30 Days of Gamemastering: Part Twenty-Seven

This is part twenty-seven of the continuing series of posts for the “30 Days of Gamemastering Challenge” from Triple Crit.

Have you ever co-GMed? Would you consider it? What are the pros and cons?

I have never co-GMed. I think it is an intriguing concept, though. I’d consider doing it if my group were a bit bigger. Right now, if I co-GMed, we’d have a ratio of one GM per player, which I think is a bit unnecessary.

I can definitely see where co-GMing would help with large-scale conflicts. It would sometimes be nice to have someone to take some of the tactical load off, so to speak. This would be especially helpful if the party split up. One GM could keep things going for each “faction”. Also, I like the idea of just having someone to bounce ideas off of. I often itch to tell someone what’s going on “behind the scenes” of my campaigns, but can’t because I don’t want to spoil the surprises. In a collaborative storytelling game, I think it would be intriguing to have collaborative gamemastering.

I think the biggest con would be that it wouldn’t work as well for smaller groups. Also, as a GM, you would give up some of that ultimate creative control that you’re used to having. Plus, as in any collaborative project, you’ll have to work hard on getting both GMs on the same page as far as house rules, general philosophy of GMing, etc. are concerned. You definitely wouldn’t want two conflicting GMs at the table.

I think co-GMing is something I wouldn’t mind trying in the future. What about you? Have you ever co-GMed? What insights can you bring about it?