How Important Is Rules Knowledge In Being A Good D&D DM?

[Oryan77]

The problem I found with 3.5 and knowing the rules is that the more I learn the rules, the less roleplaying I end up doing as a DM. I think this has a lot to do with half of my group knowing the rules and insisting that we are using them correctly.

I used to suck with rules....but I was awesome at roleplaying & storytelling. Then I got a new group that had 2 rules lawyers in it. I was forced to learn the rules as well as they knew them so they wouldn't think my game sucked. Now when I'm DM'ing, half of the group spends a good amount of time nit-picking rules and looking them up. Granted, we are quick at looking up the rules, but I realized we do it a lot...so overall, the game is slowed down.

What I realized is that when we are doing this in every encounter, it frazzles my mind and I start thinking like a robot rather than a creative artist. I no longer think about roleplaying what an NPC will be saying, and instead of an NPC doing an action during an encounter because it would add to the storytelling, my NPC's are only doing things to benefit tactical rules, like "flanking bonuses". Or I'm figuring out ways to gain "concealment/cover bonuses". Or if an NPC's crossbow is ruined by a Warp Wood spell, instead of him throwing it at the PC in frustration to add a little roleplaying spice to the encounter, I drop the x-bow as a "free action" and cast a range touch spell because I know I can damage the PC easier since a touch AC is easier to hit.

It's so bad now that I've noticed I'm having a hard time with dialogue when the players finally attempt to roleplay.

 

[RFisher]

Then I got a new group that had 2 rules lawyers in it. I was forced to learn the rules as well as they knew them so they wouldn't think my game sucked.

That's too bad.

People have to realize that what we enjoy in the game isn't necessarily what someone else enjoys. Since it's a group activity, we have to compromise.

It shouldn't be, "You're a bad DM because the rules aren't as important to you as they are to me." It should be, "The rules are more important to me than to you, so please let me help you with them." It should be, "That's the rule, but I respect your right as DM to occasionally override the rules."

Likewise, the DM in that scenario has to be willing to make some concession to the importance of the rules for that player, but it shoudn't be to the extent that the DM starts losing what they enjoy about the game.

Maybe you should tell you're group exactly what you've told us. Ask them to help you find a middle ground.

 

[Celebrim]

Raloc: Good advice. Let me add my own thoughts:

I find my own sessions go best when I follow some guidelines:

1) Prepare before the session
a. Read monster stats
b. Get NPCs ready
c. Find out and rationalize the motivations and tactics of a. and b.
d. Prepare the home terrain of your a. and b. and possibly give them some tactical advantages therein.

One additional bit of preparation that I find helps me alot is to right down the PC's spot/listen/search, fort/reflex/will, and AC's and keep them in front of me on a handy peice of paper. Not only does this minimize the amount of time that I have to waste asking the player for information off of his character sheet, but it has the additional advantage of minimizing the amount of metagame knowledge being exchanged.

4) Write major descriptions (even of battle scenes and the like) beforehand (try to anticipate)
a. If a major baddie is going to bite it this session, or you think he might, write up the majority of his speech or description of his death scene before hand.
b. Write descriptions of major geographic features or overland traveling
c. Write descriptions of any miscellany that's important to the session (dungeon description, items, etc.)

I've waffled back and forth on this over the years, but currently I've come to the conclusion that this is very good advice indeed. I use to worry that players wouldn't be as engaged when I read from a prepared text, but in my experience - and particularly in my experience as a player - I find that prepared text isn't distracting at all but quite the contracy, quite exciting. Players seem to dig it, and it means that you won't be stuttering for something to say or forget and leave off an important detail when describing something.

 

[GlassJaw]

What I realized is that when we are doing this in every encounter, it frazzles my mind and I start thinking like a robot rather than a creative artist. I no longer think about roleplaying what an NPC will be saying, and instead of an NPC doing an action during an encounter because it would add to the storytelling, my NPC's are only doing things to benefit tactical rules, like "flanking bonuses". Or I'm figuring out ways to gain "concealment/cover bonuses". Or if an NPC's crossbow is ruined by a Warp Wood spell, instead of him throwing it at the PC in frustration to add a little roleplaying spice to the encounter, I drop the x-bow as a "free action" and cast a range touch spell because I know I can damage the PC easier since a touch AC is easier to hit.

I would consider all of the above to be positives, unless of course you aren't playing the NPC's appropriately.

A well-trained or disciplined group of humanoids should use tactics as you've described. Oozes won't.

So I would argue that because you have a stronger grasp of the rules, you have more options in your arsenal to challenge your players with. But you still have to know when it's appropriate in the game to use those options.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I also think that it depends on how much combat your group wants to do. More often than not, rules questions bog down in the middle of combat. If a group is small or does little combat, rules issues are less likely to come up.

 

[Johnnie Freedom!]

N00b DM to 3.5 here. I ran a few limited adventures back in 2nd Ed days, and I've been reading D&D books in general since 1984.

Reading this post is really disenheartening for those of us with a crappy memory, a short attention span (can you say ADD?) and not much free time.

I have neither a good sense of dramatic timing nor a tactical mind, and memorizing a 300 page hardcover (or two of them if you include parts of the DMG) is out of the question.

I'm not stupid, I just can't remember that sheer volume of info. I've been running 3.5 games for...a little less than a year, mostly pre-published adventures with my own side-plots thrown in. It's been a challenge, I hafta admit....there are some nights I really don't wanna run this game at all.

Makes me wanna throw in the towel right here and now.

That's the same problem I have. If you are a university student majoring in math and you have no friends and no girlfriend, then of course you can master D&D 3.5. There are people on enworld who fit into this category, and who post here one hundred times per day, and are running multiple weekly D&D campaigns, and who memorize every spell in the Players Handbook, and who purchase every new supplement.

However, most people are in your predicament: we have other things in our lives than D&D 3.5. Which is why I don't DM anymore; I just play.

 

[Johnnie Freedom!]

The problem I found with 3.5 and knowing the rules is that the more I learn the rules, the less roleplaying I end up doing as a DM. I think this has a lot to do with half of my group knowing the rules and insisting that we are using them correctly.

I used to suck with rules....but I was awesome at roleplaying & storytelling. Then I got a new group that had 2 rules lawyers in it. I was forced to learn the rules as well as they knew them so they wouldn't think my game sucked. Now when I'm DM'ing, half of the group spends a good amount of time nit-picking rules and looking them up. Granted, we are quick at looking up the rules, but I realized we do it a lot...so overall, the game is slowed down.

What I realized is that when we are doing this in every encounter, it frazzles my mind and I start thinking like a robot rather than a creative artist. I no longer think about roleplaying what an NPC will be saying, and instead of an NPC doing an action during an encounter because it would add to the storytelling, my NPC's are only doing things to benefit tactical rules, like "flanking bonuses". Or I'm figuring out ways to gain "concealment/cover bonuses". Or if an NPC's crossbow is ruined by a Warp Wood spell, instead of him throwing it at the PC in frustration to add a little roleplaying spice to the encounter, I drop the x-bow as a "free action" and cast a range touch spell because I know I can damage the PC easier since a touch AC is easier to hit.

It's so bad now that I've noticed I'm having a hard time with dialogue when the players finally attempt to roleplay.

To be honest, it sounds like you're running D&D 3.5 perfectly. For true roleplaying, however, I have usually found Storyteller groups are more the way to go, and I've played both over the years. D&D 3.5 is a tactical wargame with some RPG elements, which is totally cool, but yeah, the dramatic roleplaying thing has never really been a part of it.

 

[Celebrim]

\Now when I'm DM'ing, half of the group spends a good amount of time nit-picking rules and looking them up. Granted, we are quick at looking up the rules, but I realized we do it a lot...so overall, the game is slowed down...What I realized is that when we are doing this in every encounter, it frazzles my mind and I start thinking like a robot rather than a creative artist. I no longer think about roleplaying what an NPC will be saying, and instead of an NPC doing an action during an encounter because it would add to the storytelling, my NPC's are only doing things to benefit tactical rules, like "flanking bonuses". Or I'm figuring out ways to gain "concealment/cover bonuses". Or if an NPC's crossbow is ruined by a Warp Wood spell, instead of him throwing it at the PC in frustration to add a little roleplaying spice to the encounter, I drop the x-bow as a "free action" and cast a range touch spell because I know I can damage the PC easier since a touch AC is easier to hit.

It's so bad now that I've noticed I'm having a hard time with dialogue when the players finally attempt to roleplay.

I have no idea why you'd need to luck up rules in every encounter unless you are in a high level campaign with alot of spell slingers. In any event, its time for you as a DM to put your foot down. Inform the players that you are wasting too much time looking up and arguing over the rules, and its reducing your enjoyment of the game. Tell them that players aren't allowed to crack a book at the table for the entire session. If PC casts a spell that the DM isn't completely familiar with, if you can't quickly summerize what the spell does without flipping open a book, then you aren't allowed to cast it.

That's what the PC's are doing wrong. Getting them to stay focused on the game will solve part of your problems.

The other problem is what you are doing wrong. Briefly, you are allowing metagame information to creep into your roleplaying. You are letting the crunch get in the way of the fluff, and you've fallen into the trap of communicating only crunch with the players. You have forgotten the DM's first rule of fluff. As long as the fluff doesn't impact the mechanics, any sort of fluff is allowable under the rules. So go ahead and have the NPC throw the crossbow away in frustration. So long as it isn't an actual attack, it is a free action. Dropping an object in a free action. How that action is described is up to you and any description you give it as a DM is a valid one so long as you don't change the crunch. By all means, you are the DM - add colorful fluff to the crunch. Allow the PC's to add colorful fluff to the crunch, just so long as they adhere to the same standard. If the PC's wants to throw his crossbow away in frustration, let him do so just so long as he understand that if he wants a chance for it to actually hit the evil wood warping druid, he has to use an action. But if he doesn't want to use an action on his crossbow tossing, it doesn't matter how he describes it and he should be encouraged to describe in as exciting and flavorful of a manner possible.

 

[Celebrim]

To be honest, it sounds like you're running D&D 3.5 perfectly. For true roleplaying, however, I have usually found Storyteller groups are more the way to go, and I've played both over the years. D&D 3.5 is a tactical wargame with some RPG elements, which is totally cool, but yeah, the dramatic roleplaying thing has never really been a part of it.

Errr... whatever. I think I would qualify that with 'in my experience' or 'YMMV'.

 

[GlassJaw]

That's the same problem I have. If you are a university student majoring in math and you have no friends and no girlfriend, then of course you can master D&D 3.5. There are people on enworld who fit into this category, and who post here one hundred times per day, and are running multiple weekly D&D campaigns, and who memorize every spell in the Players Handbook, and who purchase every new supplement.

However, most people are in your predicament: we have other things in our lives than D&D 3.5. Which is why I don't DM anymore; I just play.

Generalize much? Where's the condescending smiley when you need it?

You make it sound like the rulebook is a textbook on nuclear physics or something.