D&D 5E DM Survey results

I thought this survey of 3,743 DMs offered some interesting insights…

[video=youtube;LZxde2RYs0c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZxde2RYs0c[/video]

Here is the survey if you wish to take it: https://goo.gl/forms/UY4SKjWKXuDUmaXE3

Some conclusions based on these results…

• Most DMs get to play (as players) at least a little bit.
• Most DMs fudge dice rolls infrequently to help the story.
• Most DMs use both theater-of-the-mind and map & minis both.
• Most DMs play in person, at the same table.
• Of minority of DMs running games online, vast majority use Roll20.
• Most DMs enjoy roleplaying/interaction the most, with exploration/investigation a close second, and combat dead last.
• Most DMs prepare 15 minutes - 1 hour per 1 hour of play at the table.
• Most DMs either do not use monster CR when creating combat encounters, or use CR as a rough gauge only.
• There’s a mix of DMs changing monster hit points once a battle has started.
• Most DMs use the Monster Manual at the table to look up stats.
• Most DMs do mix of improvising NPCs and prepping NPCs ahead of time.
• Most DMs do allow players to make evil PCs, usually if it’s an “evil campaign.”
• Most DMs hide their dice rolls.
• Most DMs use a DM screen.
• Most DMs use minis and digital tools.
• Most DMs have, on average, 4-5 players.
• Many DMs have run or played in games running from 7th-12th level, though there’s a fair spread among other level ranges. (but this poll question was poorly phrased).
• Most DMs enjoy prepping their games.
• Most DMs do not have to deal with disruptive players.
• Most DMs do not play D&D Adventurer’s League.
• Most DMs roll for monster damage.
• DMs are split half-and-half between those who don’t use published adventures and those who use/adapt published adventures.
• DMs are mixed over whether they run a Session Zero for a given campaign.
• Most DMs let players use homebrew material, albeit withv varying conditions.
• DMs are mixed over how they use alignments in a particular game, but most do use alignment.

Quickleaf said:

Many DMs have run or played in games running from 7th-12th level, though there’s a fair spread among other level ranges. (but this poll question was poorly phrased).

Click to expand...

The phrasing would seem to maximize the reporting of high-level play. Most of the survey is focused on what DMs run, but this question throws in what they've played. It also asks for highest level ever, which might be taken to include prior editions and short campaigns. So if you played in a 'high level campaign' at 20th for six sessions before the DM gave it up, you bubble into the to category. Even if every campaign you ever ran stopped by 10th. :shrug: It's amazing, given that, that /anyone/ answered 1-3 - must have literally just started before taking the survey.

This explains why I dislike most DM's.

Quickleaf said:

• Most DMs hide their dice rolls.
• Most DMs use a DM screen.
• Most DMs roll for monster damage.

Click to expand...

Hiding your die rolls isn't exactly necessary when you control the bonus that gets added to your roll. And if you know what outcome you want, you probably shouldn't be rolling.

DM Screen: whatever you have to do to keep PC eyes off your map. But the minimalist in me says that you have too much going on, too many distractions, if you need a screen.

I can't really endorse rolling for monster damage all the time, though. It takes long enough for PCs to roll their dice and figure out what the results are. Just use average damage for your monsters. If you have a Critical Hit rule, -then- you can make your PCs nervous by dealing a high amount of damage.

DMMike said:

Hiding your die rolls isn't exactly necessary when you control the bonus that gets added to your roll. And if you know what outcome you want, you probably shouldn't be rolling.

Click to expand...

There's lots of times where while I know what the outcome will be, the players/characters don't; and so I have to at least go through the motions of rolling...the point of which would be defeated if they could see what I've just rolled and realize I'm narrating against it.

DM Screen: whatever you have to do to keep PC eyes off your map. But the minimalist in me says that you have too much going on, too many distractions, if you need a screen.

Click to expand...

Most useful aspect of the screen for me is to put notes and tables on for easy reference. And it hides things too.

I can't really endorse rolling for monster damage all the time, though. It takes long enough for PCs to roll their dice and figure out what the results are. Just use average damage for your monsters. If you have a Critical Hit rule, -then- you can make your PCs nervous by dealing a high amount of damage.

Click to expand...

Having the damage be the same every time in a given combat would get boring pretty fast from both sides of the screen. That, and I'm not as hung up on rapid-fire pace of play as all that, and can find time for an extra roll each time I hit.

Lanefan

It is interesting to see how we, as DMs, each deviate from the "norm" of this rather large sample! I definitely am slightly atypical compared to these results.

DMMike said:

Hiding your die rolls isn't exactly necessary when you control the bonus that gets added to your roll. And if you know what outcome you want, you probably shouldn't be rolling.

Click to expand...

Lanefan said:

There's lots of times where while I know what the outcome will be, the players/characters don't; and so I have to at least go through the motions of rolling...the point of which would be defeated if they could see what I've just rolled and realize I'm narrating against it.

Click to expand...

One of the...cultural aspects I like about 5th edition is a return to a table culture of trusting the DM. I think that's really positive for the game. On the other hand, DMs have to shepherd that trust well. As a player, I don't really care if the DM fudges dice or hides dice or not – that's a minor detail – after all, if I didn't believe the DM aimed to facilitate our fun and set the foundation for a fun collaborative story, I just wouldn't play. That's me as a player.

As a DM, I prefer to roll dice in open and never fudge at the table unless it happens to be a rare player-inspired moment (e.g. all joking around, someone rolls a cocked die, and everyone cheers them on to reroll it kind of thing). Otherwise, I like transparency and how that encourages me to be more impartial.

DMMike said:

DM Screen: whatever you have to do to keep PC eyes off your map. But the minimalist in me says that you have too much going on, too many distractions, if you need a screen.

Click to expand...

Lanefan said:

Most useful aspect of the screen for me is to put notes and tables on for easy reference. And it hides things too.

Click to expand...

I tend to use a DM screen as a quick reference sheet like you, Lanefan. Only on rare occasions do I need to hide stuff. However, I would only ever use a landscape DM screen – I find the portfolio size separates me too much from the table and prevents incorporating lots of body language for NPCs or passing notes. Also, I like to be able to reach over or around the screen to roll dice in the open.

DMMike said:

I can't really endorse rolling for monster damage all the time, though. It takes long enough for PCs to roll their dice and figure out what the results are. Just use average damage for your monsters. If you have a Critical Hit rule, -then- you can make your PCs nervous by dealing a high amount of damage.

Click to expand...

Lanefan said:

Having the damage be the same every time in a given combat would get boring pretty fast from both sides of the screen. That, and I'm not as hung up on rapid-fire pace of play as all that, and can find time for an extra roll each time I hit.

Click to expand...

In encounters with small #'s of monsters, I prefer to roll damage for the uncertainty it adds. I play with folks who are often very good at maths, so the uncertainty adds dynamism and risk. However, when running large groups of "minions", I often fall back to average damage to speed resolution of taking the turn for, say, 14 kobolds.

Quickleaf said:

Many DMs have run or played in games running from 7th-12th level, though there’s a fair spread among other level ranges.

Click to expand...

That reminds me. The defacto ‘tiers’ are five:

• Levels 1-4: Student, Apprentice, Page
• Levels 5-8: Professional, Adventurer, Journeyer, Squire
• Levels 9-12: Expert, Master, Knight
• Levels 13-16: Grandmaster, Archon, Lord
• Levels 17-20: Legend

The 5e Players Handbook tries to simplify these five tiers into four. (1-4, 5-10, 11-16, 17-20, respectively.) But levels 5-8 really do feel different from levels 9-12. They are defacto different tiers.

Notice too, the value of the proficiency bonuses correspond exactly to these five tiers.

I like how most DMs alternate between both mind and minis.

The survey seems fairly representative of my DMing. Albeit, I prefer dice rolls in plain view, if dice rolls are necessary.

Sometimes I create my own adventures, sometimes I borrow and adapt from published adventures.

Interesting. I skimmed the video, but, I'd like to watch it again.