D&D 5E In Search Of: The 5e Dungeon Master's Guide

[Xamnam]

I'm with you until #4... that's where D&D gets defined and starts to include/exclude certain playstyles as good, bad or not mentioned. Leave that up in the air or discuss them without the "best" moniker.

That's fair, I understand the issue at play there. When I imagine it, it's practices like "Be a Fan of the Hunters" (MotW) or how BitD has both "Address the Characters" and "Address the Players" as separate detailed principles. Hopefully nothing that would actively come across as disparaging. Nothing like "Linear adventure bad, sandbox good."

 

[Imaro]

My experience was totally dif

What data is there that starter set to core books is the way/best way players are on ramping to DMing?

How do starter set sales compare to core book sales?

It seems plausible that WotC has determined that starter sets are a way to on ramp new people to D&D that is worth supporting repeatedly, but it also seems plausible that this is merely one part of a multipath strategy to get as many people as they can into D&D any way they can.

Even if it's one part of a multipath strategy they seem key (and thus are doing their job) since WotC has released 3 starter sets in the span of it's lifetime. If they weren't doing their job why continue to invest in not only selling them but evolving them?

 

[Imaro]

Do the other sets have more material about running the game?

What seems likely to me is someone picks up one of these sets expecting to run it. Then they see how little there is about actually running it and they buy the DMG expecting more helpful and more useful information. Which puts as back at the DMG not being adequate for DMs new to the game because it was written for DMs new to the edition.

The latest set includes a URL that links to official WotC videos for beginning DM's. Honestly I think the whole learning from the books is outdated (and I think WotC is savvy enough to have noted this) and while it may serve some, I'm not so sure it even serves the majority now that D&D is so popular. I think there are much more people learning through visual and interactive means than through books. But I could be wrong

 

[Digdude]

A possible unpopular view, but Id like to see the treasure and magic items moved to the monster manual. This would free up room in the dmg at the cost of some monster blocks in the mm for magic item construction and other glossed over rules. I agree with many here that dming a game could be distilled down to simple concepts we see bad dms repeat. Like dm vs player mentality, how to handle tpks and murderhobboes, etc.

 

[Maxperson]

YOU KNOWN FOR DECADES. What about Ned Newby and Sister Swag who were given the PHB, MM, DMG, and 2 sets of dice from their crazy fun uncle Jasper after he took them to Chris Pratt's D&D movie? With the movie being their only taste of D&D?

You must have come into that exchange late. That was my entire point. The 5e DMG is full of stuff that isn't useful to experienced DMs, but is full of useful advice and options for new ones.

I didn't read most of it, but new DMs likely would.

 

[pointofyou]

The latest set includes a URL that links to official WotC videos for beginning DM's. Honestly I think the whole learning from the books is outdated (and I think WotC is savvy enough to have noted this) and while it may serve some, I'm not so sure it even serves the majority now that D&D is so popular. I think there are much more people learning through visual and interactive means than through books. But I could be wrong

I expect you are wrong in some ways and I am wrong in others. I think books have enough advantages that it's worth making them as good as possible. That arguably means making them useful to DMs of any and every experience level.

 

[Imaro]

I expect you are wrong in some ways and I am wrong in others. I think books have enough advantages that it's worth making them as good as possible. That arguably means making them useful to DMs of any and every experience level.

I am not talking about books in general... and I honestly enjoy reading through my D&D books but in the group I run I am literally the only person who reads them outside of the game, even the other DM has only skimmed them and has garnered the basics of running the game from online resources.

The other group I'm in is a dedicated discord for PoC gamers and nearly everyone there is new to D&D (It's a general gamer discord but has a sub channel for D&D). They learn through a mixture of online resources and participating in the games being ran, most only buy the PHB after being introduced to the game and realizing they like it so maybe my experiences are outliers but this is a relatively large sample of brand new players who wouldn't be playing D&D period if they had to read the near 900+ pages of core book material to learn.

 

[Xamnam]

Well, ideally, if the playing/running the game section is written well, no one would need to read all of the toolkit stuff in the DMG, or all the monsters, or even the character building for classes not being used in the game. I'm curious what the page count of that would look like compared to the total.

 

[AnotherGuy]

YOU KNOWN FOR DECADES. What about Ned Newby and Sister Swag who were given the PHB, MM, DMG, and 2 sets of dice from their crazy fun uncle Jasper after he took them to Chris Pratt's D&D movie? With the movie being their only taste of D&D?

I wanna crazy fun uncle Jasper too!

 

[Micah Sweet]

If the DMG is a Core Book it should absolutely be written with beginning DMs in mind. The biggest problems in the 5e Core Books all stem from the fact they were written for people who'd been playing D&D for a decade or two. Core Books written for new players cannot be anything other than an improvement.

Unless of course, you have been playing for a decade or two, in which case the book becomes needlessly simplistic and filler-heavy.