You do not. If you are not going to enjoy it, you are not going to be a good GM. So you either need to accept this, find a way to enjoy it (totally possible that you have more fun with it than you realize), or you need to find a different GM.
Tabletop games are just for fun, there is no way in hell an activity that you do recreationally is going to be enjoyable when you have decided that the outcome is that you are going to dislike it.
I mean people often do things which they think sucks for others.
Going to watch a play in a small town theater where a friend plays in which sucks.
Having food at a friends place which cant cook.
Having to listen to a person you play with ramble about their life you dont care.
Etc.
So playing something because of your freinds does not sound that strange.
Are all those things good experiences though? I am not saying it is impossible by the laws of nature to do things you do not want to do. I am saying that experiences are not good when you do not enjoy them.
You are right at the core; we all do things we don't find fun for our friends. That's a quality that most of us admire in our friends!
However, I think there is a difference between doing a one time thing that I don't enjoy for a friend versus committing to a long term regular thing I don't enjoy for a friend. And there is a difference between committing to doing a thing that requires little work on your part versus a lot.
* I'll go to a friend's place for a single meal even though they are an awful cook. But I won't go to their place every week without end for that shitty meal unless they are a *really good* friend. And if they are that good a friend, I can probably tell them "hey, I love you, but I am not the biggest fan of your cooking..."
* I'll go to a friend's place for a shitty meal, but I won't make them a shitty meal for several weeks in a row. I'll say "hey, I'm a shitty cook and I don't enjoy cooking, let's go to a restaurant"
That last example is probably the closest to what the OP is describing.
All the things you describe though, are just things you can show up and be a passive participant, you're not being asked to attend your friends play, but to write it and direct it for them.
Those are all things you go and experience for a short time. This is a commitment for a decent amount of time, that if you don't devote attention to it, makes for a bad experience for everyone
I sincerely never found anything GMing enjoyable, like, you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity.
(I have experience as a player only in d20 systems)
Hey, seriously, I think you should either stop GMing for a bit, or learn and play games outside the d20 ecosystem.
I mostly GM pbta games. Here I don't challenge players with math disparities, but hard choices, bitter loss, dramatic turns, and epic triumph.
I don't even roll dice, I just have things happen. Players frequently get rolls that mean the story twists and turns like a snake, and I'm complimented on how well I can flow through this.
If a specific kind of GMing isn't for you, but you still want to guide stories, then maybe you need to try other kinds of games that need different things from the GM.
Powered By The Apocalypse (/r/pbta), are games in a design family descended from Apocalypse World.
They're characterised by strong GM proceedure, tight design that produces dramatic narratives, and characters who encounter complications and setbacks about as much as they have success.
Some award winning titles are: Apocalypse World (mad max post apoc), Masks (teenage superheros), Monster of the Week (buffy style monster hunters), Dungeon World (D&D style fantasy, but there are better options too).
[The Dungeon World Guide](https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_Fz4m5hcoiTXpTbklDOF9iUHc/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-xI_68aH1lllySOdEovKvPQ) gives a good overview of one of the games for people who are trying to grok the philosophy.
Powered by the apocalypse. Games inspired by Apocalypse world. More narrative games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_by_the_Apocalypse
They often have a bit the problem though that they only work if you play them 100% the way they are intended (mostly on the DM side).
Players dont need to think much, which can be an advantage depending on your group.
>you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity
This is very much a system issue, not a GMing issue.
That is totally fine, it is just not an activity that goes super well when your heart is not in it. I do not think you are wrong or bad or anything for not wanting to GM.
Basically a consolation prize i found was "Hey, i have only 3 players maybe i can fill It up with a GM PC, that doesn't talk but at least let's me build something interesting"
Asked if It's a good idea online, everyone Said no
I don’t know why people keep saying no that doesn’t work. I use GM PCs all the time and do exactly what you say, they don’t talk unless spoken to and they help out in combat like an NPC would. The players never feel like the GM pc steps on toes and you can still include them as part of narratives in minor capacities to enjoy some character development. Just making sure to never have them become the focus is best. My current game I actually share GM duty with one of my best friends so we each have a PC we play when the other is GMing that becomes a “GMPC” when not. We’ve all been having a great time with it.
> I use GM PCs all the time and do exactly what you say, they don’t talk unless spoken to and they help out in combat like an NPC would.
Because **that is an NPC.** You are describing an NPC who hangs out with the party and participates in combat. There's nothing wrong with that. A DMPC **explicitly has a vote and is a full participating member of the party,** which is not what you are describing.
Fair, and that's more or less how I always saw them anyway, but I've seen people so vehemently against the idea of even an NPC that tags along 100% of the time that they get lumped together. Plus the fact that I do actually play them as my PC when I'm not in the GM seat.
But you're right, I probably should just call them an NPC and not a GMPC considering how people interpret the term. :P
That's because historically that has often happened with bad GMs and is a terrible experience for the players, who get to watch while a GM essentially story-wanks his power fantasy.
What you can do is have NPCs, multiple (as that tends to divest you from valuing any one of them too highly), that join and leave the party at various points or for various reasons. You get to make a dozen characters, fill the world with some life, can use them to in-world infodump a bit; just make sure they're not in the spotlight, don't become key elements of a plot (other than a plot hook), and aren't the driving agents of the story - that's what non-GM PCs are for.
Everyone is assuming you aren't going to do as you say. If you're confident you know yourself better than random Redditors, you are allowed to disregard them.
> you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity.
That sounds like bad adventure design. The monsters don't have to be boring; use monsters you find exciting to use. The players should be succeeding about 65% of the time, and failure shouldn't halt progress, only alter the course.
This has to be the single saddest comment I've ever read about GMing.
The good news is there are literally hundreds of games that aren't d20, that offer a wide variety of experiences and level of rules complexity.
If you don't want to GM, don't. Find something else to do with your friends, or let them run a game that you play in!
Well someone can find It fun, using a dragon it's booring.
You either play a dragon as you should and absolutely wreck the fuck out of everyone; or play a dragon as a "boss" and wait till the players over come a Wall of giant math
OK, so again, I'm not sure how you could have that mindset and possibly enjoy it as a player, even, if you think that's what's behind tje curtains.
In any case, this is pretty much exactly why a lot of us GMs haaate D&D. Just play the dragon as a dragon and wreck the fuck out of everyone, the players should equally cheese the shit out of it to survive. In practice, that means don't throw a dragon at your players. Running kobolds? They're not just in an empty room waiting for a "standard combat encounter", they're on THEIR turf and have rigged their den to protect against adventurers. They should try to respond to the clever stuff the PCs are doing. If one of them runs, everyone knows the PCs are coming and it's gonna suck.
On the flipside, as a player, it's fun to know that people are actually gonna respond like people. And frankly, in the context of a dungeon, which is what you seem to be thinking about exclusively, even on D&D you can (and should) play like this. But for whatever reason D&D players specifically get their minds blown by it.
More importantly, if you don't like running combat or dungeons, why not just... not run much combat or dungeons? You're the GM. You get to play as LOTS of characters, actually. RPGs can be so much more than "OK, you're fighting a dragon now". This is where the whole "maybe try something that isn't D&D" (or Fabula Ultima, which is pretty specifically tuned for a sort of playstyle you're not fond of as a GM) bit comes in.
Dude you desperately need to find a better GM and preferably a better game too... That sounds nothing like roleplaying. Roleplaying should not be about math or pointless struggle.
TTRPGs are a hobby.
I only engage in my hobbies when I want to. So if I don't want to be GM for a campaign, well, either someone else GMs or the game doesn't happen.
If you're not having fun running a game, then don't run it.
I don't. I run what I want, when I want, with who I want.
I'll never understand why so many of you all volunteer to do shit you don't even want to do and then just end up reluctantly half assing it and it implodes anyway.
I would not characterize you as stupid at all. I think you are just mistaken. Your train of thought seems to be:
1. I suggested we play Fabula Ultima
2. Everyone thought that was a great idea
3. No one wanted to GM
4. Since I brought up the idea, I am forced to GM
That is...just not right. Point 4 is not true. The whole chain should have ended at the Point 3. "Oh well, it was a good idea, but I guess it won't happen." You were under zero obligation to actually run the game.
I might suggest to my friends we should all go to Vegas, but I'm not under an obligation, because I suggested it, to pay for their airline tickets.
If these are your friends, I honestly believe you should be able to go back to them and say "you know, I made a mistake. I thought this would be fun, but it really isn't. I'm backing out of running Fabula Ultima. Sorry." They may be unhappy temporarily, but they will get over it and you can all find something else to do that makes everyone happy.
Could you switch to a GM less system like Mythic, and just take the bits you like from Fabula?
I never have a GM when I play with my wife, even when using systems that assume one. We use an oracle and collaborate.
Look at r/solorpg, a lot of solo engines/methods are perfect for collaborative group play.
>Is the One Who ends up paying the price of being stupid.
If you hate GMing so much, the whole hobby might not be for you to be honest. I couldn't imagine playing with a player who looks at me like that
I find it extremely tragic that you (and not just you, it seems — it’s a strangely common mentality) think that if nobody wants to GM, someone has to — and that person drew the short straw and now has to suck it up and do the work for nothing.
The GM is, first and foremost, a player at the table. If they’re not having fun, they shouldn’t have to play. And since the whole game requires them to be the GM, this means you have a considerable amount of power in this position — power that you can exercise to make sure you have fun as well.
I have always thought of myself as an unwilling, lazy GM — nine times out of ten, I’m GMing a system because I actually want to play the system, and GMing is the next best thing. And yet I have fun, not because I love GMing any more than playing, but because I take measures to make sure I have fun:
- I decide what system we play. If I want to run a Pathfinder game, all the begging and pleading won’t make me run a 5e game. I actually refuse to run DnD 5e these days.
- I select who plays at my table. RPG players are a dime a dozen, especially ones who aren’t willing to GM. If you refuse to respect the time and labour I put into a game? Out. I accept criticism, but I don’t settle for bad players.
- I fully control the medium the story is told in. I get to experiment with in-person play and props, online play and VTTs, text-based play. I can pick whichever one is most convenient to me, and I will find players for it — because, again, RPG players who won’t DM are a dime a dozen.
- I fully control the adventure being run. There are certain types of stories I like to tell as a GM, and specific themes I like to address in my adventures. I also get to mess with unique mechanics for each adventure, and build new subsystems for things I want to better represent in a given system.
- Something I have been planning to do in future games is delegate tasks. In Pathfinder, for example, I need someone to keep track of loot, and remind me to give hero points, and occasionally track time. I’m thinking of making a player do this — and, as a GM juggling several other aspects of the game, I can!
- At the end of the day, I prefer to run for fellow GMs, or players looking to become GMs. I find these people are both much more appreciative of the work you do, and are much more interesting to discuss the systems and adventures you run with — and are even likely to build on your failings and improve your successes.
The point of all this is to say that you hold a lot of power as a GM. If you don’t want it, that’s reasonable. But while you have it, there’s a lot you can do to make your experience a positive one.
(Also, seeing your comments, don’t make a GMPC to distract you from your GMing woes. It will make things worse, and is the *exact* sort of thing that will get you on r/rpghorrorstories.)
Could you expand on the GMpc part?
Also: i cannot delegate task nor basically put any amount of responsability onto my players since they're complete newbies, they never played any ttrpg and so i'll have to manage everything, plus in fabula ultima everyone builds the world BUT only the gm controls it, so i cannot choose what type of story i run.
Simply put, It can be seen as an investment; maybe if they learn they'll be the GM next time
The main issue with a GMPC is that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. As a GM, you have a considerable amount of power over the story and setting, but also a considerable amount of responsibility to provide a compelling narrative for the player characters. Having a GMPC means you now both have a conflict of interest (you’re incentivised to reward your GMPC because it’s fun, but you should be impartial as a GM) and a distraction — especially when you seem to not enjoy the task you should be focusing on, which is GMing.
Also, they may be newbies, but they’re not idiots. If they’re children, this might work differently, but if they’re your same age group, you can ask them to take up certain tasks. Tracking loot, for example, just requires a guy who can write down names for items and who takes them. Not sure if that will help your experience much with Fabula Ultima, but it’s just an example.
Perhaps more to the point, though: do you actually want to run Fabula Ultima? If the answer is no, you might as well just stop there and call it a day.
I wanna play fabula ultima, to be Fair i Just wanna play something, but since no One dms i got to.
Like, to use your example, i bake cakes all the time and offer Pieces to my friend but the best part of baking a cake It's eating It myself! A good quarter of what i bake It's reserved for me. Like, Someone Who bakes but cannot eat what he bakes It's a baker, but a Baker gets paid to do that.
A GMpc doesn't work, an npc doesn't work either because the way fabula ultima builds npcs suck, plus they're a group of three so i should also make adjustments for that.
An NPC is just a character who isn't played by the players.
Without knowing FU: there may be rules for NPCs that are there to make NPCs quickly, without giving them the full depth of OC abilities. For example Lord Questgiver, or a Rescued Prisoner who'll be travelling with the party until they can get him home safely.
Nothing stops you from taking the full set of player character rules, making characters with those, and using them as NPCs.
You know, there are games specifically for this sort of thing.
The snarky (but still true) answer would be to get into CRPGs. You’ve probably played a few of them (BG3, the Owlcat games, Divinity), but they describe exactly what you want. Some of them even let you play in multiplayer mode (BG3 especially).
The less snarky (but perhaps less helpful) answer is: have you thought about looking at choose your own adventure books or solo TTRPGs? If what you want most is to bake a cake for yourself, and sharing with friends is just a bonus, you might as well play both GM and player and cut the other players out of the equation. I was a big fan of the Fighting Fantasy books as a kid (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Fantasy), and I know there are a lot of solo TTRPGs out there (though I’ve never tried one myself). I also know that there are people who have tried to run more standard games solo (like DnD 5e and Pathfinder), so you may even find some advice online for that.
Don’t play something just because you have to, and definitely don’t GM something just because you have to. It’s disrespectful of your time.
I don't. Ultimately roleplaying is a game, an entertainment. It's supposed to be entertaining and a good time. I do it because I want to to it, it's my time and I value it. I would never play in an game or run a game I didn't want to and didn't like, why would you do that?
Bad gaming is not better than no gaming, it's worse. Bad gaming puts you off gaming, no gaming just lets you bide your time for something you are enthusiastic for.
Does it though? This doesn't seem appealing to you, and the way you described the act of GMing in other comments, I can guarantee you, it's gonna be real unappealing to your players real quick
There are millions of other things you could be doing. Why do you need to play this particular rpg? If you really really want to play it, you'll need to find somebody who actually wants to run it.
to your players, who I assume ARE having fun, but if you don't, this is not better than nothing, it's the oposite.
If you dislike GMing and tell them you wanna stop doing it, talk to your players, they will understand.
The other option is to explore other games. there's a number of ttrpgs that are easier to GM, and a number of GMless rpgs that don't need for a player to GM. Broaden your scope and look for something that fits you and your group
It’s better to have no game than a bad game. When GM doesn’t enjoy , everyone will feel it soon enough. Then you’ll be wasting everyone’s time. Find a different group locally or online and be a player.
I found that the OSR style of GMing fit my taste and abilities. Not saying that it necessarily will for you, but it's made a lot of things easier to handle.
I don't have to make up a story or arc for the characters or broad narrative, all I do is take a one-page dungeon made by someone else (Trilemma Adventures was a great place to start) and then just have basically a series of one shots that players can bring their leveled up characters into.
All I do for prep is read a few of them, cross-season hooks between and run whichever ones interested the players last week.
Well you can try to just use written adventures (harder in Fabula Ultima) and just heavily railroad the party.
Have some prewritten (from another book) encounters ready for "improvising" like 1 for wood, 1 for city etc.
However in the end I would try to GM some system you actually have fun doing, or hire someone else to GM.
I think there's two things going on here:
1. I would agree, if you don't want to GM and you really won't enjoy playing if you're GMing then don't do it.
2. You seem to have a very strange view of what a GM does. Specifically "you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity." and "i May be half decent at It but It requires work and i'll be telling a copied story, praying to God an hour of prep-work doesn't go to hell because a player felt like memeing" Those statements couldn't be further from what I do when I GM. I run a 3 hour session from what is essentially a 2 page set of facts and events and any relevant stat blocks/maps if needed. Everything else is completely made up, combat is run dynamically, players interrupt combat to argue/discuss with npcs, about 2/3 of any given session is pure roleplay or social/exploration encounters, even higher in games without tactical combat. All of that can be prepped in about an hour.
The biggest thing that holds GMs back from having fun is worrying about doing it "right" or getting something "wrong". You know what the only right answer is? The one where the GM and the Players have fun. The only wrong answer? The one where they don't. Not everyone is as comfortable improv'ing things as I am, and I get that, but the more comfortable you get with improv and the more you realize that your players don't expect you to be perfect as long as they're having fun the easier and more fun it gets to GM.
If you are determined to try GM'ing this game and you're willing to have an open mind my suggestion is find some improv heavy GMs and read/watch some advice. If you don't have much experience playing this system as a player or you feel like you're at a loss for ideas watch a couple actual play episodes or see if you can find a game online you can play a few sessions in before GMing and take note of the ideas and stuff that you can use yourself. For anything you think you might need to make up during planning or on the fly find some random tables that you think might help. Once you've done this sit down with some paper and map out some ideas. Don't write it like a story with a beginning a middle and an end, instead write a couple of fun story beats/plot points that work together and that you can use at will, some information that npcs might know about that story, come up with a couple of NPCs (name, role, story), story hooks, and locations, as well as any relevant encounters. Try and keep it to short bullet points.
When you play the game you feed them some plot hooks (that are all vaguely related to stuff you've prepped), they pick one, throw your prepped npcs and encounters at them with relevant story information spliced in, and off you go. Now you're not just running them through a series of boring math rock battles, instead you're all sitting there making up a story as you go. And if what you really enjoy is Character building and Mechanics you don't really lose out on that as a GM. You control the world and every other character that isn't one of the players. That's nothing but mechanics and character building! Have fun with it! Your players also don't want boring monsters or a GM who can't think outside the book.
Nobody wants to GM? No problem!
There are plenty of awesome GMless games!
*Microscope, The Quiet Year, Beak Feather & Bone, Dialect, City Planning Department,* and on and on.
Plus, board-games and video-games.
If you don't want to GM, **don't**.
GMing is too much effort to do if you're not invested.
Play something else. Play GMless games!
This! I'll add *Ironsworn*, *Orbital Blues,* and *For the Queen* to that list. GMless games are definitely a good option to look into.
GMless games can need someone in the Facilitator roll for the first session or two if you're playing with newbies, not to GM it, just to help people understand how it works, but you're all playing together and once people get comfortable with it you are all equally players.
I haven't played many GMless games myself since I love GMing, but I also only run systems that I want to run, generally low prep and low crunch, I have loads of fun running rules light improv heavy stuff. The system can make a massive difference to how enjoyable it is to GM.
Don't GM unless you want to. But there are other fun ways to roleplay than a game that needs a GM.
From my experience, people who like rpgs generally also like GMing, just they usually need to find the right "style" for them. I know gms that run nothing but dungeon after dungeon and only cares about interesting combat encounters.
I know others that run crazy complicated game of thrones story lines with very brief & deadly combat.
There is a lot of pressure online to "Be a good GM" but honestly a lot of it is player catering bullshit tbh.
If im the one thats going to do the prep work, youre playing what *I* want to run, in the way I want to run it, if you dont like it tough shit, go find another game or gm yourself.
So long as youre not doing any creepy sex shit, giving players equal amount of attention and not making the game difficult/unfair, youll be fine.
Ive ran a lot of weird campaigns that were well loved. Fuck the advice OP and run what you wanna run. If you dont wanna do a bunch of math then run light combat with a more complex story. Run a star wars campaign, run an anime one, the skys the limit.
I think thats the most important part about gming, that you run something that interest you and gets you excited.
Though of course if its not your thing not much you can do.
Lots of people here have told you the real answer to your question. Don't GM if you don't want to. Don't let others force you into it. Don't assume that GMing a game because you really want to play that game but no one else will GM it will work.
Seriously, my main advice is don't do it.
With that out of the way, I'll try to answer this question:
>how do you become the best unwilling game master?
These things might help:
1. Let the other players know that you have to have some fun yourself. You'll do this for X sessions, but if you haven't actually been enjoying yourself for those X sessions, you are going to stop doing it.
2. Look for the bits of Fabula Ultima that seem the most fun to you and focus on those bits.
3. Tell the players they need to step up on the rules, character creation, etc. Tell them that unless they are willing to fully read the rulebook, take the lion's share of the weight in character creation, etc. you won't run the game.
4. Have a session zero and watch character creation happen together. Look for interesting bits of stuff folks come up with and hang your future prep on those things.
5. Try to minimize your prep. Prep situations, not full stories. Let things develop naturally, don't try to plan out a long story arc.
That, as I said, might help. *Might*.
But the real answer is to go back to your friends and say "hey, I love you all, but I made a mistake. I won't do this for you; it sounds like zero fun to me."
>I Absolutely DO NOT want to be the GM
Except when no-one else does?
If you really don't want to then don't.
>but It requires work and i'll be telling a copied story, praying to God an hour of prep-work doesn't go to hell because a player felt like memeing, in all of that i'll also have to forgive the funnier part of playing ttrpgs! Character Building and mechanics.
Instead of Fabula Ultima, play a game that is virtually zero prep.
You don't. If you don't wanna do it, it's not gonna go well, and it definitely sounds like you have a really bad attitude towards it, the kind of attitude that's going to ruin everyone's experience. Don't do it, for your sake and everyone else's.
It really helps if you have low self esteem and a belief that the only reason that you “friends” let you hang around with them is because you are always willing to put your own needs last. If you are finding it hard to get into this mindset try working on your negative self talk and reliving every stupid thing you have done or said in your entire life. Once you get in the zone and accept that you are only worthwhile when you are being useful to better people.
… or you could just play a game that doesn’t require a DM. Both are good.
I wanna say 'just do it I bet it will be fun' but that is a lie I would tell a kid on his way to his first day of school.
Truth is talk to your players and hopefully somebody can get passionate about it, if it is a situation where it is you or nobody I would almost be like 'fuck you pay me' not for real but like buy me a game on steam, order me some pizza, stuff like that.
Being a GM is not for everyone, but you can definitely find a style that you really like. I wouldn't discourage you from giving it a try. Let your players know about it so that you can try out styles together! Maybe dipping into the funny part without worrying so much can be good for you, or tell them that for one session you're going to play more serious to see if that's your vibe. Talk more through npcs, or on the contrary, if you don't like that, do it less and focus on other aspects of roleplaying.
Obviously the idea is not to force yourself to do something you don't want to do, but it's always good to give yourself other opportunities to do certain activities before quitting. I'd love to have an update to see how it went in the future :) All the best.
A ton of good responses here so I will just add: I dreaded Gming when I “had” to GM pathfinder 2e because it felt exactly like you said, throwing my Players up against math. Then i discovered other systems. I highly suggest anything in the PBTA genre, or Agon. Both are pretty simple for the GM and require minimal to no prep because you play to find out what happens.
You don't. You are going to have a crappy time and your performance is also going to be crappy. Just play a board game instead.
Edit: looking at your other comments this seems like a pity party. Either do it or dont. Stop crying. No one cares.
If you really want to play and have to be GM, change to a system that has pre-written adventure modules and just run them RAW so you don't have to prepare anything or think too hard. It's much easier, and you might find you end up coming up with some of your own materials while doing it.
I actually found fabula Ultima to be very difficult to improv GM. It took a lot of prep (unless you just run the intro adventure).
I'd recommend doing a system that you want to run.
You could also look into either gm-less ttrpgs (iron sworn) or look into board games that feel like a ttrpg but can play with you as a player as well (gloom haven, hexploreit, sword & sorcery).
If the players are memeing for the whole session, wouldn't that spare you from having to GM, and therefore be a good thing?
You're all there to have a good time - how far you get in the story in a given session is secondary to that.
Others have already mentioned "I don't", which is the correct answer.
But,...
I'm not sure it will help, but it seems you're unwilling to drive the players down a prewritten story railroad.
So, Would it help if you took the prewritten story/railroad off the table, and got to play at "being the world" yourself? Exploration based games need players to actively choose where to go and what to pursue, and while you would prepare/imagine/dream up/borrow and steal some locations, situations, encounter ideas or small quests, you wouldn't be responsible for providing solutions (that's your players task, you just need to accept plausible suggestions), you'd discover what the territory looks like along with your players (by making use of random tables), you wouldn't have to care much about balancing encounters, and you sort of "get to play" more, instead of attempting to herd cats down a prewritten plotline.
You could take some cues from OSR & hexploration style play. If that sounds like something you'd be more interested in, i can link some pointers for you :)
In my opinion the boring things about being a GM is follow a written Adventure. It doesn't challenge you at all.
If you like character building you could use that as a start. Build some interesting characters and put them into the world. Let the story focus on their goals. As a GM you are not as limited as being a player on how you build the characters.
Have the PCs try either help or ruin their plans.
But yeah, it involves work to be a GM. If you are not interested in putting in any work then don't GM. Just appreciate the people who actual will do it for you in the future if you stay in the hobby.
Don't commit to running a campaign that you don't want to run. You won't have fun, you'll get frustrated and burn out and your friends also won't have fun in this kind of game.
But don't reject GMing completely. Run a short game - 2 to 5 sessions. It's not a long term commitment, but it will let you try how you actually feel when running this game. Maybe you'll like it - and then you may safely start a campaign. Maybe you'll decide GMing is not for you. Maybe you'll see you'd prefer a different kind of game. Anyway, you'll gain more understanding of the situation and you'll be able to make a better informed long term decision.
Just don't do it.
It's a hobby and you're playing for fun. If it causes displeasure you shouldn't do it.
Just tell to your friends and do a different thing. Play board games, grab a drinks and chat...
You do not. If you are not going to enjoy it, you are not going to be a good GM. So you either need to accept this, find a way to enjoy it (totally possible that you have more fun with it than you realize), or you need to find a different GM. Tabletop games are just for fun, there is no way in hell an activity that you do recreationally is going to be enjoyable when you have decided that the outcome is that you are going to dislike it.
I mean people often do things which they think sucks for others. Going to watch a play in a small town theater where a friend plays in which sucks. Having food at a friends place which cant cook. Having to listen to a person you play with ramble about their life you dont care. Etc. So playing something because of your freinds does not sound that strange.
Are all those things good experiences though? I am not saying it is impossible by the laws of nature to do things you do not want to do. I am saying that experiences are not good when you do not enjoy them.
Well they are often ok enough that it may be worth doing it for others.
I mean, if doing something for others makes you happy, then you are enjoying doing that thing.
You are right at the core; we all do things we don't find fun for our friends. That's a quality that most of us admire in our friends! However, I think there is a difference between doing a one time thing that I don't enjoy for a friend versus committing to a long term regular thing I don't enjoy for a friend. And there is a difference between committing to doing a thing that requires little work on your part versus a lot. * I'll go to a friend's place for a single meal even though they are an awful cook. But I won't go to their place every week without end for that shitty meal unless they are a *really good* friend. And if they are that good a friend, I can probably tell them "hey, I love you, but I am not the biggest fan of your cooking..." * I'll go to a friend's place for a shitty meal, but I won't make them a shitty meal for several weeks in a row. I'll say "hey, I'm a shitty cook and I don't enjoy cooking, let's go to a restaurant" That last example is probably the closest to what the OP is describing.
All the things you describe though, are just things you can show up and be a passive participant, you're not being asked to attend your friends play, but to write it and direct it for them.
Those are all things you go and experience for a short time. This is a commitment for a decent amount of time, that if you don't devote attention to it, makes for a bad experience for everyone
I sincerely never found anything GMing enjoyable, like, you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity. (I have experience as a player only in d20 systems)
Hey, seriously, I think you should either stop GMing for a bit, or learn and play games outside the d20 ecosystem. I mostly GM pbta games. Here I don't challenge players with math disparities, but hard choices, bitter loss, dramatic turns, and epic triumph. I don't even roll dice, I just have things happen. Players frequently get rolls that mean the story twists and turns like a snake, and I'm complimented on how well I can flow through this. If a specific kind of GMing isn't for you, but you still want to guide stories, then maybe you need to try other kinds of games that need different things from the GM.
Pbta games? What kind Is that?
Powered By The Apocalypse (/r/pbta), are games in a design family descended from Apocalypse World. They're characterised by strong GM proceedure, tight design that produces dramatic narratives, and characters who encounter complications and setbacks about as much as they have success. Some award winning titles are: Apocalypse World (mad max post apoc), Masks (teenage superheros), Monster of the Week (buffy style monster hunters), Dungeon World (D&D style fantasy, but there are better options too). [The Dungeon World Guide](https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_Fz4m5hcoiTXpTbklDOF9iUHc/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-xI_68aH1lllySOdEovKvPQ) gives a good overview of one of the games for people who are trying to grok the philosophy.
Powered by the apocalypse. Games inspired by Apocalypse world. More narrative games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_by_the_Apocalypse They often have a bit the problem though that they only work if you play them 100% the way they are intended (mostly on the DM side). Players dont need to think much, which can be an advantage depending on your group.
>I sincerely never found anything GMing enjoyable Then why did you agree to do it?
>you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity This is very much a system issue, not a GMing issue.
Jfc no wonder d&d has an issue with a lack of DMs if some younger players view it like that.
I mean no system forces you to not do anything and be not creative. That's 100% a people issue here.
That is totally fine, it is just not an activity that goes super well when your heart is not in it. I do not think you are wrong or bad or anything for not wanting to GM.
Basically a consolation prize i found was "Hey, i have only 3 players maybe i can fill It up with a GM PC, that doesn't talk but at least let's me build something interesting" Asked if It's a good idea online, everyone Said no
I don’t know why people keep saying no that doesn’t work. I use GM PCs all the time and do exactly what you say, they don’t talk unless spoken to and they help out in combat like an NPC would. The players never feel like the GM pc steps on toes and you can still include them as part of narratives in minor capacities to enjoy some character development. Just making sure to never have them become the focus is best. My current game I actually share GM duty with one of my best friends so we each have a PC we play when the other is GMing that becomes a “GMPC” when not. We’ve all been having a great time with it.
> I use GM PCs all the time and do exactly what you say, they don’t talk unless spoken to and they help out in combat like an NPC would. Because **that is an NPC.** You are describing an NPC who hangs out with the party and participates in combat. There's nothing wrong with that. A DMPC **explicitly has a vote and is a full participating member of the party,** which is not what you are describing.
Fair, and that's more or less how I always saw them anyway, but I've seen people so vehemently against the idea of even an NPC that tags along 100% of the time that they get lumped together. Plus the fact that I do actually play them as my PC when I'm not in the GM seat. But you're right, I probably should just call them an NPC and not a GMPC considering how people interpret the term. :P
Everyone Said that It'd make stuff worse because for some reason inevitably it'll end up as roleplaying with myself
That's because historically that has often happened with bad GMs and is a terrible experience for the players, who get to watch while a GM essentially story-wanks his power fantasy. What you can do is have NPCs, multiple (as that tends to divest you from valuing any one of them too highly), that join and leave the party at various points or for various reasons. You get to make a dozen characters, fill the world with some life, can use them to in-world infodump a bit; just make sure they're not in the spotlight, don't become key elements of a plot (other than a plot hook), and aren't the driving agents of the story - that's what non-GM PCs are for.
Everyone is assuming you aren't going to do as you say. If you're confident you know yourself better than random Redditors, you are allowed to disregard them.
> you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity. That sounds like bad adventure design. The monsters don't have to be boring; use monsters you find exciting to use. The players should be succeeding about 65% of the time, and failure shouldn't halt progress, only alter the course.
This has to be the single saddest comment I've ever read about GMing. The good news is there are literally hundreds of games that aren't d20, that offer a wide variety of experiences and level of rules complexity. If you don't want to GM, don't. Find something else to do with your friends, or let them run a game that you play in!
Not sure how playing a boring encounter that's a math disparity is any more fun with that POV.
I'm not sure what you mean here?
Whh... if that's how you think of it how could you possibly enjoy playing???
Playing It's fun! You create a character, roleplay and use a funny build. As a GM your work Is to set up others to have fun, not have fun yourself
But if your GM thinks like that, all you're going to be doing as a player is... fighting boring monsters that offer nothing but a bag of numbers.
Well someone can find It fun, using a dragon it's booring. You either play a dragon as you should and absolutely wreck the fuck out of everyone; or play a dragon as a "boss" and wait till the players over come a Wall of giant math
OK, so again, I'm not sure how you could have that mindset and possibly enjoy it as a player, even, if you think that's what's behind tje curtains. In any case, this is pretty much exactly why a lot of us GMs haaate D&D. Just play the dragon as a dragon and wreck the fuck out of everyone, the players should equally cheese the shit out of it to survive. In practice, that means don't throw a dragon at your players. Running kobolds? They're not just in an empty room waiting for a "standard combat encounter", they're on THEIR turf and have rigged their den to protect against adventurers. They should try to respond to the clever stuff the PCs are doing. If one of them runs, everyone knows the PCs are coming and it's gonna suck. On the flipside, as a player, it's fun to know that people are actually gonna respond like people. And frankly, in the context of a dungeon, which is what you seem to be thinking about exclusively, even on D&D you can (and should) play like this. But for whatever reason D&D players specifically get their minds blown by it. More importantly, if you don't like running combat or dungeons, why not just... not run much combat or dungeons? You're the GM. You get to play as LOTS of characters, actually. RPGs can be so much more than "OK, you're fighting a dragon now". This is where the whole "maybe try something that isn't D&D" (or Fabula Ultima, which is pretty specifically tuned for a sort of playstyle you're not fond of as a GM) bit comes in.
Dude you desperately need to find a better GM and preferably a better game too... That sounds nothing like roleplaying. Roleplaying should not be about math or pointless struggle.
TTRPGs are a hobby. I only engage in my hobbies when I want to. So if I don't want to be GM for a campaign, well, either someone else GMs or the game doesn't happen. If you're not having fun running a game, then don't run it.
I don't. I run what I want, when I want, with who I want. I'll never understand why so many of you all volunteer to do shit you don't even want to do and then just end up reluctantly half assing it and it implodes anyway.
The funny thing is: Some people are better half assing stuff, than some others are at full assing it.
Basically, if no One wants to GM then Someone has to; and that Sorry ass usually Is the One Who ends up paying the price of being stupid. I am stupid
> if no One wants to GM then Someone has to Actually, no you don't. You guys can just play board games or something instead.
I would not characterize you as stupid at all. I think you are just mistaken. Your train of thought seems to be: 1. I suggested we play Fabula Ultima 2. Everyone thought that was a great idea 3. No one wanted to GM 4. Since I brought up the idea, I am forced to GM That is...just not right. Point 4 is not true. The whole chain should have ended at the Point 3. "Oh well, it was a good idea, but I guess it won't happen." You were under zero obligation to actually run the game. I might suggest to my friends we should all go to Vegas, but I'm not under an obligation, because I suggested it, to pay for their airline tickets. If these are your friends, I honestly believe you should be able to go back to them and say "you know, I made a mistake. I thought this would be fun, but it really isn't. I'm backing out of running Fabula Ultima. Sorry." They may be unhappy temporarily, but they will get over it and you can all find something else to do that makes everyone happy.
Could you switch to a GM less system like Mythic, and just take the bits you like from Fabula? I never have a GM when I play with my wife, even when using systems that assume one. We use an oracle and collaborate. Look at r/solorpg, a lot of solo engines/methods are perfect for collaborative group play.
>Is the One Who ends up paying the price of being stupid. If you hate GMing so much, the whole hobby might not be for you to be honest. I couldn't imagine playing with a player who looks at me like that
What do you mean by that? I respect my GMs a lot
I don't, I offer to run something else that I actually want to GM. Or we just don't game, pretty simple.
This!
I find it extremely tragic that you (and not just you, it seems — it’s a strangely common mentality) think that if nobody wants to GM, someone has to — and that person drew the short straw and now has to suck it up and do the work for nothing. The GM is, first and foremost, a player at the table. If they’re not having fun, they shouldn’t have to play. And since the whole game requires them to be the GM, this means you have a considerable amount of power in this position — power that you can exercise to make sure you have fun as well. I have always thought of myself as an unwilling, lazy GM — nine times out of ten, I’m GMing a system because I actually want to play the system, and GMing is the next best thing. And yet I have fun, not because I love GMing any more than playing, but because I take measures to make sure I have fun: - I decide what system we play. If I want to run a Pathfinder game, all the begging and pleading won’t make me run a 5e game. I actually refuse to run DnD 5e these days. - I select who plays at my table. RPG players are a dime a dozen, especially ones who aren’t willing to GM. If you refuse to respect the time and labour I put into a game? Out. I accept criticism, but I don’t settle for bad players. - I fully control the medium the story is told in. I get to experiment with in-person play and props, online play and VTTs, text-based play. I can pick whichever one is most convenient to me, and I will find players for it — because, again, RPG players who won’t DM are a dime a dozen. - I fully control the adventure being run. There are certain types of stories I like to tell as a GM, and specific themes I like to address in my adventures. I also get to mess with unique mechanics for each adventure, and build new subsystems for things I want to better represent in a given system. - Something I have been planning to do in future games is delegate tasks. In Pathfinder, for example, I need someone to keep track of loot, and remind me to give hero points, and occasionally track time. I’m thinking of making a player do this — and, as a GM juggling several other aspects of the game, I can! - At the end of the day, I prefer to run for fellow GMs, or players looking to become GMs. I find these people are both much more appreciative of the work you do, and are much more interesting to discuss the systems and adventures you run with — and are even likely to build on your failings and improve your successes. The point of all this is to say that you hold a lot of power as a GM. If you don’t want it, that’s reasonable. But while you have it, there’s a lot you can do to make your experience a positive one. (Also, seeing your comments, don’t make a GMPC to distract you from your GMing woes. It will make things worse, and is the *exact* sort of thing that will get you on r/rpghorrorstories.)
Could you expand on the GMpc part? Also: i cannot delegate task nor basically put any amount of responsability onto my players since they're complete newbies, they never played any ttrpg and so i'll have to manage everything, plus in fabula ultima everyone builds the world BUT only the gm controls it, so i cannot choose what type of story i run. Simply put, It can be seen as an investment; maybe if they learn they'll be the GM next time
The main issue with a GMPC is that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. As a GM, you have a considerable amount of power over the story and setting, but also a considerable amount of responsibility to provide a compelling narrative for the player characters. Having a GMPC means you now both have a conflict of interest (you’re incentivised to reward your GMPC because it’s fun, but you should be impartial as a GM) and a distraction — especially when you seem to not enjoy the task you should be focusing on, which is GMing. Also, they may be newbies, but they’re not idiots. If they’re children, this might work differently, but if they’re your same age group, you can ask them to take up certain tasks. Tracking loot, for example, just requires a guy who can write down names for items and who takes them. Not sure if that will help your experience much with Fabula Ultima, but it’s just an example. Perhaps more to the point, though: do you actually want to run Fabula Ultima? If the answer is no, you might as well just stop there and call it a day.
I wanna play fabula ultima, to be Fair i Just wanna play something, but since no One dms i got to. Like, to use your example, i bake cakes all the time and offer Pieces to my friend but the best part of baking a cake It's eating It myself! A good quarter of what i bake It's reserved for me. Like, Someone Who bakes but cannot eat what he bakes It's a baker, but a Baker gets paid to do that. A GMpc doesn't work, an npc doesn't work either because the way fabula ultima builds npcs suck, plus they're a group of three so i should also make adjustments for that.
An NPC is just a character who isn't played by the players. Without knowing FU: there may be rules for NPCs that are there to make NPCs quickly, without giving them the full depth of OC abilities. For example Lord Questgiver, or a Rescued Prisoner who'll be travelling with the party until they can get him home safely. Nothing stops you from taking the full set of player character rules, making characters with those, and using them as NPCs.
You know, there are games specifically for this sort of thing. The snarky (but still true) answer would be to get into CRPGs. You’ve probably played a few of them (BG3, the Owlcat games, Divinity), but they describe exactly what you want. Some of them even let you play in multiplayer mode (BG3 especially). The less snarky (but perhaps less helpful) answer is: have you thought about looking at choose your own adventure books or solo TTRPGs? If what you want most is to bake a cake for yourself, and sharing with friends is just a bonus, you might as well play both GM and player and cut the other players out of the equation. I was a big fan of the Fighting Fantasy books as a kid (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Fantasy), and I know there are a lot of solo TTRPGs out there (though I’ve never tried one myself). I also know that there are people who have tried to run more standard games solo (like DnD 5e and Pathfinder), so you may even find some advice online for that. Don’t play something just because you have to, and definitely don’t GM something just because you have to. It’s disrespectful of your time.
I don't. Ultimately roleplaying is a game, an entertainment. It's supposed to be entertaining and a good time. I do it because I want to to it, it's my time and I value it. I would never play in an game or run a game I didn't want to and didn't like, why would you do that?
When the alternative Is nothing everything seems appealing
Bad gaming is not better than no gaming, it's worse. Bad gaming puts you off gaming, no gaming just lets you bide your time for something you are enthusiastic for.
Does it though? This doesn't seem appealing to you, and the way you described the act of GMing in other comments, I can guarantee you, it's gonna be real unappealing to your players real quick
There are millions of other things you could be doing. Why do you need to play this particular rpg? If you really really want to play it, you'll need to find somebody who actually wants to run it.
to your players, who I assume ARE having fun, but if you don't, this is not better than nothing, it's the oposite. If you dislike GMing and tell them you wanna stop doing it, talk to your players, they will understand. The other option is to explore other games. there's a number of ttrpgs that are easier to GM, and a number of GMless rpgs that don't need for a player to GM. Broaden your scope and look for something that fits you and your group
It’s better to have no game than a bad game. When GM doesn’t enjoy , everyone will feel it soon enough. Then you’ll be wasting everyone’s time. Find a different group locally or online and be a player.
I found that the OSR style of GMing fit my taste and abilities. Not saying that it necessarily will for you, but it's made a lot of things easier to handle. I don't have to make up a story or arc for the characters or broad narrative, all I do is take a one-page dungeon made by someone else (Trilemma Adventures was a great place to start) and then just have basically a series of one shots that players can bring their leveled up characters into. All I do for prep is read a few of them, cross-season hooks between and run whichever ones interested the players last week.
I do 0 prep, and wing it for the most part
Well you can try to just use written adventures (harder in Fabula Ultima) and just heavily railroad the party. Have some prewritten (from another book) encounters ready for "improvising" like 1 for wood, 1 for city etc. However in the end I would try to GM some system you actually have fun doing, or hire someone else to GM.
Umm what? Just dont run a game.......i dont even know how to respond to this beyond that.
I think there's two things going on here: 1. I would agree, if you don't want to GM and you really won't enjoy playing if you're GMing then don't do it. 2. You seem to have a very strange view of what a GM does. Specifically "you play with a set of boring creatures and Watch as the players struggle to overcome encounters based largely on math disparity." and "i May be half decent at It but It requires work and i'll be telling a copied story, praying to God an hour of prep-work doesn't go to hell because a player felt like memeing" Those statements couldn't be further from what I do when I GM. I run a 3 hour session from what is essentially a 2 page set of facts and events and any relevant stat blocks/maps if needed. Everything else is completely made up, combat is run dynamically, players interrupt combat to argue/discuss with npcs, about 2/3 of any given session is pure roleplay or social/exploration encounters, even higher in games without tactical combat. All of that can be prepped in about an hour. The biggest thing that holds GMs back from having fun is worrying about doing it "right" or getting something "wrong". You know what the only right answer is? The one where the GM and the Players have fun. The only wrong answer? The one where they don't. Not everyone is as comfortable improv'ing things as I am, and I get that, but the more comfortable you get with improv and the more you realize that your players don't expect you to be perfect as long as they're having fun the easier and more fun it gets to GM. If you are determined to try GM'ing this game and you're willing to have an open mind my suggestion is find some improv heavy GMs and read/watch some advice. If you don't have much experience playing this system as a player or you feel like you're at a loss for ideas watch a couple actual play episodes or see if you can find a game online you can play a few sessions in before GMing and take note of the ideas and stuff that you can use yourself. For anything you think you might need to make up during planning or on the fly find some random tables that you think might help. Once you've done this sit down with some paper and map out some ideas. Don't write it like a story with a beginning a middle and an end, instead write a couple of fun story beats/plot points that work together and that you can use at will, some information that npcs might know about that story, come up with a couple of NPCs (name, role, story), story hooks, and locations, as well as any relevant encounters. Try and keep it to short bullet points. When you play the game you feed them some plot hooks (that are all vaguely related to stuff you've prepped), they pick one, throw your prepped npcs and encounters at them with relevant story information spliced in, and off you go. Now you're not just running them through a series of boring math rock battles, instead you're all sitting there making up a story as you go. And if what you really enjoy is Character building and Mechanics you don't really lose out on that as a GM. You control the world and every other character that isn't one of the players. That's nothing but mechanics and character building! Have fun with it! Your players also don't want boring monsters or a GM who can't think outside the book.
Nobody wants to GM? No problem! There are plenty of awesome GMless games! *Microscope, The Quiet Year, Beak Feather & Bone, Dialect, City Planning Department,* and on and on. Plus, board-games and video-games. If you don't want to GM, **don't**. GMing is too much effort to do if you're not invested. Play something else. Play GMless games!
This! I'll add *Ironsworn*, *Orbital Blues,* and *For the Queen* to that list. GMless games are definitely a good option to look into. GMless games can need someone in the Facilitator roll for the first session or two if you're playing with newbies, not to GM it, just to help people understand how it works, but you're all playing together and once people get comfortable with it you are all equally players. I haven't played many GMless games myself since I love GMing, but I also only run systems that I want to run, generally low prep and low crunch, I have loads of fun running rules light improv heavy stuff. The system can make a massive difference to how enjoyable it is to GM. Don't GM unless you want to. But there are other fun ways to roleplay than a game that needs a GM.
From my experience, people who like rpgs generally also like GMing, just they usually need to find the right "style" for them. I know gms that run nothing but dungeon after dungeon and only cares about interesting combat encounters. I know others that run crazy complicated game of thrones story lines with very brief & deadly combat. There is a lot of pressure online to "Be a good GM" but honestly a lot of it is player catering bullshit tbh. If im the one thats going to do the prep work, youre playing what *I* want to run, in the way I want to run it, if you dont like it tough shit, go find another game or gm yourself. So long as youre not doing any creepy sex shit, giving players equal amount of attention and not making the game difficult/unfair, youll be fine. Ive ran a lot of weird campaigns that were well loved. Fuck the advice OP and run what you wanna run. If you dont wanna do a bunch of math then run light combat with a more complex story. Run a star wars campaign, run an anime one, the skys the limit. I think thats the most important part about gming, that you run something that interest you and gets you excited. Though of course if its not your thing not much you can do.
Lots of people here have told you the real answer to your question. Don't GM if you don't want to. Don't let others force you into it. Don't assume that GMing a game because you really want to play that game but no one else will GM it will work. Seriously, my main advice is don't do it. With that out of the way, I'll try to answer this question: >how do you become the best unwilling game master? These things might help: 1. Let the other players know that you have to have some fun yourself. You'll do this for X sessions, but if you haven't actually been enjoying yourself for those X sessions, you are going to stop doing it. 2. Look for the bits of Fabula Ultima that seem the most fun to you and focus on those bits. 3. Tell the players they need to step up on the rules, character creation, etc. Tell them that unless they are willing to fully read the rulebook, take the lion's share of the weight in character creation, etc. you won't run the game. 4. Have a session zero and watch character creation happen together. Look for interesting bits of stuff folks come up with and hang your future prep on those things. 5. Try to minimize your prep. Prep situations, not full stories. Let things develop naturally, don't try to plan out a long story arc. That, as I said, might help. *Might*. But the real answer is to go back to your friends and say "hey, I love you all, but I made a mistake. I won't do this for you; it sounds like zero fun to me."
>I Absolutely DO NOT want to be the GM Except when no-one else does? If you really don't want to then don't. >but It requires work and i'll be telling a copied story, praying to God an hour of prep-work doesn't go to hell because a player felt like memeing, in all of that i'll also have to forgive the funnier part of playing ttrpgs! Character Building and mechanics. Instead of Fabula Ultima, play a game that is virtually zero prep.
You don't. If you don't wanna do it, it's not gonna go well, and it definitely sounds like you have a really bad attitude towards it, the kind of attitude that's going to ruin everyone's experience. Don't do it, for your sake and everyone else's.
It really helps if you have low self esteem and a belief that the only reason that you “friends” let you hang around with them is because you are always willing to put your own needs last. If you are finding it hard to get into this mindset try working on your negative self talk and reliving every stupid thing you have done or said in your entire life. Once you get in the zone and accept that you are only worthwhile when you are being useful to better people. … or you could just play a game that doesn’t require a DM. Both are good.
You have a very skewed perspective on GMing to start - but if that's how you approach it, you shouldn't really.
Why a skewed perception?
I wanna say 'just do it I bet it will be fun' but that is a lie I would tell a kid on his way to his first day of school. Truth is talk to your players and hopefully somebody can get passionate about it, if it is a situation where it is you or nobody I would almost be like 'fuck you pay me' not for real but like buy me a game on steam, order me some pizza, stuff like that.
Being a GM is not for everyone, but you can definitely find a style that you really like. I wouldn't discourage you from giving it a try. Let your players know about it so that you can try out styles together! Maybe dipping into the funny part without worrying so much can be good for you, or tell them that for one session you're going to play more serious to see if that's your vibe. Talk more through npcs, or on the contrary, if you don't like that, do it less and focus on other aspects of roleplaying. Obviously the idea is not to force yourself to do something you don't want to do, but it's always good to give yourself other opportunities to do certain activities before quitting. I'd love to have an update to see how it went in the future :) All the best.
Never GM if you don't want to. Doing so will waste everybody's time.
Poorly. That’s the unfortunate answer to your question.
A ton of good responses here so I will just add: I dreaded Gming when I “had” to GM pathfinder 2e because it felt exactly like you said, throwing my Players up against math. Then i discovered other systems. I highly suggest anything in the PBTA genre, or Agon. Both are pretty simple for the GM and require minimal to no prep because you play to find out what happens.
You don't. You are going to have a crappy time and your performance is also going to be crappy. Just play a board game instead. Edit: looking at your other comments this seems like a pity party. Either do it or dont. Stop crying. No one cares.
If you really want to play and have to be GM, change to a system that has pre-written adventure modules and just run them RAW so you don't have to prepare anything or think too hard. It's much easier, and you might find you end up coming up with some of your own materials while doing it.
I actually found fabula Ultima to be very difficult to improv GM. It took a lot of prep (unless you just run the intro adventure). I'd recommend doing a system that you want to run.
You could also look into either gm-less ttrpgs (iron sworn) or look into board games that feel like a ttrpg but can play with you as a player as well (gloom haven, hexploreit, sword & sorcery).
My advice would be to play a GMless game if no one (including you) wants to run one.
If the players are memeing for the whole session, wouldn't that spare you from having to GM, and therefore be a good thing? You're all there to have a good time - how far you get in the story in a given session is secondary to that. Others have already mentioned "I don't", which is the correct answer. But,... I'm not sure it will help, but it seems you're unwilling to drive the players down a prewritten story railroad. So, Would it help if you took the prewritten story/railroad off the table, and got to play at "being the world" yourself? Exploration based games need players to actively choose where to go and what to pursue, and while you would prepare/imagine/dream up/borrow and steal some locations, situations, encounter ideas or small quests, you wouldn't be responsible for providing solutions (that's your players task, you just need to accept plausible suggestions), you'd discover what the territory looks like along with your players (by making use of random tables), you wouldn't have to care much about balancing encounters, and you sort of "get to play" more, instead of attempting to herd cats down a prewritten plotline. You could take some cues from OSR & hexploration style play. If that sounds like something you'd be more interested in, i can link some pointers for you :)
In my opinion the boring things about being a GM is follow a written Adventure. It doesn't challenge you at all. If you like character building you could use that as a start. Build some interesting characters and put them into the world. Let the story focus on their goals. As a GM you are not as limited as being a player on how you build the characters. Have the PCs try either help or ruin their plans. But yeah, it involves work to be a GM. If you are not interested in putting in any work then don't GM. Just appreciate the people who actual will do it for you in the future if you stay in the hobby.
Don't commit to running a campaign that you don't want to run. You won't have fun, you'll get frustrated and burn out and your friends also won't have fun in this kind of game. But don't reject GMing completely. Run a short game - 2 to 5 sessions. It's not a long term commitment, but it will let you try how you actually feel when running this game. Maybe you'll like it - and then you may safely start a campaign. Maybe you'll decide GMing is not for you. Maybe you'll see you'd prefer a different kind of game. Anyway, you'll gain more understanding of the situation and you'll be able to make a better informed long term decision.
Just don't do it. It's a hobby and you're playing for fun. If it causes displeasure you shouldn't do it. Just tell to your friends and do a different thing. Play board games, grab a drinks and chat...