Link: https://forms.gle/FEZyw9Ax2cqkX3Ge6

Greetings, programs! With the MCDM community's help, I've prepared a survey of GM styles, so that I can use factor analysis to find the common variables underlying GMs' responses, and come up with a scientific answer to "what kinds of GM styles are there?" The survey has 43 questions and takes a few minutes to complete. The more people answer, the better the data we'll get.

EDIT: We got 101 responses and now we're analysing the data. First results: There are 9 dimensions of GM style! Not sure what they are, but there's 9 of them.

I just submitted my responses. Can't wait to see the results!

I've been GMing now across 40 years or so, and my GM style these days is very different to when I started. These days, I'm much more a "fly by the seat of my pants" GM, with all of us building a story together. I see my role as bringing unexpected elements in to the story we're building, so that the players themselves have a dynamic environment to build their characters against, rather than it just being collaborative storytelling.

I use dice for a similar reason. They allow for the unexpected and for unpredictable outcomes. They mean that the players themselves feel uncertainty when making choices for their characters.

Do you spend more time on encounter prep, or art prep?

That's my secret. I never prepare

In all seriousness, there's a couple of questions like that, asking which type of content I spend more prep time on, but I genuinely don't spend time doing prep on anything, which makes it hard to answer those question. I voted in the middle, but it won't distinguish my answer from someone who does prep, but spreads their time equally.

"Are you the only one in your group who GMs?"

I am in 3 groups, in 2 of them I am GM.
From these 2, in one I'm the only GM; in the other there are 3 GM's.

A bit hard to answer questions like this on a 5 point scale.

Fun initiative. A bit narrow in its scope as others said because it focuses on DnD style games and fails to encompass much of the rest. Notions like encounter and art prep make no sense if these things are not part of the game. Same with "behind the screen" if there's no screen, but especially annoying to put sandbox and railroad with no definition on a single scale. Feels like a questionnaire asking about whether you're catholic or protestant, ignoring the rest of the world's perspectives.

A fair criticism, as these questions were submitted by the MCDM community, and most of us play Draw Steel, so the questions are probably biased towards games like Draw Steel.

However, if a GM mostly runs Blades in the Dark as a player-directed experience, and spends way more time collecting music and paintings to set the scene and mood, rather than preparing heist obstacles for their Crew, I'd say that GM runs an art-prep-heavy sandbox game. Such a GM might also prefer to hide enemy factions' plans from the players and blindside them with twists, or roll on the complication table in front of the players and let them see how the mechanics are creating the story. So while I agree with your point, I don't actually find your examples convincing. Perhaps you have experience with games even less like D&D than BitD, and I'm simply too narrow minded to understand your critiques.

"Does your world have spinoff adventures and oneshots?"
I GM an anthology series, each session is a self contained adventure, but there's an overarcing plot, like Stargate or The Clone Wars.

Nah, you're probably right that I was not very good at explaining myself.

I think this one link can hopefully make my point clearer:
1d6chan.miraheze.org/wiki/Everyone_Is_John

Using that game would then make less sense to ask about encounters or challenging players/characters, or railroaing, or sandboxing.

Same for example if a game has a specifically defined setting not made by gm or players, does not have encounters and is not involve the idea of challenging anyone. Technically, I can go around the world classifying people as "proactive" or "reactive" in the way they see life, but it would not necessarily mean much to many of them.

But it is fine, I'm far from being representative. Many questions work on a broader scale, but some did not. Especially if my perspective on ttrpgs does not align with the way things are often presented in groups where DnD is a synonym for ttrpgs.

Wowee, that game looks like fun! I'll go play it with My friends now!

Interesting questions, although I had to vote 3 on things where I was ambivalent about two things or in favor of both things. Like I don't do a or b so I clicked 3, and for another question I frequently do both x and y so I clicked 3.

A tricky thing, is that I don't GM the same way a zero prep horror game where death is certain, and a blockbuster RPG campaign.
And that many questions depend on the specific context. Having players who need to come home by the last train means I have a hard deadline to end a session. But if that player sin't there we can find the right moment

Anyway, thanks for your pool, and curious about the results

i prefer to run games that some would call "narrative heavy" like Blades in the Dark but i am a stickler for the rules.

A well made game will have rules that each make the game more fun, so the temptation to ignore them should be rare.

Kudos for mentioning Everyone is John.

And since I’m already typing a reply, I might as well link to another obscure RPG (that I haven’t played):

https://rpggeek.com/rpg/104103/boss-dragons-and-scrambled-eggs

Yeah, I often see people equate "narrative focused" with "rules light" and Blades really highlights that they're not the same thing

When do you end your sessions?

At a particular time

After a particular story beat

So basically "how old are you?"

Actually, I've been running the data, and it seems there's a factor underlying when sessions end, whether joke characters are allowed, restrictions on character choice, comedy relief NPCs, and a focus on lore prep.

I'm going to quickly summarize what I commented under Matt Colville's video I think a potential framework is preference of narrative types, and preference for game mechanics. I mentioned a few archetypes that I've seen that seem to be pretty common.

I talk about the Tactician GM, who's campaigns tend to be tests of skill and understanding of a given ruleset, think more dungeon crawls and mega dungeons. They tap into the wargame simulation roots of the hobby. The mechancial highlight system of this would be D&D or Pathfinder.

I also mention the Philosopher GM, who tends to focus on character's beliefs and convictions and how they operate in a messy world, what they're willing to sacrifice when push comes to shove. Think gamified trolley problems and philosophy 101. The mechanical highlight systems for this would be something akin Mage the Ascension/Awakening or Ars Magica.

And finally in my writeup, theres the Socialite GM, who specializes in the interpersonal dynamics and conflicts, think court politics, social maneuvering, or interpersonal melodrama. The mechanical highlight for this would be Vampire the Masquerade, especially any campaign focused heavily on Camarilla internal politics.

I think there may be a sort of parallel between this discussion of what is a GM's style and the Adam Neely video about what makes musical genres distinct.

parallel between this discussion of what is a GM’s style and the Adam Neely video about what makes musical genres distinct

Sorry, I couldn't resist :D

Where are you going to announce results?

I guess I'll post in this community when I've written up descriptions of all the dimensions.

But if you want to see how the sausage is made, we've been making it together in the MCDM discord server.

And I just named the last factor. So although I haven't written descriptions of all the factors, I can tell you the acronym is STOPJADEN. Strategy, Tactics, Order, Prep, Jest, Authenticity, Direction, Equality, Narrative.

i do the same but our sessions are short so it ends up as 2-3 session long self contained episodes (playing Beam Saber)