D&D General D&D as a Curated, DIY Game or "By the Book": Examining DM and Player Agency, and the DM as Game Designer

[Neonchameleon]

In my experience, most of my players aren't particularly interested in the rules and only read the basic rules, if that. Why have a dog (DM) and bark yourself?

Because the DM isn't a dog and DMing is fun. (So is playing).

In my experience a good half are interested in either the rules or DMing themselves and want to try it at least once. Of those about half will decide it's not for them (which is fair enough).

But a lot here depends how arcane the rules are. I mean I've never played 4e without there being at least three regular DMs in the group. By contrast the few 3.5 games I played only ever had one regular DM and a number of people having decided even if GMing was for them DMing 3.X wasn't. (I'm in this latter category). 5e is somewhere between 4e and 3.5.

 

[tetrasodium]

on the topic of players noticing or having thoughts if a gm changes the rules. Yes there are some who are so oblivious they never move past "what do I do to use my sword", but players are probably going to notice even if you are changing something entirely behind the screen like monster ac/hp. The GM only has so much leeway to make changes to the rules before encountering pushback as well. ""I want to use this optional rule out of the dmg is likely to have a very low bar & not eat up too much of the gm's leeway to push changes for the betterment of the game. The second a gm needs to start rebuilding entire systems or including a bunch of edge cases in a rule the pushback will grow exponentially if the change is not making PC's more powerful/durable/invincible making some of 5e's dial settings particularly inexcusable.

 

[Oofta]

on the topic of players noticing or having thoughts if a gm changes the rules. Yes there are some who are so oblivious they never move past "what do I do to use my sword", but players are probably going to notice even if you are changing something entirely behind the screen like monster ac/hp. The GM only has so much leeway to make changes to the rules before encountering pushback as well. ""I want to use this optional rule out of the dmg is likely to have a very low bar & not eat up too much of the gm's leeway to push changes for the betterment of the game. The second a gm needs to start rebuilding entire systems or including a bunch of edge cases in a rule the pushback will grow exponentially if the change is not making PC's more powerful/durable/invincible making some of 5e's dial settings particularly inexcusable.

I modify monsters on a regular basis and have in all editions. Sometimes it's because of in-game reasons "you see something extremely unusual, the ogre seems to be wearing heavy armor". In other cases just to fit the situation or my vision. In the extremely rare case that anyone notices I just let them know that I modify monsters now and then and don't expect them to be exactly the same as the MM version. On the other hand I only have a handful of house rules (half a dozen or so) because the game works well enough out of the box.

My wife and I share DMing. No rebuilding the system has ever been required, I can't imagine how much you'd have to change to require that.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

but when the DM changes part of the basic rules, the players will notice.

Sure: attack rolls, initiative, skill checks, spell slots.

Anything else, I doubt they would notice.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Because the DM isn't a dog

He pretty much is.

and DMing is fun. (So is playing).

It would be nice to get to play. I only DM because no one else is willing to do it. Playing is fun, DMing is work.

In my experience a good half are interested in either the rules or DMing themselves and want to try it at least once. Of those about half will decide it's not for them (which is fair enough).

My experience, about 2/3 of players haven't read the rules. They only know what they have picked up through playing. I have met one other player willing to try DMing, but after a couple of weeks they found they didn't have time with the pressure of work.

 

[Minigiant]

Sure: attack rolls, initiative, skill checks, spell slots.

Anything else, I doubt they would notice.

You know what often changes that?

The list of races and classes. Genre adaptions. Genre additions.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The issue I have with the "D&D as DIY hobby" viewpoint approach is this:

Why would I ever DIY for my home game using D&D as the foundation, when FATE and Cortex are right there and come with much less baggage to unpack and discard?

If I was in the business of producing RPGs commercially, then I could see the argument for making a 5e hack along the lines of AiME, Esper Genesis, Five Torches Deep, Pugmire, etc. Alternatively, I could try and make something new out of the rules chassis of earlier editions; Pathfinder did it with 3.5, Lancer did it with 4e, and the OSR market is (over)saturated with B/X and AD&D clones and hacks. But if you aren't interested in going so far as to creating a new game entirely (and possibly monetizing it), then I don't see trying to make 5e work for purposes beyond its RAW state worth the effort.

In the context of the 90s and the early 00s, when the Internet wasn't as developed as it is today and both games themselves and in-depth discussions on games theory and design wasn't as accessible, I can understand why DIY became the dominant ethos. But the field has shifted, the breadth of tabletop games has massively expanded, and I am very tempted to say that the community overall has a better understanding of the hows and whys of the ways tabletop RPGs function.

In that light, I feel that there's two ways you can go with DIYing 5e and have it be worth the time investment: you either make some very minor aesthetic changes, or commit to really taking it apart and putting it back together in a standalone game. If you don't commit to either extreme, you'll more than likely find yourself in some weird limbo of messy and clunky design that wasn't really worth the effort and probably would have been better off just using another game for your purposes, whether generic or specific.

I bolded the issue; the issue that you have is simple; a failure of empathy. As in understanding and vicariously experiencing the feelings and experiences of others.

You might never DIY D&D. That's fine! You are you, and that's a respectable choice to make. On the other hand, other people are not you. They are not interested in monetizing the game commercially. And they might not want to run FATE or Cortex.

So try and imagine that you are someone who does enjoy DIY, and does enjoy D&D, and does enjoy the two things combined! What might be some of those reasons? I will give you a few.

1. A long history to build upon. Imagine there is a TTRPG that has been around since the dawn of pre-history; since TTRPGs were invented. This would allow for you to easily "plug & play" elements of the past into the current game.

2. Ease of use/ familiarity. Whether you believe the 10,000 hours thing or not, if you have significant time invested in the "D&D" style of play, it can become increasingly easy to run the game, alter the game, and modify the game as you need to. Some might call this "path dependency" but the basic idea is that it the system and lore is second-nature to you, and therefore easily hackable.

3. The 800lb gorilla in the room. Lots of people play FATE and Cortex. Which is great! But everyone plays D&D. Is that an exaggeration? I don't know. I mean, I'm hard pressed to think of anyone I know or have met that plays TTRPGs that has never, ever played D&D (a version of it, a clone of it, PF, etc.).* That means that there is a massive, ungodly amount of 3PP that is churned out that is compatible with D&D. If you stretch back to prior editions, and prior 3PP, the amount of stuff you have to draw upon is truly insane- too much for a mortal mind (MUAHAHAHA!). This allows for a ton of great material that you can alter and incorporate into your own setting.

4. Experience. Building on (2) and (3), above, many people have experience running bespoke versions of D&D, and know what they want. Players are familiar with D&D. It's almost always easier for some of us to both create a custom D&D game, and to sell it to players that are familiar with it, than to create a new game with a new system and sell it to players.


Again, this is not to denigrate any other TTRPG; many are designed incredibly well, and are amazing at what they do! More power to them. But if you truly can't envision why people "DIY" D&D, then I think you aren't listening to the people who are telling you that they are, in fact, doing that.



*Yes, there is always someone. I fully expect to hear from the, "I never played D&D. I have only ever played GURPS Autoduel," person any time now.

 

[Umbran]

As long as you accept that the side that's interested in DIY are the inclusionists. And the side that wants to exclude as a default is those who don't want to DIY things. That's far more reflective of the whole picture.

So, we see here an attempt (intentional or not) of setting this up as a conflict between Them and Us, with good guys and bad guys.

The DM enforcing their role as sole curator against the wishes of the players absolutely deserves tyrannical undertones.

And... here we see the insults start to fly.

Not cool, dude.

 

[Imaro]

The issue I have with the "D&D as DIY hobby" viewpoint approach is this:

Why would I ever DIY for my home game using D&D as the foundation, when FATE and Cortex are right there and come with much less baggage to unpack and discard?

Because D&D provides a different play experience than Fate & Cortex?? I don't even understand how this is a question...

 

[Neonchameleon]

You pointed the spotlight at a bunch of insane & unstructured things... All that math you cite works great with no feats and no magic items, except almost nobody plays that way & that carefully curated balance collapses badly enough to invert linear fighter quadratic wizard. Why the heck should this particular spherical cow be praised?

In no way does 5e come close to inverting linear fighter/quadratic wizard. It would not even do so if every sword strike was lethal rather than the fighter wandering round effectively with a nerf sword (or a foam rubber cosplay sword) thanks to the nature of hit points, especially in 5e.

This is among other things because combat isn't everything - and in part because at both 1st and 20th levels the fighter's big thing is moving a normal move distance and swinging a piece of sharpened metal hard and fast. There is almost nothing other than an improved proficiency bonus that distinguishes what a L1 fighter can do from a L20 fighter in the exploration and social pillars.