Games you like to run vs. games you like to play

Is there a big difference between what you like to play vs. what you like to run? Different systems, settings, styles? If so, what accounts for the difference?

1 Like

I absolutely prefer playing 5e to running it.
I prefer running FFG Star Wars to playing it.
Hoping the “D&D One” revisions make it more fun to run, because 5e feels like filling out government forms. I know that’s not a consensus opinion, do not take it as an invite to stan 5e DMG.

Call of Cthulhu, Run it. I am not a good investigator type. It bores me. But, to dole out the crumbs and clues and ill fates that follow, I Like!
Overall it is cyclic to me. I am back into wanting to run games over wanting to play in them (as a character).

I’ll play anything once. I run my game, the occasional Pirates of the Spanish main or Ogre.

For me, no there is no difference. The games I like to run (both the rules and the campaigns) are ones I would LOVE to be playing.

1 Like

I getcha to be sure. The reason I do my world is I love it. And welcome to the madhouse.

I love playing good one-shots at gamedays and cons. The chance to jump into a pre-gen with an already established background and relationships in an adventure I know will have a set arc is a ton of fun at minimal investment. And it’s a great way to try out new systems and settings.

But I suck at creating one-shot adventures, and I’m not very good at running them. I worked for a long time on trying to master the four-hour story arc, but finally acknowledged that my effort was probably better spent elsewhere. I’ll still occasionally run 'em if it’s for a setting/system that I’m trying to sell some players into participating in a campaign for, but otherwise, I’d rather be running an open ended campaign.

Ten encounters, no more. If it will be talk heavy, fewer. Have a couple of pads in there so if running long you can pull them if you are running short, add one.

I’ve done many a convention. BE FLEXIBLE is the ghodd of commandments.

1 Like

As a general rule, I prefer to run more than to play. If only I had the discipline and energy to keep up with that. My regular group is full of GMs, which has spoiled me for being able to take extra time to contemplate and prepare adventures while someone else runs the weekly sessions.

When I’m running a game, I can be flexible and open to player input; I can adjust presentation flow and info output to what a player should be able to handle. I find that when I’m playing (especially under a GM I’m not familiar with), there’s too often a gap between what the GM and I are expecting. Occasionally it’s a matter of rules interpretation; sometimes it’s a difference in background knowledge; and frequently a difference in genre-related expectations. I hesitate to join many ‘storytelling games’ for this reason.

All that said, my favorite genre to run is, broadly speaking, pulp-action; enough story to keep the plot flowing and invoke a suitable mood, dramatic (and often not-quite-realistic) action, fairly clear villains-vs-heros distinction (allowing for subplots of betrayal and subterfuge, of course!). My Justice, Inc. campaign ran for many years (kind of like Star Trek-in-a-zeppelin, globetrotting from one adventure to the next); Star Wars (Saga edition) and Feng Shui have also been great fun to run. Savage Worlds is one of my go-to systems for convention one-shots.

I’ve tried and found I can’t really run good horror games - building & keeping that sense of tension, in right mood, doesn’t happen for me. Deeply culture-linked games where I don’t really know the culture (Legend of Five Rings, for example) I won’t even try to run (though I had fun playing it when the guy at our table who is an Asian-martial-arts fan ran it.)

1 Like