, a good grasp of producing the _written_ language isn't all that essential to run a good game.  You need to read but you don't necessarily have to internalize all the grammatical rules.  I know quite a few 13 year olds (which I think is the minimum age expected for DDB accounts) who are actually very linguistically adept in spoken expression, butt rite lyke thise (exageration, but you see what I'm putting down).  Is that especially problematic in PbP? ... maybe, I think there are a lot of folks who are not primary English speakers/readers who make it work, and again that subforum isn't for only pbp.

But really any "cattle call" type clearing house matching system with little quality control beyond regular forum moderation is going to have a pretty wide signal to noise ratio.  

As far as pushing the limits beyond 5e.  Those experiments, especially the unvetted homebrew ones aren't my cup of tea either.  That said, there are some 5e interpretations of Star Wars anf Star Trek, while unlicensed, are still really popular.  There was an epic thread a while back basiclally between folks who think you can do anything with 5e and those who think other mechanics better capture other styles of setting and milleu and what not.  

At the end of the day, if I'm doing a deep dive through the forums, I "what the..." quite a bit, and leave those discussions alone.  Kinda like the game itself, the forum's what you take from it.  I rarely check LFG/LFP.  I'd point someone toward Startplayinggames if I wanted a game matchmaker.

To actually answer your question, I am a new DM (~2 years). I learned from my DM and from various YouTube channels such as Matt Colville.

I don't think the looking for games forum is representative of the hobby, whether for play-by-forum or play by Discord, or in person. Strangers are less likely to feel guilty about ditching your game after a few sessions than friends. I don't think people primarily ditch because it was a bad game, although maybe it didn't meet their inflated expectations from watching Critical Role. Rather, they just ditch because they weren't that committed in the first place. It turns out they aren't interested enough in the hobby, or they thought they had enough time to dedicate to it but they realize they can't keep up.

Quote from Socratos >>

It has taking me a little bit to get back to this sorry. I was referring to calling out specific users. I didn't want someone joining just to talk poorly about other users by name.

What I meant by many of the posts looking like a mess was the fact that some of them can't even spell simple words properly and give no basis to the game at hand. That doesn't speak directly to the game that GM runs but it just looks like a mess. It looks so thrown together almost in a spur of the moment type of way. Games that are trying to play a type of game that 5e certainly can not run properly without homebrewing it to the point it's no longer 5e. That kind of stuff.

The main question was not why there is a disparity between the number of gms and players. That has always been around. It's that I've had several potential players and current players that came from "bad games". I've heard many stories. I tend to take the GM side in matters that I do not know. If someone's first couple of responses to me are about how bad their last GM was it's a real red flag for me on that player being a possible problem. Case in point I had a player tell me in the second response back that if I was going to lie and yell at him and call him a cheater it wouldn't work. That was a red flag for me for good or bad that I may not want to play with this player. Similarly several players are a part of a campaign they wish to leave because it's "bad". Have I just been running into a lot of players who may be problem players or what?

I've just seen a lot of that here since I joined and was curious of everyone's opinions on the hobby. Mainly from me being a gm I don't see other gms games much. Was just curious why this seems to be prevelant. One of the big questions being that since I've been gming for a long time I wouldn't really know how new gms get their foot in the door anymore. Or if it's just players being hard headed.

I think several of you may have hit some of the points as this probably is one of the last places people go when looking for games. None of my post was meant to be derogatory though I can definitely see how it was taken that way in one of the paragraphs. 

 I mean, you're automatically filtering out all the games that are going smoothly, first of all. You'll never see those, all you'll see are the bad ones, because the good ones don't have their players seeking alternatives.

But anyway, most players aren't *that* invested in the hobby. They aren't thinking about it when they're not playing the game. It's just not that serious for them. This can lead to some problems, and without a significant primer of collected knowledge (i.e. studying, which is boring), they might not be equipped to recognize the root causes at all. This goes for DMs too. Many of them are just players who took on the role so their group would function. Myself included. While I like to read about theory and stuff in my free time, most people don't.

The groups that work, generally stick together. My groups have a great dynamic and we met as strangers. We lucked out in a major way -- it was most of our first games, and a couple of people came and went, but the rest of us stuck around because it was working. I'm sure that if we all broke up and went on LFG, we'd have a tough time. All the social and rules quirks we've grown accustomed to would be changed. We'd go from having in-jokes and a 24/7 meme channel and buying each other Christmas presents, to not knowing anybody -- all of that "good group energy" possessed by each individual would be, at least for a while, useless. Who knows how long we'd each bounce around for, looking like bad players and bad DMs.

I feel like a ton of players would benefit from joining a campaign with a pro/paid DM. Most of the players on these forums are very new and would stand to gain a lot from somone who can keep a consistent schedule, who knows the game well and is very open to teaching beginners. Granted, not all pro DMs put that much effort in but they’re usually easy to spot if you look at reviews. 

Side note: I love DMing, in fact I would say I probably prefer it to being a player but I understand why some don’t. It can be a huge investment if you want certain books/subscriptions/don’t always play in homebrew worlds. And that’s not even taking into account how much time and prep goes into a single session. 

Quote from Socratos >>

I wanted to hear other people's thoughts on it and maybe newer gms would pipe in and say I learned this way. Or I've been reading this book. Was just curious is all.

Well to give you the answer ya wanted I'll get in here.

I've been playing and DMing since oct 2020. So pretty new. Before that I was watching critical role for entertainment, not even playing 5e at all. My first time playing 5e I was running it.

I also watched some general videos on DnD too, and so I picked up the rules through osmosis, mostly. I ran some games, and that's where most of my learning came from, along with watching "talking head GM" (as someone called them. Matt Colville, Web DM, Great GM, etc) videos for ideas and advice. Now I run on a Oneshot server and I'm the DM with the most games run (since they started keeping track that is, one of the admins has way more games that weren't counted). So I just run a lot of games and learn that way.

I've spent a good deal of time perusing game ads. I did not apply to a lot of those games mainly because I have weird hours so my schedule doesn't jive with most games, disqualifying them for me by default. Still, I often read the full ads just to see what's out there. Or at least I start to. I would estimate that I don't finish reading about 35-40% of ads because of the half-arsed, grammatically incompetent way that they're typed up. And I'm pretty sure most of it isn't because of English not being the DM's second language. I have spent a good deal of time interacting with people who speak English as a second or even third language, both in person and online via text and voice and am bilingual myself (English is my first language but I speak passable Spanish). People who don't have a full command of a language tend to make mistakes that follow certain consistent patterns and with some practice one can recognize those patterns more often than not; this is especially true if you speak/read more than one language yourself because then you recognize the types of mistakes you have/do make yourself. When someone is misspelling the same word three different ways in the same paragraph, always types "then" because they are apparently unaware that the word "than" exists (and ESL folks will rarely make this sort of mistake because they're translating it from a different root word), and either uses no punctuation or puts in commas seemingly at random in the middle of thoughts and phrases, I am generally willing to bet actual money they just don't give a rat's butt about proper use of the language. If they can't coherently describe their campaign in a way that conveys at least a basic idea of what kind of game I can expect and their post looks like something that would make my old third grade teacher pitch a screaming fit upon reading it then I will assume that that person is an idiot and not worth investing my time into in any way. 

Appearances matter. Communication matters. I'm currently in three regular games, all online, with two DMs. The DM I play in two games with is Mexican and does telephone customer service for an major American company; if any of his customers ask about his accent he just tells them he's from San Diego and they believe him even though he's actually lived in central Mexico his entire life. He does make certain grammatical errors when typing on Discord during the week with some consistency, though, and those are recognizable as such. Same with a Mexican player in one of those games but more pronounced as he is less practiced with English than the DM. They both type stuff that's easier to read than a good percentage of those ads I skim through; if something is misspelled or strangely worded I reread it from the perspective of Spanish phonetics or grammar and immediately understand (admittedly, having their first language as my second one helps a lot but even with my Polish friend from an MMO I can recognize patterns in her "weird" wording of things). My other DM is a young Indian guy attending college in the US, he's studied and practiced English from childhood, barely has an accent, and communicates via text with the general coherency one would expect from an American college student. Which is more than I can say for quite a few native born Americans in their thirties or forties. Fun fact, the latter group fall entirely within "idiots" in my mental Venn diagrams and both of my DMs don't. 

Finding a group you that's looking to play the same style of game as you are and has good chemistry or even just gets along passably well is hard enough while sifting through the ever-varied morass that is the internet (in my personal experience and opinion Sturgeon's Law applies to any situation involving humans, though maybe I'm a bit cynical). If I look at a two hundred word post and think "this person is dumb as $^%&" then I'm not even going to waste time investigating their game any further.