Prepping for games and running them go hand in hand — both are key ingredients of GMing most RPGs — but they seem to draw from completely different skill sets. It’s like English and Math: People who excel in one subject often aren’t so hot at the other one.
I hate Math, and I often dislike prep; I excel at English, and I’m good at running games. Is there a connection there?
Or do you disagree — are prep and at-the-table GMing more compatible than that?
If they are different skillsets, can anything be done to make the one you don’t enjoy more like the one that you do enjoy?
No doubt that prepping a game and running it two different skills. I was always a Math/Science person. Now that I think about your question, I am a much stronger at prep than at running.
My session run well, because I invest in my prep. Over the years I have continually evolved my game prep, making it more efficient, so that able to put my hands on information I need quicker during a session. I am not bad at running a game, but I rely heavily on my prep work. I am not a good GM for winging it.
The week before my session (I run tri-weekly) I write my notes. I also, on my drives to and from work, practice specific dialog. I also do a walk-thru of the game in my head to make sure that I have continuity and that events occur for a logical reason. It sounds like a lot of prep, but I have done if for so many years that it is force of habit.
If I am in my car, shopping at the grocery store, or in a boring meeting at work, the gears kick in and I start the process. It is just something I do now.
I have been that way since the early 90’s, coincidently when I was a Biology major in college. My counter question to you is, are people who would be considered “Type A” personalities stronger at Prep or Running, and vice versa?
I am very Type A and I am not comfortable winging it in games. It is something that I need to develop but I cannot sit down to a table without notes and run a game.
I am able to play off of my players during one of my sessions, but again I think that is because I know where the story needs to go, because of my extensive prep, and I can adapt and guide the story along those lines.
You got my gears turning now. I will have to think some more about this.
Wow, I hadn’t even thought about the Type A/Type B connection!
I’m solidly Type B in most areas, although I drift into Type A when specific things come up (I alphabetize my DVDs, for example ;)). I mprovisation is one of my biggest strengths as a GM, and I love winging things.
Now you’ve got my gears turning!
To chime in, I have had a lot of math/science training but honestly I hate math (if you knew what my profession was, you’d say I was in the wrong field). But, I can handle good, complex math and science topics. On the other side of the coin I’m not buddy-buddy with English, but we get along enough to usually not let me make a fool of myself.
The point is, I think that I’m pretty balanced at both preping and running (and winging) games and I don’t excel in either MaSci or English.
Doesn’t prove anything, I suppose, but interesting to note at least.
Hmm, I dislike prep, or at least certain kinds of prep, or really, prep that takes too much time. But I’m very comfortable with mathematics.
Not sure where that takes us, other than perhaps to suggest there are multiple reasons people don’t like prep.
Frank
I’m in Frank’s boat; a strong math guy who dislikes prep. Of course, there are types of prep that appeal more than others– reusable pieces interest me more. I suspect that’s parallel to the difference between learning the equasion and just memorizing results… to strain the analogy.
I’m an English major with a minor in Math (almost a double major), and I write software for a living. In fact, I enjoy both writing and math. Science is what bores me. 😀
I like prep that gives me a good return on my investment. I don’t like other prep. Say I have a new creature for D&D 3.5 that I really want to share with other DMs. All that reverse-engineering and getting the stats just so is rewarding. Someone will get some bang for my work. OTOH, say I make up a new creature for my game. Who cares if the skill points are exactly correct? The exact same work that was worth it in the first case isn’t worth it now.
Preparing to run a good game is an inherent part of roleplaying. If the game is one we would normally call “low prep”, the prep might be mainly to get a good rest ahead of time, and then play appropriate mood music the hour before. One might prefer that kind of prep, but it is still prep. If you prep for someone else to run a game (e.g. write a published adventure), that is mostly work.
Finally, the joy of creating a campaign is a kind of prep that does have some work attached with it. If nothing else, you must organize your creation enough to keep it straight in your head.
Hmmm… I’m with Frank and ScottM. I am better with math than english, and on the game side I’m better at running and improv than I am with prep (though what I do get done is very worth while).
I usually code something to do the mundane prep work for me.
I am a type B personality and I have a strong leaning to the Science side over the English side.
I find that I do better games when I create a modicum of prep work. Usually about 3-4 hours a week, sometimes up to 5.
However I have run several campaigns (not jsut single sessions) from the seat of my pants. I personally enjoy the “give and take” of winging it over the bittersweet task of prep.
I call it bittersweet since I get many more compliments and questions about the next game after I do the prep work than if I just wing it.
Oh yeah this is my first comment on TT!
Based on the last several comments, it seems like there both is and isn’t a connection here. 😉
I think there’s something to be said for a correlation between Type B/English/running games and Type B/Math/prep, but it seems pretty fuzzy.
If you want to reduce prep, get your players to kick in. Chances are, they know good material from bad.
Now, you’re probably thinking “How can I trust them to …”
But that means you aren’t delegating right. Most of my players could come up with some ideas for unique magic items, or maps of a city without any difficulty at all. Or ask for ten piles of treasure, from big to small. When you have a large enough collection of stuff, it will seem random, and yet they’ll occassionally say “Hey, that’s the statue I thought of”
Rudolf, I’d love to see your suggestion developed into an article/longer post.
Since your name isn’t linked, I’m guessing you don’t have a blog/website — if you’re interested in writing something like that as a TT guest post, email me and let’s talk. 🙂
I’m a journalism major who ended up working as a web programmer, so I like both prepping and running. My frustration as a GM usually comes in one of two forms.
A) I’ve spent a whole bunch of time on prep, and the party only ends up using 10% of what I created (this used to be a horrible problem when I was in college, but thankfully I’ve gotten that under control over the last ten years or so).
B) I write myself into a corner by not doing *enough* prep, and find that what I thought was a pretty clever plot, wasn’t really quite so clever once the PCs actually start running through it. Imagine a highway with a bridge out … but not realizing that the bridge was gone until you’re right there.
Ken, what do you do to get around A and B? That would also be a great subject for an article, either or Nuketown or here as a guest post. If you’re interested in the latter, shoot me an email. 🙂
I’m a maths/science geek and I too much prefer prep to running the game. I’m getting better at winging things, mainly cause my players keep throwing me curveballs and asking about things I hadn’t planned
Sometimes I suspect they’re trying to trip me up. 😉
I’d say that if you’re better at prep or running games, you’ve got more incentive to improve at your weak points than most adults do at improving at math or English.
“My job doesn’t require math? Sweet! I can forget all that shit they made me learn in college, and focus on the stuff I like.” 😉