Forums of the Megaverse®

I've come to a startling conclusion.
There are no good game masters around anymore.
Wait, ammend that thought; I should say there are VERY few game masters worth a toss that are actulay willing to game master.
What with the intercinine bickering, struggles to see who is alpha dog, and what-not between players...no WONDER why most of the good GM's have said "to heck with this" and just given up.

Most that are left, tend to be micro-managing misanthropes with no concept of what it means to run a good story AND have PC interaction.

I'll admit, I've had my "bad sessions" that I've run before, but I always try to keep the ball rolling.
Any time I've tried 'playing' in the games that have gone on here or in IRL; well...90% have all been snore fests.
Why?
Favoritsim!
On the part of the GM's..towards ONE player.
THIS will kill any game quicker than any munchkin glory hog.
That or rampant plot hammering that doesn't allow for ANY PC growth or motivations. The PC seems to be stuck in one slot and that's it..do not speak do not act do not blink unless the GM says so.


Advice; don't do it..ever!
I speak from experience (15 years ago). It only ends in tears in the long run.

Let's make sure GOOD GM's don't become a dying breed.

Based on my own experience, I have to say that there are definitely plenty (alot) of good G.M.s around, both for Palladium and for other RPGs.

This is taking into account both RL GMs that I know, and internet GMs.

~ Josh

Hey.. as I said... the majority seem to suck or make fatal errors in judgement; not ALL though
For those who've replied today; keep up the good works then

methinks, it is a case of the errant PC's that join. they want a 'cuddleypoo session' .. or a simple 'hack'n'slash fest' .. or even at times 'showcase my "super cool awesome better than yours ever" character' .. and you got a recipe for disaster.

been in too many that are that way. they all think the same thing, all the characters are the same. i could say the name of a 'player' .. and then tell you exactly WHAT kind of character they will run. and HOW they will run it.

predictability is sad. response playing is sadder still. when you turn about and tell someone that started gaming back in the 80's 'you should play the way i do, you'll have better games that way, and people will want to game with you' .. something is wrong.
either its ME - and the fact i DONT conform all my characters into one melting pot and run them all the same, just different names and looks ... *is guilty of allowing character's to be ... UNIQUE*
or its the system itself which, if it calls for 'conforming characters only', then the WHOLE system should be renamed to something more fitting.
[sadly i cannot SAY it aloud for fear of getting banned for .. foul language, but i'm sure you get the idea]

i'll just state for the record, then WHEN i GMt [game master in training], i inform the players of my guidelines. they work with them or they don't. most REFUSE to work with them as it 'confines THEIR creativity'
1 - NO arguements about rules. i HATE arguements, and yakking the rules to me about this or that does little more than bore me and as the gmt, if i get bored, the game is called and NO exp is dished out
2 - NO holding of PC hands. i will NEVER cater to one individual. the game is made up of MORE than one player, thus EVERYONE will get a turn in the spotlight.
3 - its YOUR game, i'm just steering it' .. this means 'DON'T nag me to interact with YOU'

if you can abide by these three rules, i usually allow just about anything as long as it fits the base power level. NO 11th level Shifters when everyone else is about 1-4 level.

i try to balance things out to fit the party. you start with 'rune weapon this or deific great grandparent that ... you know where the door is, cause i will suggest that the game is NOT suited to you

DhAkael wrote:Hey.. as I said... the majority seem to suck or make fatal errors in judgement; not ALL though
For those who've replied today; keep up the good works then

Huh? "The majority seem to suck"? On what sort of information or experience are you basing this, exactly? Are you saying the majority of GMs everywhere suck, or just the ones you've had the personal misfortune to have interacted with?

I look at a statement like the above or your initial post and those sorts of sweeping generalizations make me cringe. Maybe I'm reading a bit too far into your posts, but it seems to me you've had some bad luck finding decent GMs and you've transferred all the things you dislike about the GMs you've gamed with, or the poor way(s) in which they've run their games, and assumed most of the GMs you haven't had the pleasure of gaming with possess the same faults.

I mean, God forbid that you should think the majority of GMs suck because you personally have had one or two (or heck, I'll even spot you four or five) that sucked. It's a lousy assumption. Reading your first post, and the specifics of why the majority of GMs (apparently) suck, leads me to believe you're ranting about a particular GM or two. Because, let's be honest: you can't have been in more than--let's say, for the sake of argument--five groups that had such issues.

I've been gaming for more than 25 years and I've interacted with a lot of other players and GMs. At least a dozen different GMs (that I remember) in at least that many systems and settings. Some GMs were good, some needed work. A few were even great. But in my experience, the sucky GMs are a minority. It's a bit like natural selection: lousy GMs tend to not do it for long because they have trouble attracting and keeping players. Players who disrupt a good dynamic between the GM and other players tend to be dropped pretty quickly.

So give us some numbers: how many GMs have you gamed with? How many of them sucked? How many times have you been exposed to the situations you described in your first post?

Maybe I've been extremely lucky with the GMs and players I've gamed with. I'll go out on a limb and say that the experiences of a good number of the others who post to the Palladium forums are closer to positive than what you've experienced.

Ø

count zero wrote:
Maybe I've been extremely lucky with the GMs and players I've gamed with. I'll go out on a limb and say that the experiences of a good number of the others who post to the Palladium forums are closer to positive than what you've experienced.

Ø

Prolly...
but going back 23 years...i'd say out of 15 DM's / GM's in general maybe 5 have been GOOD
so 1 out of 3...hmm..maybe I was being a bit harsh

hippie_mama wrote:

Misfit KotLD wrote:

hippie_mama wrote:i know at least two seriously awesome ones in Missouri and i think i'm pretty decent, for just learning myself.

*Makes a note to kill off Cerra*

Eek! That was a typo, it was supposed to say "i know at least two seriously awesome ones in Missouri, but they're nothing compared to Misfit, who is a GM God"

Golden God.
It says so right in the title I gave him!

DhAkael wrote:
Let's make sure GOOD GM's don't become a dying breed.

You're right. I should start spreading my seed as far and wide as I can.

CaptRory wrote:Every good GM needs to take on two apprentices, be slain by the greedy apprentice, and have him slain at some distant date by the good apprentice who was always "Master's Favorite".

Y'know...that's a death I can actualy feel would be worth-while

CaptRory wrote:But what sort of death would it be? Prolly bludgeoned to death by a bag of dice hahaha.

But it would be a glourious death, preceeded by a T.P.K. adventure fueld by Jolt & Mnt. Dew

well ... IF you want the truth ... i'ld have to kill you

k .. kidding .. i doubt that i could kill anyone .. but, my answer most likely would be the same.

they've gone on to bigger and better things. IF .. they haven't decided to join the masses of the **** the other guy over faster than they can do me.

take a look at the "God Complex", he MIGHT have been a good GM once ... but that was once, and that was long long LONG ago. now? .. he's more intereste in being hte Primadonna of the game. his biggest thing is to out muscle the muscle, out think the thinkers .. and basically get the random gm's that allow him into their games to **** him just cause HE's there.

NOT my idea of how to game, but hey ... that appears to be the almost norm now. on digi, i've had the misfortune to have a ratio of 5:1 for bad gm's to good. and i've only seen about4? .. good ones? .. scary ... a 20% chance of getting a good GM? .. hope you guys like the odds, cause i dont

Misfit KotLD wrote:

Novastar wrote:

hippie_mama wrote:

Misfit KotLD wrote:

hippie_mama wrote:i know at least two seriously awesome ones in Missouri and i think i'm pretty decent, for just learning myself.

*Makes a note to kill off Cerra*

Eek! That was a typo, it was supposed to say "i know at least two seriously awesome ones in Missouri, but they're nothing compared to Misfit, who is a GM God"

Golden God.
It says so right in the title I gave him!

Novastar the Wise.

Me likes!

Citizen Lazlo wrote:

Braden, GMPhD wrote:

DhAkael wrote:
Let's make sure GOOD GM's don't become a dying breed.

You're right. I should start spreading my seed as far and wide as I can.

Someone call Canada's FAA, Braden's head is becoming a hazard to local air traffic again...

Anyway, I dislike trying to gauge my ability as a GM, especially comparing to other people. I try to keep my games fun, fair, interesting, directed, and whatnot. I remember not being so great when I started, but all my players were newbies too, and we've grown as a group.

I know that I'm doing some things right as I've had people from the four corners of the Earth wanting to join my games, and have gotten high praises from about 48 of the 50 people I've GM'ed for (and more from those I've shared stories with). That being said, I still have several things I could do better, so I strive to keep developing and honing my skills.

As far as my experiences with other GM's, the worst I've found is mediocre. However, I have heard some horror stories from other players.

So, I'd say that there are lots of good GM's out there as long as you know where to look. Then again, perhaps I'm not quite as stern in my judgement of others' abilities.

I am horrible at accents so I gave up a long time ago. When the NPC makes their appearance in the scene or speaks for the first time in a scene I say, "He says in a <insert name> accent, "Blah blah blah."

U.S.Advanced Recon wrote:In my 11 years of gaming I have found quite a few good G.M's but most of them have one fault..... they can't hold a game for a extended period of time.

(Myself included, I get fed up with the bickering because a player doesn't know whats going on but thinks he does, so he is yelling at me about how I am doing it wrong .)

I've personally had an ongoing Rifts campaign for seven years now...

Of course, I typically try and work through players' problems (and as a psych undergrad, it has given me experience in conflict resolution ). If an agreement can't be reached, I kindly show them the door. Seems simple enough (although as someone who typically has a short temper, I tend to avoid including known "problem players" unless I think I can reform them).

There are still plenty of good GM's around, but the issue (IMO) is that most aren't looking for new players. Good GM's get that way with practice, and most of them have solid groups that want to stick with them. They don't need or want more people, who'll throw their dynamic out of whack.

The Open House is a great place to get a chance to roll with some of these great GM's, where they show up and are willing to do a one-off with players they don't normally have. Occasionally one can get lucky with snooping around for a local group, or finding an experienced GM new to the area, but most good GM's are homegrown. Start with your group of friends, and develop over time. Don't expect them to fall out of trees.

Warwolf wrote:

U.S.Advanced Recon wrote:In my 11 years of gaming I have found quite a few good G.M's but most of them have one fault..... they can't hold a game for a extended period of time.

(Myself included, I get fed up with the bickering because a player doesn't know whats going on but thinks he does, so he is yelling at me about how I am doing it wrong .)

I've personally had an ongoing Rifts campaign for seven years now...

Of course, I typically try and work through players' problems (and as a psych undergrad, it has given me experience in conflict resolution ). If an agreement can't be reached, I kindly show them the door. Seems simple enough (although as someone who typically has a short temper, I tend to avoid including known "problem players" unless I think I can reform them).

Um..how long has rifts been out?
THAT's how long my campaign has been running; different groups mind you, but the same plot threads are all from the original game I started way back when the FIRST edition FIRST printing of Rifts came out.

It may not be a fault of a 'Good GM', but perhaps you may have less than stellar Players. Or a combination of both.

Myself, if you'd asked me 6 months ago, I'd be telling you I was a great GM. Now, I have little doubts that I can GM at all. Funny in a way. I feel that part of GMing is also good Player interaction. Something more than, "Kill, Kill, Kill". Sadly, my group of late has degenerated into this sort of mindframe a bit. But as I sit here and type about it, I also realize that it's a apart of my 'loss of control' of the situation. I run combats to pull the group out of off-game conversations (at least I keep the combats 'story-centric'), but I feel that I'm dumbing things down.

It could be GM/Player expectations, where Players want _____ (mystery, combat, save the world/girl, etc) and the GM wants _____ . And then, even beyond that, it could just be people, place of playing, or a list of other things.

ApocalypseZero wrote:It may not be a fault of a 'Good GM', but perhaps you may have less than stellar Players. Or a combination of both.

Myself, if you'd asked me 6 months ago, I'd be telling you I was a great GM. Now, I have little doubts that I can GM at all. Funny in a way. I feel that part of GMing is also good Player interaction. Something more than, "Kill, Kill, Kill". Sadly, my group of late has degenerated into this sort of mindframe a bit. But as I sit here and type about it, I also realize that it's a apart of my 'loss of control' of the situation. I run combats to pull the group out of off-game conversations (at least I keep the combats 'story-centric'), but I feel that I'm dumbing things down.

It could be GM/Player expectations, where Players want _____ (mystery, combat, save the world/girl, etc) and the GM wants _____ . And then, even beyond that, it could just be people, place of playing, or a list of other things.

You make good points...but really... I've yet to encounter a "new" decent GM who is worth the title. Players can make things hard, but GM's should be able to adapt to MOST player B/S and just wing-it.
My primary complaint is, and always will be 'Favoritism'.
The GM should spread both the love AND the pain equaly among their players. No ONE PC should get all attention, be it good or bad.

On the PCR I've yet to play in any game that hasn't had 'favortism' as a major factor (and no..not a hypocrite here; I don't want 'limelight' constantly..maybe once every third session ).

New Term: PCR, explain?

As for Favoritism, I don't see myself doing it in games too much. I do actively try to 'spread the love' in my games. Sadly, when I see my players 'talking' more than 'playing', it causes me to want to just shy away from them, especially when their topics can become less than desirable for me. Which does float attention towards the one player that does not talk. For me, I don't feel like I've done my job unless EVERYONE is involved. I like to see the whole group interact and not just a portion. I try to include something to every character: Combat for the Men-at-Arms, Puzzle or Research for the Scholars & Adventurer, etc. And I love when the players react as much in character as they can get.

DhAkael, will you be at the Open House?

Oh, maybe I need to head back in there for a game sometime.

Sadly, I'd have to agree with the above statement regarding this thread. I been of unique fortune to have started my gaming career with some of the best GMs I will have ever met. The guys that I learned from were of the highest professional and moral caliber. Although fellow players fell very short of their expectations, they delt with US appropriately. Of course my opinion stems from my OWN requirements of a good/great GM. As some might assume, I've been "spoiled" by them. Anyone else who did not remotely practice their (my old GMs) style of GMing were branded as "wanna-bes". This makes my choices unfairly biased towards other GMs, and yes...I don't think that's fair.

As it stands, however, I've GMed/played in 8 different states, and 3 different countries. I've GMed for groups as small as (2) players to as large as 18. I've probably stood in front of around 100+ people as a GM over that time period. And I still have a PBP going on at this time (along with another table-top group). Over this time period, I've interacted with players as young as (10) years old to those reaching a ripe old maturity of (55). I've encounted maybe...(20+) GMs, and only (3) of them were worth their pounds in gold. Don't get me wrong, at least 3 others were "OK" and pretty fun to play under, but those are still some pretty bad stats.

I would gauge my own ability as mediocre. I can run, and I can keep a game going.

Where are those good GM's? I don't want to gauge their ability over a PbP or PCR, I want face-to-face interaction. That's when you discovery their true ability handle a person or player. That being said, Gadrin ran a KICK-BUTT PbP a while ago, and I've wanted to table-top with him every since.

Someone said it before in this thread..."good" (to my standards) GMs have always been in the minority.

ApocalypseZero wrote:
DhAkael, will you be at the Open House?

Not likely
3 reasons (well only two really)
1- Little bit of past history / animosity with Maryann Siembiada (who's no longer extant, so it's a moot point right now).
2- Distance needed to be traveld (I live in Toronto), and the fact that the yanks are being pricks about passports and such. Once the border is ballanced and BOTH sides are required to show passposrts at BOTH ends..then I'll travel to the states again. Until the paranoia that Dum Fuq President George W. Bush has created is gone, or the door swings both ways, you won't catch me in the states...ever!
3- money...as in lack of.

What advice would you guys give to a just starting GM? I'm going to try and put a game together, and I know at least two potential player's have NEVER role-played before. I've been wondering if I should start them out in and SDC setting (TMNT) or just go for the gusto and drop them into a Rifts game? Any advice would be great!

Sounds like pretty common sense stuff. Thank's for the advice.

sometimes the posters that reply to questions will actually NOT treat you like a piece of **** on the bottom of their shoe. anyways i digress.

advice? .. lets see .. have an idea where the game SHOULD be headed ... try to think of about 4-6 angles .. cause not everyone will on the ball, or actually play in character.
*in one game right now where the mage that SHOULD be making lots of TW toys, is more interested in going shopping for clothes and holding hands and gigging with her current 'boytoy' ... which is kinda hopeles or hte rest of us. ..
*another person knows a lot of the Rifts genre of games ... and whatever HE knows ... ALL his characters know

try figuring out HOW to play in that game and stay in one piece ... its tough to NOT punch the two in the face and then carry on .. but hey .. its a learning experience

that's where I get a little fuzzy...trying to think of enough ideas so that if your players really don't like to follow hints, you can still keep them entertained. It seems like having a really involved scenario is just asking to have the thing fall apart.

CaptRory wrote:"Wait, wait! All the signs pointed to X being the culprit!"
*The GM smirks evilly* "Didn't it seem a bit Too Obvious?"

That is so much fun.

lather wrote:

CaptRory wrote:"Wait, wait! All the signs pointed to X being the culprit!"
*The GM smirks evilly* "Didn't it seem a bit Too Obvious?"

That is so much fun.

Been there, done that..have the pile of hair my players ripped out from their scalps in frustration to prove it

Misfit KotLD wrote:

shiiv-a wrote:*in one game right now where the mage that SHOULD be making lots of TW toys, is more interested in going shopping for clothes and holding hands and gigging with her current 'boytoy' ... which is kinda hopeles or hte rest of us. ..

What the character does and who she is need not be the same thing.

Agreed.

DhAkael wrote:

lather wrote:

CaptRory wrote:"Wait, wait! All the signs pointed to X being the culprit!"
*The GM smirks evilly* "Didn't it seem a bit Too Obvious?"

That is so much fun.

Been there, done that..have the pile of hair my players ripped out from their scalps in frustration to prove it

Wow you save the hair? Awesome

whatever .. it was a comment about a char i'm in a game with. about 2 of them actually .. and the topic went off into left field.

was in a game with someone else, and they wanted to be the only superstar character. their character had to be the ONLY one that could do fancy stuff .. the one with all the secrets and the one with all the fancy gadgets and gizmo's. the GM allowed the char to have them. in fact that gm allowed the char anything they wanted. whats the point n playing then?

there isn't .. thing is, as a gm you gotta avoid doing 'favoritism' .. its really easy to fall into, and you end up with the superstar. you want to avoid that, cause it really ruins the experience for everyone else in the game.

I always allow each character the opportunity to shine.

Sometimes I write the campaign around the characters, but not too much since players are so unpredictable.

i don't GM much anymore. seems my way of running games isn't how people WANT it to be. thus if they get thwarted about doing a skill or casting spells when they aren't in the right area and need to travel about 10 paces up hill to get a view of whats going on, before getting involved into the fight.

i think the only time i GM'd for a mod, was when Asa joined in, and went along with the issue of getting trapped in a pit, and when everyone went walking about looking for his char [who waas calling out from the pit] .. one by one they basically fell in on top of him and mooshed him into the muck on the bottom of hte pit.

i think only ONE char didn't fall into the pit ... but it was funny. guess it went from finding out what went wrong to playing 'sardines' .. cause the other PC's did just that .. they had to get into the pit with the mod. before that, they actually had the answer. they were about 5 feet from the hidden door, and then went off to play 'sardines' .... go figure ... *shrugs*

I will say that I an a decent GM for a few reasons:

Before we even start our first session, I ask all my players (over phone or email) what kind of campaign they want and then I try to make it happen.

I always have at least two ideas for complete campaigns at any given time, and am willing to switch between open-campaign, closed-campaign, and one-shot nights of fun at the whim of the players.

I take notes while we are gaming to give me ideas for the next evening of adventure. I try to understand what it is the players like and dislike about the current adventure and then apply it in the future. Sometimes they get bored with straight combat, or political intruige, or micro-managing or ancient powers or hi-tech toys. I vary it a little each session.

I ask them how they feel about things currently and see if they have suggestions.

Does anybody see a common element here?
COMMUNICATION!!
That and keeping track of all the info you are communicating. Communication (or lack of it) is the number one cause of failed marriages in America.
Why should you treat a gaming group any different.
Communicate people! Find out whats bugging them. Tell them whats bugging you. Get it out in the open instead of hating on each other all the time.

Shorty Lickens wrote:I will say that I an a decent GM for a few reasons:

Before we even start our first session, I ask all my players (over phone or email) what kind of campaign they want and then I try to make it happen.

I always have at least two ideas for complete campaigns at any given time, and am willing to switch between open-campaign, closed-campaign, and one-shot nights of fun at the whim of the players.

I take notes while we are gaming to give me ideas for the next evening of adventure. I try to understand what it is the players like and dislike about the current adventure and then apply it in the future. Sometimes they get bored with straight combat, or political intruige, or micro-managing or ancient powers or hi-tech toys. I vary it a little each session.

I ask them how they feel about things currently and see if they have suggestions.

Does anybody see a common element here?
COMMUNICATION!!
That and keeping track of all the info you are communicating. Communication (or lack of it) is the number one cause of failed marriages in America.
Why should you treat a gaming group any different.
Communicate people! Find out whats bugging them. Tell them whats bugging you. Get it out in the open instead of hating on each other all the time.

True, but still

Misfit KotLD wrote:

Shorty Lickens wrote:Communication (or lack of it) is the number one cause of failed marriages in America.
Why should you treat a gaming group any different.

Because I am not marrying my gamer friends. EW!

Take one laugh point sir

Misfit KotLD wrote:

DhAkael wrote:

Misfit KotLD wrote:

Shorty Lickens wrote:Communication (or lack of it) is the number one cause of failed marriages in America.
Why should you treat a gaming group any different.

Because I am not marrying my gamer friends. EW!

Take one laugh point sir

Only one? I guess it's better than a Snort Point.

It is, yes.

I guess you can say that I, at least sometimes, put a lot of effort into a campaign. I was in NC a couple of years ago and there seemed to be a lack of gamers in my area- so I took advantage of that time and started writing a campaign. Well- 3 years later I was back in CO and had gamers, but none of my players are interrested in the BTS campaign that I worked on for those 3 years. LOL!

CaptRory wrote:There's nothing wrong with ending a game a little early. I'd rather break 15 or 20 minutes early at a Good Spot then wait to the deadline and stop in a Bad Place. Right before a big combat? Good. In the middle of a convoluted combat? Bad. When you're transitioning from one thing to the next? Good. When you're all in the middle of something that will be hard to just pick up next session? Bad.

I imagined an ogrish James Hetfield reciting your post.

Misfit KotLD wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I guess you can say that I, at least sometimes, put a lot of effort into a campaign. I was in NC a couple of years ago and there seemed to be a lack of gamers in my area- so I took advantage of that time and started writing a campaign. Well- 3 years later I was back in CO and had gamers, but none of my players are interrested in the BTS campaign that I worked on for those 3 years. LOL!

Told you, Florida was going to be where I'm at.

But I'm in CO- that's one hell of a commute

But a short telecommute.

Misfit KotLD wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

Misfit KotLD wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I guess you can say that I, at least sometimes, put a lot of effort into a campaign. I was in NC a couple of years ago and there seemed to be a lack of gamers in my area- so I took advantage of that time and started writing a campaign. Well- 3 years later I was back in CO and had gamers, but none of my players are interrested in the BTS campaign that I worked on for those 3 years. LOL!

Told you, Florida was going to be where I'm at.

But I'm in CO- that's one hell of a commute

Not my fault you moved in the wrong direction.

I guess we both just went home

lather wrote:But a short telecommute.

True, but I'm one that prefers table top- I like to see the look on the face of my players when they roll that Nat. 1

GreenGhost wrote:

lather wrote:But a short telecommute.

True, but I'm one that prefers table top- I like to see the look on the face of my players when they roll that Nat. 1

Yea, true that.

lather wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

lather wrote:But a short telecommute.

True, but I'm one that prefers table top- I like to see the look on the face of my players when they roll that Nat. 1

Yea, true that.

EPIC wrote:

Lorgan_Hegener wrote:

duck-foot wrote:I think we should make a Superb GM's Guild. Requiments: 10+ years og GMing, less than of five your campiagns have de-railed. You know the material well enough to not have to continually look at the books. (the ones pertaining to your game)

Campaign derails are what makes a good GM.

... providing he learns and grows from the experience.


The art of GM'ing begins with losing your fear of making a fool of yourself in front of your friends.

You will fumble.

You will fail.

You will make bad calls.

You will fail to be a mind reader.



But, as with all things, we fall so that we can learn to stand back up. GM'ing isn't just a playtime whimsy. It's a life lesson.

don't forget about the accents you try to use for NPCs ... players will laugh at them.

I've had tons of players laugh at all of the accents and fully acted out NPCs I do but do to the fact that I stay with it they've all come to quite enjoy them. To the point of my players begging me to let them film me doing a particular NPC.

J. Lionheart wrote:There are still plenty of good GM's around, but the issue (IMO) is that most aren't looking for new players. Good GM's get that way with practice, and most of them have solid groups that want to stick with them. They don't need or want more people, who'll throw their dynamic out of whack.

The Open House is a great place to get a chance to roll with some of these great GM's, where they show up and are willing to do a one-off with players they don't normally have. Occasionally one can get lucky with snooping around for a local group, or finding an experienced GM new to the area, but most good GM's are homegrown. Start with your group of friends, and develop over time. Don't expect them to fall out of trees.

Good GMs are looking for elite players to compliment their good or as good as they can get it group.

good GM's are looking for Elite players? ..... uhoh .... counts me out. i try to at least have a LITTLE fun in the game and keep it going. runningone char now that seems extremely greedy .. but hey .. NO ONE is talking to my char, so no one knows why she's theway she is.

been called numerous things as a player, and worse as a gm. only thing i can take away from the experience is this - if the game is no longer fun for an individual, something needs to be changed. sometimes its the palyer or the gm that needs to have a sleeve tug and a private chat about something. and things should change, hopefully for the better.

best of luck then.

The "Good" GMs are not gone...they're simply busy running adventures at explorersunlimited.com

9 Rifts: Merctown GMs

3 Phase World GMs

2 Heroes Unlimited GMs

2 Robotech GMs

2 Chaos Earth GMs

The Palladium Fantasy, Nightbane, and Beyond the Supernatural games each have their own GM as well.

That's right...count it!

20 GAME MASTERS ARE ON EU RIGHT NOW!