That is an attitude I simply can’t live with. It implies too much work for me; I’d have to build an entire story.

Also, it doesn’t sound fun. I could write a novel and be done with it.

I have, literally, had a player say to me, after I tried to get him to help decide a direction for a game, “Dude, I’m here to watch you tell a story, not to do it myself.”

He may as well have said, “Entertain me! Dance, screen monkey! Dance!”

Fortunately, I’m a passable dancer

My problems with Y are usually the standard ones that accompany decisions by committee. People tend to lock horns and it takes forever to get anywhere, or a leader emerges from the group and people follow them. A lot of times it’s the most hardheaded player or the most vocal who emerges as leader, and the other players just let them call the shots because they’d rather just keep playing and not fight. It’s an interesting social dynamic to me — is it still a democracy at that point?

To be honest, I rather enjoy it when the omnipotent force behind the DM screen drives a course of events because it gets things going again. I guess at my core, I’d rather be entertained than engage in social discourse. But maybe it’s just the high fructose corn syrup talking.

Gosh, Vanir, you’ve got a way with words!

Our group tends to lean toward Type X, though I’m constantly trying to push us to a Z, at least in my mind. Now, I haven’t figured out if it is because, in terms of our social group, I’ve always been the oldest and the de facto leader, or if it is because I’m a control freak.

It could be that I’m the only one willing to DM, or the only one that cares enough to make game policy. It could also be that I’m the only one with a big enough kitchen table for all of us and a near-limitless supply of Mountain Dew.

I get a lot of “hey, it’s your game, it’s your rules” from my players. Do I demand it? Not at all. Do I like it? Not especially. But some of them even get annoyed when I try to bring them into the decision-making process.

Heck, I remember several years ago trying to get the group to help me pick between two campaign settings. Of the 7 players, 2 had an opinion (opposed to one another, of course) and the other 5 refused to join one side or the other.

So, yeah, in many respects we’re an X group because that’s the way the players want it. I think Y is ideal, Z is more realistic (for any group but mine, apparently!)

I find that the best management analogy for a gaming group (DM included) is the Project Group dynamics complete with the 4 stages of development: Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing and the 5th one Stagnation.

In that the DM’s role is more authoritative and controlling in the early forming stage. He/she needs to becomes a true leader-type in storming if there’s any hope of keeping the group together and as players agree on social contracts and get used to play together, the DM’s role becomes more like a coach…

Great post Vanir… you are quite the master with words!