Am I an atypical DM?

[Henry]

One of my, and other DMs in my group, biggest problems is rules that aren't cut-and-dried, and this most often applies to NEW SPELLS.

Example from recent history: Anti-magic ray. Neat spell, but the first two times we used it in combat, we used it wrong. First time, we assumed the target could have spells affect him (they don't); second time, we assumed that all items required a saving throw to see if they were temp-negated (they aren't, that's only if targeting the item.) In summary, because of misreading, we had to take out game-time to interpret the spell, AND we got it wrong both times anyway! It's not so bad with something like Cometfall (big rock, 15d6 damage, + rubble on ground), but trickier-worded stuff or new rules systems entirely slow us to a crawl, because the DM doesn't know them, the PLAYER using them claims to know them but doesn't really, and the end result is slowed play.

My new resolution is to drastically dial back on the supplements next time I run D&D, because too many supplements means the DM needs to keep track of them when the players DON'T.

 

[hexgrid]

Combat speed: Combat seems to go by pretty fast. It only really slows down when I get the maths-challenged people in the group who can't add up 5d6. Otherwise... bonuses stacking? Buffing? Interacting effects? All pretty easy, and fast. And getting better with the more streamlined monsters in MMIV.

Prep-time: D&D is hard to prep for? I often use monsters straight out of the book, grab maps from anywhere (love the Fantastic Locations maps), traps likewise. NPC creation for the core classes is a dream thanks to the DMG info, and even when I have to create an unusual NPC (like the Frost Dwarf Soulborn 9 from last session), it doesn't take more than half-an-hour, and there's no need for many unusual NPC stats. The hard bit is coming up with the actual plot/story (and that's something that's edition-independent).

If I have a pit trap or monster, a reference to the book I found it in is enough.

Overload of options: I, as the DM, don't need to know how all the abilities my players have work exactly. Let's face it: most of D&D is the manipulation of only a few variables. If the net effect of an ability is to stun an opponent if it fails a Fort save, then that's pretty easy to deal with. Sure, the players need to know, but they don't have that much to deal with.

I think it's important to keep in mind that all of these issues could be huge at 15th level but non-existent 5th. I've noticed in the past that even some of 3e's most outspoken supporters don't play the game past 12th level.

 

[Gargoyle]

One of my, and other DMs in my group, biggest problems is rules that aren't cut-and-dried, and this most often applies to NEW SPELLS.

Example from recent history: Anti-magic ray. Neat spell, but the first two times we used it in combat, we used it wrong. First time, we assumed the target could have spells affect him (they don't); second time, we assumed that all items required a saving throw to see if they were temp-negated (they aren't, that's only if targeting the item.) In summary, because of misreading, we had to take out game-time to interpret the spell, AND we got it wrong both times anyway! It's not so bad with something like Cometfall (big rock, 15d6 damage, + rubble on ground), but trickier-worded stuff or new rules systems entirely slow us to a crawl, because the DM doesn't know them, the PLAYER using them claims to know them but doesn't really, and the end result is slowed play.

My new resolution is to drastically dial back on the supplements next time I run D&D, because too many supplements means the DM needs to keep track of them when the players DON'T.

The Spell Compendium, while a great book, has had that effect on my game, moreso than the Complete books. Players think they know the spell, but they don't. So other players end up questioning the spell and the book flipping ensues. I try to get them to not worry about it too much and to just look it up after the game, but they have something of an obsession in playing it correctly. I'm sure they mess it up sometimes anyway.

Rather than restricting them from using the book, I'm going to nag them a bit before the game to make certain they understand the options they are using. Then at least they'll do the book flipping before casting the spell.

 

[Gargoyle]

I'm a happy DM except that I'd like to play more.

Combat speed slows down for my rules impaired players, but in general they are all pretty good about keeping things going fast. I can't complain here, except the above-mentioned page flipping with regard to new spells. Even that's not too bad. All of my players have jobs and kids, and treasure the time they get to play. They don't want to waste it.

Prep time is cut down for me by using E-tools, and by not overpreparing. I can wing an entire adventure if I have to, but usually I just try not to obsess on the details. With a few stat blocks, a page of notes, and a big easel sized piece of 1" graph paper, and a laptop with e-tools I cut my prep time down to as little as a couple of hours or less.

Overload of options. I don't worry about this too much. I allow most of the classes and feats in the complete books, but I don't encourage them. Most of my players are content to play with just core options anyway. One of them is something of a power gamer and loves to build somewhat unusual characters, but nothing really unbalanced or weird. Making lots of options available hasn't hurt my game, probably because most of my players prefer the core stuff anyway.

I've got a pretty good group of players; hopefully that's not atypical.

 

[Hussar]

Merric, you sound a lot like me in my games. I'm not having any major malfunctions and we've just tripped into the double digits. We'll see how things go from here, but, so far, no problems.

For those who have problems with combat slowing to a crawl, I have this piece of advice: Run more combats. Seriously. If you run two or four combats every session for a while, 99% of issues vanish. You learn by doing, so, do it.

 

[mmu1]

I'm only being half-serious here (and I'm certainly not trying to single out the OP) but when I hear people talk about how quickly and easily they can run 3E and 3.5, and don't understand what other people complain about, it makes me think of the following:

Perhaps you are really good when it comes to the technical aspects of DMing. You can keep all the numbers straight with minimal effort, you don't need much prep time, and your combats move like a well-oiled machine.

On the other hand... maybe you're just sloppy. Perhaps all the detail doesn't bother you because you don't pay enough attention to it. (How does it go? "If everyone around you is panicking, but you're managing to remain calm, you probably don't understand the situation.") Prepping NPCs and monsters doesn't take much of your time, because they're unambitious and cookie-cutter. But your game still has enough redeeming features that this doesn't matter that much, or your players simply don't care about this kind of stuff either - so everyone's happy.

 

[Woas]

Combat Speed: I used to have a problem with slugish combats. But I have recently cracked down big time on it. No more Committee Meetings on every single PC's turn: that is, players are not allowed to give 'in-game' hints and tactics to other players while it is not their turn. However they are welcome to speak and bark out orders when it is their turn all they want. So yeah, combats run fine.

Prep Time: Hmm... my prep time is all over the place. Sometimes things take me a long time either because I have distractions (trying to browse the web, stat up an NPC and talk on the phone, etc). And then other times prep time takes as little as 10 minutes.
Like others have mentioned, I also like to give a personal flavor to humanoid-ish NPCs/combatants so those sometime take a bit to get together. But on the other hand I also will use more monster-ish NPCs straight out of the book(s).. so in all prep time is all over the map. Which is okay with me.
Sammael mentioned how assigning spells to spell casting NPCs is a pain, which I agree with. However one thing I have been doing over the past.. *thinks really hard* ..year or so now has been to create "typical spells prepaired" flash-cards. The players have been using these for awhile now. Basically spell cheat-sheets. So I took the idea and applied it to NPCs. As I created spell casting NPCs over time I would get an index card and write down the spell selection, DCs, range and what damage dice to roll (or a brief description of the effect if the spell was successful). Each card had a little theme to it like: support caster, enchanter mage, buffer and so on. I would create typical spell lists that spell caster NPCs who would be assuming those types of roles would normally have ready. Then from there it is pretty much just plug-n-play, switching out a spell or two for something more specific if the situation called for it. This has saved me a lot of prep time and even helped out my "on the fly" DMing skills.

Overload of Options: D'oh! Unlike most of the other posters, I've pretty much nixed most "options". No PrCs or special feats. But then, I use Arcana Evolved and there are a lot of built in rules that others might call "options" that work perfectly together. So that pretty much takes care of itself...

 

[WizarDru]

I think it's important to keep in mind that all of these issues could be huge at 15th level but non-existent 5th. I've noticed in the past that even some of 3e's most outspoken supporters don't play the game past 12th level.

And some of them play all the way to Epic, like me.

Some of these issues do compound by later levels...but my general experience still isn't that different from Merric's experience. I'd like to think I'm not sloppy, certainly several of my players who could be described as Rules Lawyers (and would be flattered at the term) would not be reserved with their opinions if they felt I was. High-level play does require adjustments to style on the DM's part and a general change of some accepted techniques that work fine at lower levels. But I've run combats where a group of six 18-19th level PCs took on a Githyanki assualt force comprising well over a hundred warriors of varying levels (from CR 2 to CR 20) and we finished the combat in less than an hour. All of the stats and the map were all cribbed from an issue of Dungeon.

With resources like Dungeon, Dragon and a host of supplements from WotC and others, I have an embarassment of riches when it comes to ready-made source material. Books like the DMGII and MM IV give me maps, monsters, pre-built challenges for a variety of levels, pre-made NPC and adventure ideas. The potential is there, of course, but we never see it.

 

[Fenes]

Plug my old post for getting more bang per buck in your prep time: Link in my sig.

 

[Barak]

Combat Speed: No problem there, or there shouldn't be. I know the rules very, very well (not bragging here, I'm just good at remembering trivia (and yes, D&D rules qualifies)). My players know that, and trust me, so combat goes quick.. Or it should. That one player of mine just isn't that good a reader. He reads something, and either leaves stuff out, or interprets it in a weird way. Then argues 'till the end of time. This has even seeped into games I don't DM, as he always try to convince -me-, since he knows whoever else is DMing will ask me how the rules work, and.. Gah.

Prep time: I'm running the WLD. I read whatever applies to wherever the PCs are headed, fix the occasional issue, and that's it. Has started taking me longer lately, as my players keep backtracking and going elsewhere, so I need to read up on more places.

Options: I have and know more books than my players do, and I allow virtually everything, so it's no biggie.