How Gaming Made Me a Better Leader

Quick Summary

• Running Dungeons & Dragons taught me to prepare a direction without controlling the people who take it.
• Baldur’s Gate 3 showed me that people can disagree with a decision and still trust the person who explains it.
• Dead by Daylight made me pay attention to what teammates need before they say it.
• Chained Together taught me to match another person’s pace instead of dragging them behind mine.
• Games gave me a safe place to practise failure, trust, and handing over the lead.

AI-generated summary based on the text of the article and checked by the author. Read more about how BUT. Honestly uses AI.

Can playing games make you a better leader?

I learned some of my most useful leadership habits while rolling dice, running from killers, and falling off platforms with a colleague. Courses and management books gave me names for those habits. Games made me practise them.

I played Dungeons & Dragons, Baldur’s Gate 3, Divinity: Original Sin 2, Dead by Daylight, and Chained Together with incomplete information and no guarantee that my plan would work. I had to listen, adapt, and trust someone else to act.

Dungeons & Dragons: Guiding Without Controlling

If I had to pick one game that changed how I lead, it would be Dungeons & Dragons.

I have spent years playing and running campaigns. As the Dungeon Master, I build the world, prepare the encounters, and give the players somewhere to start. Then they choose where the story goes.

A DM who controls each scene drains the fun from the table. Players stop taking risks because they can tell their choices will not change anything. I have seen teams withdraw for the same reason. If I make each decision before they enter the room, I cannot expect them to feel ownership of the result.

A 2023 qualitative study by researcher C. N. Mackey found that players carry communication, delegation, and leadership skills from D&D into work and social settings. I recognise that transfer in my own work. Running a campaign has trained me to prepare enough structure for people to act without scripting what they do.

Preparation still matters. I can spend hours designing a session, and the players can undo it with one choice I did not expect. The first few times this happened, I found it frustrating. Now I treat the plan as material I can use rather than a route everyone must follow.

I use the same approach when a project changes direction. I keep the goal in view, listen to what the team has found, and adapt the route.

Fair Rules Leave Room for Judgment

A DM sets the rules and decides how to apply them. Sometimes the rules protect the group. Sometimes a player has an idea worth bending one for.

I make the same judgment at work. A process can keep work fair and clear, but it can also get in someone’s way. I need to know why the process exists before I decide whether this moment needs an exception.

Players also commit more to a campaign when their choices shape it. My teams have done the same. Some of our best work has started with an idea I would not have chosen on my own.

Years behind the screen led me to write a commitment to my team:

I commit to calm, open, and honest leadership that empowers through coaching and creativity.

I use it to remind myself that I am there to give people enough support to do work they own.

Baldur’s Gate 3: Explaining the Choice

Baldur’s Gate 3 and Divinity: Original Sin 2 rarely label one decision as correct. Your words change relationships, your actions close routes, and your companions remember what you did.

A 2024 review by Hao and colleagues links decision-heavy games with situational awareness, accountability, and adaptive thinking. Larian’s games make me work through all three. I choose with limited information, watch the consequences, and decide what to do next.

Work gives me the same problem with higher stakes. I can make a sound decision and still meet resistance. I can also make a poor one and recover some trust by owning it. My team needs to know why I chose a direction and what I will do if it goes wrong.

My party members challenge me. They bring their own values and may reject mine. Their disagreement does not stop the group from moving, as long as the group has enough trust to keep talking.

I used to treat alignment as agreement. Now I see alignment as knowing the choice, the reason behind it, and what each person needs to do next. Someone can understand all three and still think I was wrong.

Dead by Daylight: Reading the Team

I play Dead by Daylight solo and in SWF (Survive With Friends) mode with a colleague. The two versions ask me to communicate in different ways.

As a solo survivor, I have no voice chat. I watch where another player runs, how long they hide, and whether they head towards a hooked teammate. I have to infer what they intend to do and cover the gap they leave.

Teams at work also tell me things before anyone says them aloud. A person who has gone quiet in meetings may need time, context, or help. I cannot know which from silence alone, but I can notice the change and ask.

In SWF, my colleague and I join a Discord call. We share the few details the other person needs: where the killer is, which generator is close, or who should make the rescue. We do not narrate each move. We trust each other to use the information.

A 2021 study by Michael J. Keith and his colleagues found that coworkers who played multiplayer games together improved their communication and trust. I have felt that change with my colleague. After enough matches, one of us can take a chase while the other works on the objective without negotiating the roles.

I want the same balance at work. I share enough context for someone to decide, then let them decide.

Chained Together: Matching Someone Else’s Pace

Chained Together connects two or more players with a chain and asks them to climb. If one person jumps too soon, both can fall.

I play it with the same colleague. Every jump requires us to read each other’s timing. I lead some sections and follow through others. If either of us decides that his own pace is the right one, we end up back at the bottom.

A Brigham Young University study summarised by Atlassian found that new teams who played video games together for 45 minutes were about twenty percent more productive than teams who did other team-building exercises. Chained Together gives that coordination a visible cost. The chain pulls tight when we stop paying attention to each other.

I have made the same mistake with teams. Pushing at my pace can exhaust someone who needs more time. Holding everyone back can frustrate someone who is ready to move. I have to keep checking where people are and hand over the lead when they can see the next step better than I can.

The falls help too. Failing the same jump gives us a shared problem to solve without anyone needing to defend a performance review or a deadline. We laugh, change the timing, and try once more.

The Habits I Took to Work

Games gave me a place to repeat a few leadership habits until I could recognise them at work.

Give People a Direction They Can Change

As a DM, I prepare the world and let the players alter it. At work, I set the goal, explain the constraints, and leave room for the team to find a route I missed.

Treat Failure as Something to Examine

A failed match gives you another attempt with more information. A team needs more care because work has consequences, but blame still hides the information I need. I want to know what we saw, what we assumed, and what we will change.

Share Context, Then Stop Talking

My colleague does not need a running commentary in Dead by Daylight. My team does not need one either. They need the facts I have, the decision I made, and the freedom to act on both.

Let Someone Else Set the Pace

Chained Together punishes me when I pull without looking back. Work may take longer to expose the same mistake. Regular check-ins help me notice it before someone burns out or gives up.

From the Table to the Team

Games let me practise these habits without risking a project or someone’s career. I can make a bad call, see what happened, and try a different one in the next session.

Some games teach team skills through structured play. I learned more from playing for its own sake over many years. I noticed them while I was trying to keep a campaign moving, survive a chase, or get two chained characters over the same platform.

I still think about those moments at work. In a meeting, I borrow the DM’s habit of making room for each player. During a hard decision, I explain my reasoning and accept that someone may disagree. If the team starts moving at different speeds, I check the chain before I pull.

Gaming made me a better leader because it made collaboration concrete. I could see when I took too much control, feel when communication failed, and learn when someone else needed to lead.