Is there even any fucking point in being the GM?

Is there even any fucking point in being the GM?
>fucktonne of work
>fucktonne of prep time
>all the work to entertain your players rather than yourself
>not the star of the show or the centre of attention
>basically a more advanced computer on which the game is being played
>enjoyment of the session depends on enjoyment of the players
>all your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
>always the one that has to organize the session (date, time, location, inform the group, etc)
>likely always the one who has to host it (and offer snacks)
>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point
>if you're the GM you're likely stuck as the GM forever because 99% of people don't want to do all this shit
>players just have to make a character, show up, and play the game

Why do I bother? I love worldbuilding, but that's like 25% of the work, the rest is boring tedious shit defining the latrines of your dungeon, what eye colour the merchant has, drawing battlemaps, and preparing dialogue only to have the player go somewhere completely different anyway. It's a tonne of fucking work to entertain others without getting paid and basically being a glorified computer, so why not just be a player and actually do the RP in RPG?

Sounds to me like you're not enjoying GMing.

It's best if you do one of these two things
a) find a new group to GM for
b) drop the GMing and play as a player

Because other GMs do it wrong and you can do it better. Now go be the GM you want to be and drag your players kicking and screaming to glory.

Just think OP, instead of wasting your time writing yet another troll thread, you could have spent the time trying to find a group so you can actually have fun with people and not just theorypost about games on Veeky Forums.

Just do less prep work. Improvisation is a GM's best friend.

I remember reading stories/anecdotes about a group that engaged in round robin GMing. You could suggest that and still get to do your world building.

Can attest to this not working, tried it and it ended up taking 2 months per session because only 1-2 in the group actually could be arsed putting in a little work.

This. Effective DMing only works as a form of somewhat benevolent despotism, and as long as everyone understands the value of having someone who can put an end to debates for the benefit of having fun.

Sounds like you're doing everything wrong.
You're using the wrong system, you have a bad group and you sound like a selfish cunt that completely misses the point of RPGs and group activities in general.

>you sound like a selfish cunt that completely misses the point of RPGs and group activities in general.
Put the effort on a scale, GM's effort on one side, all the player's combined effort on the other. The scale will tip so hard towards the GM side it will break. Now do the same but with enjoyment, now it will tip just as hard but in the player direction. Not sure how not wanting to do all the work to entertain everyone much more than yourself is selfish. Usually in group activities you don't offload all the work on one person while everyone else reaps the enjoyment.

Sounds to me like you're just doing it wrong.

Because you can interact with people in a dominant position in a social setting.

Not from my experience.

When I play a roleplaying game, I do what I can to ease the burden of the GM who wants to tie in my character into the game, by putting NPCs in my character's background that he can use as he wants and giving my PC a reason that he would go out and live a life of adventure rather than a peasant life of an NPC.

While I agree that the preparation for a game is still something that needs to be done for a good game, I also think that the players should take it to heart to entertain the GM with their PCs antics and shenanigans. Wether it be srs bsns or a bit more wacky games.

If you aren't having Fun, why are you playing a game at all?

>>fucktonne of work
>>fucktonne of prep time
>>all the work to entertain your players rather than yourself
You can dial prep back a ton if you work to be more comfortable with improvisation - which you should be doing anyway.

>>not the star of the show or the centre of attention
Your descriptions give the players all their information about what's going on in their characters' presence, if you aren't the centre of attention under such circumstances you have fucked up.

>>basically a more advanced computer on which the game is being played
Again, learn to improvise. The capacity to deal with the unexpected is the signature advantage a GM offers over a computer.

>>enjoyment of the session depends on enjoyment of the players
As a player, when have you ever enjoyed a session which made the rest of the players miserable?

>>all your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
Don't you bother to find out what your players are interested in, or whether they'd prefer a proactive sandbox or a more reactive mission-based thing?

>>always the one that has to organize the session (date, time, location, inform the group, etc)
This isn't hard. Facebook is a big help here.

>>likely always the one who has to host it (and offer snacks)
Just say "I'll host, everyone bring snacks to share".

>>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point
So don't invest in having "your own story", present the scenario and enjoy discovering the outcome the players arrive at.

>>if you're the GM you're likely stuck as the GM forever because 99% of people don't want to do all this shit
They certainly wouldn't want to do it the way you present it, but it's very obvious you're in a "work harder, not smarter" mode.

>>players just have to make a character, show up, and play the game
Yes, that's the basic trad RPG format for you.

>tfw no longer have fun playing and only enjoy being the master mind GM.

your problem isn't that being a GM is a bad or tedious job, it's that the players you have are selfish and mentally challenged and you should stop gm'ing for them. also, several problems you bring up are easily solved
>not the star of the show or the center of attention
don't be selfish
>all of your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
also hinged on them being actually interested in playing the game. if they're only there to throw dice at fantasy monsters, they're not there for the right reasons and you should find a group that wants to play a game, not gamble at a casino
>likely always the one who has to host it (and offer snacks)
shit players detected, GM should never have to buy snacks
>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point
then either learn to come up with content on the fly (challenging, but not impossible) or tell the players that you have a quest you would like them to follow, and if they don't follow it either out of spite for you or whatever reason, tell them then you can't have a session this week as everything you planned for is no longer being played. they'll either learn to follow your quests quickly or learn to leave, at which point it's a win for you either way
>drawing battlemaps
i will never understand why this became the norm for TTRPGs. i used to use pennies and dice on a grid of paper to represent characters and monsters, who the fuck needs graphically illustrated woods for your random orc encounter.


don't shitpost on Veeky Forums and expect anything to change, just ask for it and plenty of neckbeards here are willing to offer advice. believe it or not, threads that genuinely ask for help aren't met with shitters most of the time, it's the threads that are shitposts from the start that meet shitters frequently

You need to enjoy storytelling just as much as you enjoy writing.

If it's not working out for you, you may just be a bad/unskilled GM. Either that or you're lazy.

>Those ungrateful players!
>tfw literal slave.
>I just want to write my story, is it that hard for players to understand that? And if they could appreciate me and realize that I'M the real star of the show here, that would be great, too.
>They steal my lunch money, too!
>No fucking escape!
You sound laughably pathetic, OP. Your players sound pretty bad, but I'm picturing you like the type of person that bends over backwards for others and makes themselves miserable, but then just keeps stewing in their own spite and acting passive-aggressively instead of telling people what's wrong.

You're not just creating a world to showcase to your players and have them praise you for it when GMing. Just like how being a player isn't necessarily about your characters alone. If either of these were the sole purpose of a TTRPG, the game would be over as soon as the characters have been created and the setting described. Seeing your world come to life by having players take it somewhere you hadn't necessarily planned to ahead of time, have them interact, loathe and possibly get attached to the NPCs you make, pull the rug under their feet with a well set-up twist and see how they react; there's a lot more a GM gets to enjoy than just worldbuilding, enough to usually justify the extra effort if the group is a good one.

If this doesn't appeal to you, maybe you could try and have someone else be the GM, to put them in your shoes and give you a breather. Tell them you'll help them with some of the aspects of rule and design, then enjoy the break.

>GM's effort on one side, all the player's combined effort on the other.
Tips slightly towards GM; a little more if you're running convention games like me.
>Now do the same but with enjoyment
Balanced; tends to tip slightly towards GM for convention games.

Your bad effort management and lack of enjoyment boils down to using the wrong system and doing prep in all the wrong places.

The thing you quoted refers to
>all the work to entertain your players rather than yourself
>not the star of the show or the centre of attention
>enjoyment of the session depends on enjoyment of the players
>all your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point

I have a group of players who create interesting characters, engage with the game and actively strive to make the game smoother and more fun for everyone. You can have a fun game even if you put in work, but it requires cooperation.

>tonne
Why are British people bitches

Complaining is a national british hobby.

You would be too if your contry is over run by people you once conquered.

All the stuff you've listed as downsides of being GM is the exact reason why I find it fun.
Aside maybe the host part, since we take turns with this, so it's neither a pros nor a con for me.

But then again, I had an entire string of shit-tier GMs when I entered the hobby and each time I end up playing with some random Joe as GM is also awful experience, so guess I'm simply burned off from playing games as such, unless we are taking turns within my current group about it.

Also, have you tried it? You know, trading places in your group, so everyone runs a scenario for the rest of the group and nobody is "stuck" as GM or just shows up as a player all the time.

You know what they say - karma is a bitch.

OP sounds like a lazy pussy

I never really understood DM burnout. Most adventures and campaigns are a base story outline, with a lot of improvisation. Complex and rigid stories almost never survive contact with players. I actually find it interesting how the outcomes differ from what I had intended.

Dm burn out is diffrent from what OP is saying. It seems OP just does not enjoy being the DM.

OP, I'm not criticizing you, however you sound like you come from the 2nd Ed mindset. You likely create intricate stories, detailed dungeon maps, and want your adventures to go a specific way. Am I right?

I used to be the same way, and I noticed a lot of people who started D&D in 2nd Ed era, tend to have that same thought process. The idea of an epic tale in which the PC's are molded to fit into the story, is a common trait of 2nd Ed era.

If you can break that thought pattern and adopt a more bare bones setup where you allow the game to evolve naturally, rather than trying to railroad a a specific story, you will likely enjoy your gaming sessions more.

I'm trying to get into this setup with less detailed maps and such but I find it hard considering my gaming group is so big into detailed r20 maps and shit. How does one go about being less detailed?

It works best if you don't oblige every single person in the group to take a turn - just go with the enthusiastic people who actually want to GM. Then you get all the benefits of a round robin arrangement without having to sit through a shit campaign that the GM responsible for doesn't want to run in the first place.

Ideally, each GM should have a little run of sessions before you pass it over - 3-4 sessions of a mini arc in one campaign (like a full Cthulhu investigation or a complete mission in Shadowrun or whatever), 3-4 sessions in the next one.

I think it's really unfortunate that this entire thread is disparaging OP when I think he brings up sometimes valid complaints. People can say "find a better group, troll" but that's something that takes a lot of time, and sometimes you just want your friends to not be shitheads instead. Players getting spoiled easily would be my biggest complaint. Their characters did a cool thing before, so when their charcter faild to hit an enemy a couple times, it ruined the season, even though they had a good time talking and laughing with others, they leave with a bad takeaway and blame me. Because they tried to hit a ghost with a sword.

>it's all his fault
Nah gMing is sometimes a chore even for people who enjoy it

Veeky Forums posters have a bad habit of insulting first THEN trying to help. Like this guy. Ain’t no one gonna read your shit if you start off “You sound laughably pathetic”

Okay if I'm right, you likely draw symbols on your maps, like statues, beds, fireplaces, chests, etc. Things that could just as easily be described in text if you play online, or verbally if you have an in person group. Outside of walls and standard doors, you really don't need to draw in all the details, just the boundaries of the room and the visible doors. The actual lay out can be described without have to have it visually represented. This also allows you to change a room's layout on the fly, if something needs to be altered.

Just run a simple system and make the minimum necessary prep.
I won't run anything that requires more than a couple of pages to describe all the core rules.

>the rest is boring tedious shit
Only focus on the stuff that interests you and you get something out of.
>defining the latrines of your dungeon
Not relevant. Ecologyfaggotry is already bad, but even when you're not running a funhouse dungeon you shouldn't focus on inane details irrelevant to the game.
Orcs no longer shit. There you go.
>what eye colour the merchant has
Literally irrelevant.
>drawing battlemaps
Make your players draw the map. It's what D&D assumed anyway.
>and preparing dialogue
Don't. Just state NPC intentions and use that to wing it.

Think of it as collaborative storytelling and don't make everything totally planned. It should be you making most of the stuff up while they make up how they're responding to it.

Sounds like y'all should be playing pic related. Tiny amount of prep time, everyone works towards the storytelling, can be played with a few rocks of different sizes and/or colours, and a GM can go from not even thinking about GMing a session of it to having a session ready to go in about 30 minutes, if he's slow.

That's what I'd want to switch to, just describing everything simply, but this is usually what our maps end up looking like. Sans adding in even more shit. I'd much rather just map out the walls, maybe mark where items of interest are, and then say fuck it to the rest. I think my players would be too autistic to be able to deal with the change however.

Yeah I figured that's what it would look like. Sadly, when I started playing D&D, programs like this weren't available, so I was hand drawing all of this on graph paper with a pencil, ruler and compass, so I feel your pain.

Unfortunately the first step in the transition is often the hardest, as the players may object, but you just have to push forward, and play it by ear. With luck they'll accept the change within 3-4 sessions, however some resist longer, but you just have to be firm on the change. You can try to explain it if you wish, but don't back down.

And none of you entitled lazy fucks pick up the slack and DM a fucking game?

This is why I GMPC. I never end up powergaming either way and keep it fair as fuck for the other players.

>>fucktonne of work
>>fucktonne of prep time
Yes, at least more than the usual player. ON the other hand... I can run a good session (sometimes even two) with less prepp material than fits on one sheet of paper. Improvisation helps *a lot*.

>>all the work to entertain your players rather than yourself
If you don't enjoy running a game at all, GM'ing might not be for you or you need a break from it.

>>not the star of the show or the centre of attention
Who else is the centre of attention if not the GM? Everyone depends on you.

>>basically a more advanced computer on which the game is being played
You can play any online game with bots too. Playing with/against real persons is still more interesting.

>>enjoyment of the session depends on enjoyment of the players
That's most likely true for every player too, as it's a cooperative game.

>>all your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
Kinda true. But I also don't see this as a big hurdle. It can be tedious if all players are totally passive, but I never saw that actually happen irl.

>>always the one that has to organize the session (date, time, location, inform the group, etc)
That can be bothersome in the long run, yes. Currently I try to encourage my players to do that more on their own and created a Westmarches campaign for that. Group chats help. It started slowly but they are starting to initiate sessions now after the first few ones I started.

>>likely always the one who has to host it (and offer snacks)
Hosting can be beneficial too, because you don't have to run around town. But if you don't want that to be always the case, just make a rule for it, so everyone (who can) has to host from time to time.
At least give them incentive to host. I hand out OOG points and with those they can "buy" in-game content which furthers their personal quests/ambitions/etc.

Okay, fag, listen
>you get to create a world and masturbate over wattle and daub walls in the village
>you get to draw a motherfucking map with "here be dragons" on the edge
>in fact you have a whole notebook with cryptic notes and maps
>have I mentioned maps?
>you are a psychopath who feeds on the despair when the party finds immense wealth but the volcano erupts and they can't haul it through a crooked bridge over a chasm
>sometimes you also feed on their cookies
>you get to hear "thanks for the game" every week
>maps

It's a pre-game rule in my game that every player has to contribute snacks to the free-for-all snackpool. Except the GM and the host.

>>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point
Don't write elaborate stories beforehand. Train yourself to improvise. This also cuts A LOT of prep time as soon as you're good enough.
Taking another POV could help too.... I don't see it as "my" story but "ours" - which isn't really created beforehand, but during a session.

There are also tricks you can use to let players hit the story's cornerstones no matter what exactly they set out for (within reason of course). Look for GM tipps, there are good videos and books out there, to much to write down in one post.

>>if you're the GM you're likely stuck as the GM forever because 99% of people don't want to do all this shit
If you enjoy it, then that's only a minor problem imho. But I can understand that someone who GM'ed for years would like to see the table from the other side again. I guess... talking to your players would be a good course of action? Find out if somebody is interested and/or willing to, but maybe just isn't brave enough to step up or needs a slight nudge to get moving?

>>players just have to make a character, show up, and play the game
I expect my players to write enough backstory (and developing it further later on) so I always have enough adventure hooks at hand. While it's true that I, as the GM, have more prep to do, I redirect as much as I can. In the end, I spend maybe 1-2 hours prep time for an adventure that takes 6-10h playtime.

>players just have to make a character, show up, and play the game
I fucking wish. I do it for them most of the time. Fucking players.

>>you get to hear "thanks for the game" every week

Does this happen

haha

>fucktonne of work
Yes
>fucktonne of prep time
Yes again
>all the work to entertain your players rather than yourself
Entertaining people entertains me. It's like telling a good joke. I get to make up world and characters and do annoying voices and I find that fun.
>not the star of the show or the centre of attention
You're not the star, but your are the centre of attention. No matter how many players there are you'll be saying or doing something half of the time.
>basically a more advanced computer on which the game is being played
That actually makes it sound cooler to me
>enjoyment of the session depends on enjoyment of the players
Yes
>all your work is hinging on the players being interested and not passive
Yes and I fucking hate this
>always the one that has to organize the session (date, time, location, inform the group, etc)
You don't have to do that, say that you don't want to be the one to have to do this and that you want someone else to.
>likely always the one who has to host it (and offer snacks)
This also doesn't have to be true. Set up a rule of each person having to bring a snack or you won't share yours with them, or simply just don't provide snaks and let them know ahead of time.
>don't even have much control over your own story since the players decide what to do unless you railroad them which defeats the point
This isn't so bad.
>if you're the GM you're likely stuck as the GM forever because 99% of people don't want to do all this shit
Then when it's time for a new campaign you can use whatever system or homebrew rules you want and they'll have to stick with you.
>players just have to make a character, show up, and play the game
If there's 4 players and 1 gm, then each player is probably only going to spend about an 8th of the game time actually playing. You have to do much more prep work, but in exchange you get to not spend most of the time waiting.

Also OP, if you really feel this way you either need to have a serious talk with your players, find a new group, or drop the hobby for a while and do something else like video games or some gay shit like exercising.

I don't understand you people. In my group GM is a constantly contested position, with half of us wanting to be GM.
Have the regular GM set up a setting, some mysterious overarching goal which you're almost certain to ignore, and a place or organization or npc to to care about.
Make sure your setting is either outspace, a world composed mostly of islands, an absurdly massive complex of caverns, or have teleportation to different places or dimensions. This makes GMing less intimidating since they get to have stories that take place in spereate locations from the others, so they don't have to worry about being consistent with other people's stuff.
Let it be known that a GM doesn't have to follow the rules to an exact T, and if you're the established GM let them know they can ask you before or during for advice, help or even to take over for them if they give-up.
Don't force people into GMing, and don't have an established rotation other than the law of dibs.
Provide a mechanical advantage for player who's GMing. Like their character gets time to spend on a useful project behind the scenes, or receive some special training or some shit.
Let them know there' s magical thing called a module, and that you can direct them to a couple of them for free which they can use if they don't want to do as much work.

Maybe tell them to supply you with whatever battlemaps from the internet they think are cool, and that you'll at some point use them with some small modifications or whatever. I'm sure at least one of them will jump at the chance to give you a map that they think looks super rad, or even to give you a dungeon layout from some video game they like.

GMs think they're demiurges letting the PCs into their magical realms
PCs think GMs are glorified slaves that run the game for them

i feel you brother.

''so why not just be a player and actually do the RP in RPG?'' because if everyone is a player there is no game. also, gming is a shitty job and most players dont want to come even near that kind of responsability. and that is without saying that a lot of players cant roleplay themselves out of a cardboard box.

>he uses paper.
Pleb. Get a whiteboard and make a put a 25x25 dot grid on it, or get one of those eraseable roll-up maps.

agreed.
they say that to you? wow. you have grateful players......can you breed them to spread those kind of human beings?

>not having a desu ex machina self insert to beat the shit out of them whenever they do something ridiculously stupid

except when it makes for floaty worlds where nothing is certain. nothing break immersion more than a floaty world.

>Is there even any fucking point in being the GM?
It distracts from the pain inside

no it doesn't

It distracts from the pain with a different pain

Germanic peoples?

I think he means celts

Most of us don't care, and some aren't making a post to help you so much as make a point.

>Is there even any fucking point in being the GM?

That's why I've decided to take a very long break from GMing.

I want to have fun playing the game but nearly every way I have fun as a GM is wrong. And what fun I could have must take the backseat to player fun. It feels like I'm just supposed to do a ton of work just so some other people can have fun.

russians you retards!

being GM is the only time I get to be the center of attention of sorts

shame Veeky Forums is full of players and not DMs that jump at DMs throats as soon as they don't act as players want. So the only point you are making is that you are a cunt that shitposts on an echo chamber.

Tbqh, if a player thanked me for a game I'd probably be weirded out. It would be like if someone asked to use my bathroom and thanked me for letting them afterwards.

Writing a story or setting and sharing it with people is enough motivation for some

OP, you forgot
>Anything that goes wrong is the GMs fault no matter what
>GMs are supposed to constantly be reading and learning how to have fun the right way when it's not game time
>Players just have to show up

I wasn't even that dude, I'm telling you that people don't give a shit about your feelings on the internet. Veeky Forums is probably the nicest board on Veeky Forums, but you shouldn't be surprised if someone is rude.

Isn't Celt a large group of people including the insular celts such as the Britons?

I wasn't the first guy either but I'm tired of most of Veeky Forumss players.

Still I only put as much effort on a campaign I run as the players, and I've been stuck with players that can even be arsed to read the rules to make their characters, so I just made my own generic system that create characters in less than 5 minutes. Also I improvise EVERYTHING, to the point that whenever we come together (which is never) I just present 3 settings that fancy me that day and we do a 1 shot. If the players like it too much then we play a couple of sessions more.

Point is that as soon as a DM complains he is usually met with "you suck"

Honestly, I agree. Being the player is infinitely more fun, I'm going to try and revoke my eternal DM status but I don't know how, and if I do, it will almost definitely be the end of roleplaying in our social group.

>playing only heavy-prep games

kek

>leaving after a session
>punch GM in a stomach
>"you've been a good boy today. I'll be coming next week, prep something fun for me and the girls"
>his body shudders from both pain and pleasure
>"y-yes master"

I'm a forever DM but goddamn that made me crack up, user.

>tfw no players to bully me after each session

Am I the only one with a good group?

>Prep a lot of shit
>Everyone excited for new shit every session, asking questions about surroundings and lore, engages NPCs
>Buys beer and snacks for themselves during session, but gives me free shit because they see the work I put in away from the table for them
>Gets compliments about shit they like after the game and constructive criticism (I ask for criticism, it makes me DM better)
>all good friends IRL

Ya'll need some new friends

Try to be a little more carefree about the game and if it feels like work and nothing you do seems to make it better, can it or at least start charging.

>Point is that as soon as a DM complains he is usually met with "you suck"

This gets super tiring to hear everywhere you go. I'm tired of hearing players act like a GM is supposed to be their neutral unbiased fun dispenser and their enjoyment should just be from "telling their story" (but not too much because that's railroading) and presenting their players with situations (not fun unless your players make it fun for you).

I'm working on wrapping up my current games and I started looking for games online. It took me a couple of months to find a decent game but I'm having way more fun now.

My players do all that but buy shit for me because we play online and I do appreciate them. But I'm still getting burnt out and having less and less fun GMing.

You disgust me.

I bet you play for fun too.

Then be consistent, make a note of stuff after you do it. Your players will remember even if you don't.

Ofcourse user :)

I think you need to adjust your GMing to things that you find interesting or fun.
Personally I enjoy worldbuilding and making interesting NPCs that the PCs can interact with, and I mostly use dungeonlayouts from online and sprinkle in monsters as need be.
I might have prepared a couple of different types and throw them at the players as I see fit.

The key is to have the whole session be more organic and easy to improvise for me. I used to plan every encounter with timing for monsters to appear, places, etc. But when I wing it i find that the game flows better and I can have more fun with it.

I enjoy worldbuilding, interesting NPCs, and combat so I do gear my games to fit that. And I've definitely learned to improvise and the games do go smoothly but it just feels kinda empty at the end of the game. It feels like everything I've done was wrong and there was probably some way I could've done it better, and right now that responsibility isn't what I consider fun.

I've decided to just take a break and come back when I feel like I'll enjoy it again.

Same. I've got a pretty big group (8 players) and they're all interested in the campaign, they thank me after every game and say it's a lot of fun every time and that they can't wait for the next session.

Most of them are relatively new to roleplaying games though, so this enthusiasm might die out in a year or so

damn 8? I got 5 and i feel that makes combat drag out too long at times

Agreed. This dm better tell me his tricks or I'm going to find out where he lives and mail him print-outs of GURPS rules and modules.

I used to run with 7 so to compensate I would make combat more like rocket tag for both sides. Each turn had a significant impact whenever an attack landed. I also was more freeform with players doing "combo-attacks" with each other.

That's why I try to keep fighting to a minimum. When fights do inevitably break out, I try to make it so that just half the party is fighting to buy time for the other half, which is doing something else.

Of course, it does happen that the entire party fights (boss fights and the likes) but in those cases I make things a little unorthodox by making sure the enemy fights in unconventional ways (hit and run, ambushes, dirty tricks, magic and stuff like that).

What does the half of the party hat isn't involed do? Do they sit and listen, or do they go off into the corner to chat and eat?

>being this optimistic
Wow.

Gotta say, iguanamouth has gotten pretty good these past 4 years.

Keep in mind I don't FORCE things to be like that, I simply keep in mind a few tricks when designing sessions. There inevitably are fights in which I have to crunch through the entirety of the 8-men party, but they all agreed I should force them to make their decisions quickly in order not to slow down the game too much.

The reason they can't all fight at the same time could be any of these:
>The party needs to run from X, and there are obstacles on the way / doors to unlock / puzzles to solve in order to proceed
>The party needs to catch X, and they can't afford X running away with no one chasing it just because some enemies slow the party down
>There simply isn't enough room for the entire party to fight (narrow corridors, small buildings...)
>Obstacles preventing the melee characters from engaging, or the ranged characters from shooting.

Most of the latest sessions have been about role-playing, investigating and negotiating, though. There have been a few fights but they were mainly hostage skirmishes, except for one 1 on 1 duel.

>Do they sit and listen, or...?
Most of the time they do, but of course they get bored when it takes 10 minutes to let everyone have their turns, which is why I try to speed things up a bit when large scale fights do happen.

You a good gm user.

Thank you, but I think what most GMs need is just a good group that makes them feel like their work is appreciated.

Preparing sessions is fun as long as everyone involved really wants to play them and looks forward to them.

GMing fucking sucks, but my group has rotating campaigns every 3 months and everyone has to run something.
I just run light-hearted gimmick shit now.

My current campaign is just 5e except I stole all the maps from various Tactics RPGs, gave each square a rough durability rating, and told everyone to make characters based around shoving enemies off cliffs and through walls.

So just half-ass it. The whole deal is just an excuse for people to come to your house and steal all your food and soda anyways.

I came in here just to brag. Also all the players have some interest in GMing so we swap GMs and systems often to try new things out.

If preparing for sessions took actual time and effort I'd hate it too. "Session prep" for me usually means daydreaming about my world and how it all works and all the cool shit that could be in it, then write down notes. If I'm feeling lazy I don't even have to do that if I don't want to most of the time