Why do people think the GM should sit at the head of the table?

[Zhorn]

Round tables > Square tables > Long tables

[Knaight]

It's not about placement at the table - it's about height. Ideally, the GM should have at least 30 cm of height over his underlings loyal subjects players. Particularly tall players should be issued correspondingly low chairs.

This would explain why I'm good to sit wherever. I'm getting that height gap regardless.

[Hackulator]

Round tables > Square tables > Long tables

True but generally you are stuck with what you have.

[Malphegor]

It's not about placement at the table - it's about height. Ideally, the GM should have at least 30 cm of height over his underlings loyal subjects players. Particularly tall players should be issued correspondingly low chairs.

This is why indoor tennis courts are theoretically the best place for D&D.

The DM sits in the umpire chair, while the players navigate their minis across the painted on dungeon on the grounds whilst the DM shouts from a megaphone what they encounter.

[OmSwaOperations]

Because the GM fulfils the same narrative role in the game as the vampire who invites the unfortunates into his castle, or the king who commands the execution of his courtiers; and thus must sit at the end of the table, as they do.

Possibly because it's easier to keep GM notes hidden when players aren't sat directly to either side of you (and are thus pretty much forced to look over your shoulder when they glance at you).

[Hackulator]

Because the GM fulfils the same narrative role in the game as the vampire who invites the unfortunates into his castle, or the king who commands the execution of his courtiers; and thus must sit at the end of the table, as they do.

Possibly because it's easier to keep GM notes hidden when players aren't sat directly to either side of you (and are thus pretty much forced to look over your shoulder when they glance at you).

I feel like unless you have vision issues so you use REALLY BIG FONTS, the players would have to be doing it on purpose in order to get real info.

Also, if you are on a long table and you have people to either side of you, that means the side fits 3 people. If that's the case, a standard group shouldn't actually need to use those seats next to you, as 3 across from you and 2 on each end is 5 players. If you're actually running a live game for 7 players, that's a problem on its own (though I've don it with way more). However, in that case, being at one end of a table that long is an even further issue, as you're really far away from the people at the other end.

[Kaptin Keen]

This would explain why I'm good to sit wherever. I'm getting that height gap regardless.

All my friends are taller than me. I'm wider, which would propably put me on top in a fight - but sadly, I'm not wrestling them =(

This is why indoor tennis courts are theoretically the best place for D&D.

The DM sits in the umpire chair, while the players navigate their minis across the painted on dungeon on the grounds whilst the DM shouts from a megaphone what they encounter.

Yes!

[geppetto]

Is your middle name "Sheldon"?

Nope its head of household.

[Algeh]

I'm now tempted to try running games at a kidney table. I wonder if we have one in storage at school somewhere...

[Karen Lynn]

I tend to take the head of a table when GM'ing on the basis that it's traditionally a position of respect and authority. People tend to listen a bit better to me when I sit there as opposed to sitting alongside them. Players are as far from you either way.

[OldTrees1]

I'm now tempted to try running games at a kidney table. I wonder if we have one in storage at school somewhere...

If you need a lot of width in your private DM space, then a kidney table would have you take up roughly half the seating area but would allow the players near the "ends" to have better access to the table than if it was a long rectangular table. You might even take up less than half of the seating area that way.

Please try it out and then report back (if this thread is still here).

[Hackulator]

I tend to take the head of a table when GM'ing on the basis that it's traditionally a position of respect and authority. People tend to listen a bit better to me when I sit there as opposed to sitting alongside them. Players are as far from you either way.

I feel like if you need to take a physical position of "respect and authority" when GMing there is a problem with the group.

As to your second comment, just, no, that's not how geometry works.

[Quertus]

I tend to take the head of a table when GM'ing on the basis that it's traditionally a position of respect and authority. People tend to listen a bit better to me when I sit there as opposed to sitting alongside them. Players are as far from you either way.

The table is, say, 2'x6'. Sitting in the middle, the furthest player is ~3' away; sitting at one end, furthest player is 6' away.

[Karen Lynn]

I feel like if you need to take a physical position of "respect and authority" when GMing there is a problem with the group.

I'm a quiet person living in a state where everyone speaks loud and tend to talk over each-other. Sitting in that position has lead to people speaking over me less.

As to your second comment, just, no, that's not how geometry works.

The table is, say, 2'x6'. Sitting in the middle, the furthest player is ~3' away; sitting at one end, furthest player is 6' away.

That's assuming the table is always full of players, or all players sit on one side.

Assuming you have players sit opposite you, four players facing you, furthest player is two seats away. If you sit at the head, then two players a side going down the table, furthest player is again two seats from you.

[SunderedWorldDM]

For various reasons, I like sitting at the head of the table. I will admit that it makes interacting with minis on the board in front of me is more difficult, but I solve that by simply standing up and carrying the monster manual/relevant book/my notes/nothing with me during combat. The reason that I like the head of the table is that I typically play with squirrelier players, and being at the front of the table helps me to get and maintain their attention.

If I had the opportunity, I would happily play at a round table, but for now it's much easier for me to use normal rectangular folding tables, and I like sitting at the head of such to keep my player's attention and interest that much more easily.

[OldTrees1]

That's assuming the table is always full of players, or all players sit on one side.

Assuming you have players sit opposite you, four players facing you, furthest player is two seats away. If you sit at the head, then two players a side going down the table, furthest player is again two seats from you.

Assuming the table's narrow dimension is 1 person wide:

If you are sitting at the end with 2 people on either side, then the distance from you the furthest player is 0.5 people to the left and 1.5 people forward. (0.5^2+1.5^2)^0.5 by pythagoras due to people's heads being in the middle of their place.

If you are sitting across from 4 people, then the distance from you to the furthest player is 1.5 people to the left and 1 person forward. (1.0^2+1.5^2)^0.5 by pythagoras. This distance is larger because you have increased the short orthogonal distance without decreasing the long orthogonal distance. This pattern continues for 2N people.

So the players' ears are closer to your mouth if you are at the end vs if you take up a full side of the table.

But what if you don't take up the full side? What if there are 6 players and you take up the room of 2 players. So on the side you have people next to you at a discreet distance and 4 people across from you.
At the end: (0.5^2+2.5^2)^0.5 = 6.5^0.5
At the side: (1.0^2+1.5^2)^0.5 = 3.25^0.5
Suddenly you have decreased the distance from your mouth to the furthest ears by 30%.

Summary: If you are only optimizing for distance to ears, and your table's narrowest dimension is 1 person wide, then the rankings go:
1st) Sharing the long side
2nd) Being at the end
3rd) Monopolizing the long side

But people don't just care about distances from mouths to ears. So what works best for each group depends on all the considerations and how much priority the group gives each consideration. (I still prefer Round tables myself)

[Knaight]

Distance is a terrible metric here - there's a directionality to speaking, which is why someone six feet in front of you hears you better than someone three feet behind you. There's even more of a directionality to vision, and supplementing hearing with also seeing how mouths move is pretty ordinary.

[Jay R]

So nobody is sitting beside me able to see my notes.

[I keep a table with the minis I plan to use half-hidden on a table behind me. I once caught a player looking at it to see what was coming up. The next session (at 2nd level), I had a large red dragon prominently displayed at the front of the table.]

[ExLibrisMortis]

Reading this thread, I'm wondering whether a Lazy Susan with a battlemat would be useful?

[D+1]

I am amused because after participating in this thread, yesterday the DM of the new game we just started yesterday chose the middle of long side of the table to run the game from. I've never seen that before. Never really even heard of it before until now. :) And I don't think it changed anything; didn't work better or worse. Whatever advantages/disadvantages people CLAIM either way, I think it's strictly a personal preference, nothing more or less.

[Ashtagon]

The GM should sit on the lap of the highest-level PC.

...

What?

[Malphegor]

The GM should sit on the lap of the highest-level PC.

...

What?

We're milestone levelling, so I guess they have to sprawl out across all of us in a line.

[gkathellar]

If and when people think that the DM should sit at the head of the table, I suspect it is because the head of the table has cultural and visual significance, clearly differentiating them from the players by virtue of setup. (It's also somewhat harder to flip a table from the end, or at least requires an ounce more thought.)

Should people think that? Maybe. Play groups will vary. What works for you may not work for others, and vice versa.

[Jay R]

If and when people think that the DM should sit at the head of the table, I suspect it is because the head of the table has cultural and visual significance, clearly differentiating them from the players by virtue of setup.

In my experience, it's purely practical. With nobody beside me, nobody else can see my notes. For DMs who use screens, it's much easier to screen off the end of the table than the middle.

[The Kool]

An interesting and highly impractical anecdote: One of my DMs sets up in a large room, with a full square of 6-foot (maybe 8-foot? tables. He takes one, the players get the others. He has 2 or 3 screens he sets up in a big arc. I dislike being that far away from him, but eh I'm not gonna argue, at the first session he had way too many players. Maybe this next one it'll be a smaller setup.

[Hackulator]

I am amused because after participating in this thread, yesterday the DM of the new game we just started yesterday chose the middle of long side of the table to run the game from. I've never seen that before. Never really even heard of it before until now. :) And I don't think it changed anything; didn't work better or worse. Whatever advantages/disadvantages people CLAIM either way, I think it's strictly a personal preference, nothing more or less.

Clearly your DM is a person of great taste and impressive intellect.

Maybe it made things easier for the DM and you just didn't notice.

[Jay R]

I've done both. When I had a sidewall next to me to tape my party notes to, I sat in the middle of the table with my encounter notes in my lap.

My main concern is that I don't want it easy for a player to see my encounter notes. I don't expect most of them to give into that temptation, but the temptation is irksome. Why put them in that uncomfortable position?

[The Kool]

My main concern is that I don't want it easy for a player to see my encounter notes. I don't expect most of them to give into that temptation, but the temptation is irksome. Why put them in that uncomfortable position?

Lately I've been irked by the fact that, due to the layout of my room, my players can see my computer screen. If I pull up stats of a monster, not only can they see that I've done so, they can usually catch the name on the screen. Spoils the fun a bit.

[Jay R]

Lately I've been irked by the fact that, due to the layout of my room, my players can see my computer screen. If I pull up stats of a monster, not only can they see that I've done so, they can usually catch the name on the screen. Spoils the fun a bit.

Any good poker player knows that one way to protect yourself from your own tells is to occasionally provide false ones. You can occasionally bring up the page of a creature who can turn invisible when there are no monsters around. Or set up a vampire page when a couple of harmless bats are about to fly by.

More fun, if you have time, is to program the computer to show a false name. If you know what monsters are coming, and you have time the day before, make your own pages with the correct stats, but the wrong picture and name. This is particularly effective if you use a shapechanger, and they are assuming that the troll in front of them is really a changeling.

I once had a player who would look at the minis I had set up behind a screen for the session. I cured that by putting a large red dragon in front of them. Nobody pays any attention to the gnolls lined up behind the red dragon.

[Tanarii]

GM's sit? I stand and roam around.

Coffee is a hell of a drug.