Well, if YouTube says it!
D&D General Can we talk about best practices?
- Thread starter overgeeked
- Start date
Yora
Legend
Run the game you think you can run. Not the kind of ideal game you wish you could run.
Being ambitious and trying things out is always good to learn and approve. But quite often it's a good idea to really think if what you plan to do is realistic.
An 80 part campaign that takes the PCs from 1st to 20th level sounds cool. But when your GM career so far consist of a campaign with 5 games and one with 3 games before they stalled out, do you really think you'll pull that off? Better to plan for a single adventure that can be done in 5 games and then has the option to carry on into a next adventures, if the players all work together well as a group and are still motivated.
Or you want to run a deeply involved campaign with 6 PCs who all play major roles in the continuous narrative, but you never can get all seven people in your group together at the same time more than ince every two months or so. Yes, your idea might be amazing, but when you have a group where only 4 or 5 people can actually make it for every scheduled game, better find a campaign that doesn't require all PCs to be present every time.
Being ambitious and trying things out is always good to learn and approve. But quite often it's a good idea to really think if what you plan to do is realistic.
An 80 part campaign that takes the PCs from 1st to 20th level sounds cool. But when your GM career so far consist of a campaign with 5 games and one with 3 games before they stalled out, do you really think you'll pull that off? Better to plan for a single adventure that can be done in 5 games and then has the option to carry on into a next adventures, if the players all work together well as a group and are still motivated.
Or you want to run a deeply involved campaign with 6 PCs who all play major roles in the continuous narrative, but you never can get all seven people in your group together at the same time more than ince every two months or so. Yes, your idea might be amazing, but when you have a group where only 4 or 5 people can actually make it for every scheduled game, better find a campaign that doesn't require all PCs to be present every time.
There are no best practices because there is no one game of D&D (or any other rpg, for that matter). Some tables run super casual author stance power fantasy and some high sandbox deep improve type of game and all shading and gradations in between are possible. Some table can even switch between styles or the DM can juggle things to satisfy players with different style agendas.
So advice for one style may be contra indicated for another.
So advice for one style may be contra indicated for another.
el-remmen
Moderator Emeritus
That's just good advice.
A lot of it is hit or miss and the best of it can be summed up as "Don't be a dick" and don't let anyone else be a dick at your table either. They rest of the good stuff is often aimed at a particular style of D&D. it is often wort watching because seeing how other people do it can be a learning experience but creating advice for a DM that has never seen a game or played before and just bought the rules and wants to run a game is not easy and not all DMG's succeed at that task.
There are some Youtube series that are worth watching but to get the value quite a few videos may have to be watched.
Then there is the option of watching some actual gameplay but also quite an investment in time. I wonder is there utility is some one taking a Critical Role session and breaking down what is going on for the beginning player.
Grantypants
Explorer
I think the most useful way to talk about our hobby and how to improve it is with actual evidence. "Maybe X seemed like a good idea, but what happened when you actually tried it at the table?" "I thought Y would be awful, but this is what happened when we tried it." It's also super important to talk about your style of play and what you hope to accomplish with whatever piece of advice. For example, strategies for resolving conflict between players about what to do next might be great for a table with players that prefer to focus on tactical combat setpieces. On the other hand, if the players would rather roleplay through drama between characters, then you've taken away a fun part of the game for them.
D&D is a game, and ultimately the point is to have fun. So, whatever best practices you've got, if they make your table have more fun, then it was good advice for your table.
D&D is a game, and ultimately the point is to have fun. So, whatever best practices you've got, if they make your table have more fun, then it was good advice for your table.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I think it’s true that what’s best for one game, or one group, might not be what’s best for another. But I think it’s silly to extrapolate that there is therefore no such thing as best practices, or that the concept is one true wayist. It just means best practices are contextual.
Any activity that has had this many people working on it for this long absolutely has best practices. Some of these are nearly universal across games, genres, and groups (like, pay attention, be respectful, understand the rules, be consistent, work out social conflict outside of game-play, be explicit about what you like and don't like, don't argue about rules during the game, etc.). Others are broadly applicable but might be conditional: For example, fudging dice vs. letting them roll in the open; railroad vs. sandbox vs. somewhere in between; PvP vs. not; following the rules to a T vs. just doing whatever feels right in the moment; meticulous planning and inventory tracking vs. just letting it all ride; meta-game knowledge vs. character knowledge; open discussion of combat tactics in the middle of combat vs. deep-immersion decision making; etc. There's a lot of GM advice out there, and some of it is contradictory, because for most issues there are a small handful of best practice approaches.
Similar Threads
