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

[pointofyou]

But you're assuming that all new DM's think like you. You're assuming they were drawn to be a DM because they want to be the most efficient creator as opposed to having fun... I'm just saying some people are going to look at that approach and find it boring and they may or may not keep DM'ing. Personally I think adventure design should come before any of this.

Yes. All the new DMs that are going to be any good think like me. That is exactly what I have been saying.

Without sarcasm what I am advocating for is making it as unintimidating as possible for new DMs. I actively want as many people becoming DMs as can and want to and I think presenting them with something that at least looks really really hard is not the best way to do that.

 

[LordEntrails]

They should just put many of these resources online and they can just keep adding to them, and DMs can print or use when necessary. This would save a lot of space in the DMG.

IMO, not a good idea. WotC has a proven track record of being a poor digital archiver.

 

[Imaro]

Do you think there's conflict between what you want and that discussion saying something like "starting small usually gets play happening more quickly?"

Not at all... but some of your statements seemed to advocate for a definite "better" method, if they weren't then i apologize for the misunderstanding.

 

[pointofyou]

Not at all... but some of your statements seemed to advocate for a definite "better" method, if they weren't then i apologize for the misunderstanding.

I think there are approaches more new DMs are going to find easier and/or quicker and I think it's a reasonable choice for the DMG to prioritize those. I am also operating on the presumption that someone who just bought the books wants to get to playing the game as quickly as possible. Clearly that is not always the case.

 

[Imaro]

Do you really think a player familiar with the prewritten adventures would struggle with most of that? There might need to be a bit of adjustment and some guidance on personal goals and maybe some setting specifics, but none of that seems insurmountable.

A lot of it is potentially present in Lost Mines of Phandelver. My group was split about dealing with the Redbrands or going off to the castle (Crackjaw?).

I don't mean this as a criticism of your game at all because it sounds like a perfectly good D&D game.

I never said it was insurmountable... I'm noticing this trend where I say something then you take it to level 100... and I'm not sure why. You asked for differences, not insurmountable differences. I gave you the differences. For players that are used to having a driving story goal... yes I have found it to be a noticeable adjustment to get them to both come up with their own goals and go about pursuing them without the DM leading them.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I never said it was insurmountable... I'm noticing this trend where I say something then you take it to level 100... and I'm not sure why. You asked for differences, not insurmountable differences, I gave you the differences. For players that are used to having a driving story goal... yes I have found it to be a noticeable adjustment to get them to both come up with their own and go about pursuing them without leading them.

I asked for challenges. Things that would present some difficulty or tension to overcome.

None of the things you mentioned seem to be much of a challenge in that regard. They seem easily surmounted. None seem so different that anyone who already had an idea on how to play D&D would really struggle with them.

Having personal goals is likely the biggest shift, but with a little help, and the other players there as guides, I don't think it's that big a deal. Especially because, as you say they will have to work together on when and how to purse these potentially unrelated goals... the new guy can just tag along and see how the others handle their personal goals before he feels the need to bring his into focus.

Now, whether that kind of game is to the person's preference, or whether a prewritten adventure would appeal to a regular player in your game, is totally a matter of taste. But I don't think either would pose much difficulty in transition.

I agree with @MGibster about how most D&D games aren't as dissimilar as we sometimes think they may be.

 

[Oofta]

T


Thank you for pulling up those quotes. One of those makes me up my count of one or two to two or three in any case. :-(


Two of the others object to having it "written for the new DM". I wonder how they would react to "written with the new DM in mind". Some might not read them differently, but the former sounds like every other purpose is secondary and I picture some tutorial text books I've seen that would be annoying to use for anything else. The later seems more open.

I read the other (or maybe a later post saying similar) as commenting on the current state of the 5e DMG and giving examples of how it could be done better.

Anyway, apparently I was feeling pedantic, and I think from some of your other posts we would probably agree on much of what could make a much better DMG for everyone, and particularly much better for new DMs.

I think starter sets are where most truly new DMs should start because there is only so much you can do in one book. A starter set has multiple encounters, a setting, potentially details talking about how to handle things and so on. LMoP is 64 pages. Are we supposed to increase the size of the DMG by a third to include all of that content? What they've started doing is releasing free encounters with a video explaining how to run it, I could see an entire set of encounters and videos that do the same. That way it can be tweaked and adjusted based on feedback.

I also think the DMG should be arranged a bit, and no I have no problem with a "getting started" section but that would probably be only a few pages and does not offer as much as a starter set. Get a copy of the free rules, grab a starter set and you should have all you need for a while for most people.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Except for one or two people who are worried there is nothing to cut to put it in, has anyone come out against putting in a chapter explicitly to help new DMs? Has anyone come out against at least keeping new DMs in mind when reorganizing the DMG?

Well, I did write an entire additional thread.

D&D 5E - The 5e DMG Part 2- The Purpose of the DMG

Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process. 1. Introduction- What Does "No One Reads the DMG" Actually Mean? So my undying love of Leonard Nimoy, long-running jokes, and the many nifty and obscure things tucked away in the 5e DMG led...

www.enworld.org

I think that this debate is fundamentally a category error. People that keep saying that the DMG must include a chapter (or whatever) instructing new DMs who have never DM'd before ... are (IMO) missing the purpose of the DMG. It's a reference guide for DMs, not a "learning how to DM manual."

The links I provided make that explicitly clear. The best way to learn to DM is to combine instruction with practice. So the website has a tutorial along with a sample encounter. And then it provides additional instruction along with showing that the preferred starting point if you're new to DMing is ... A STARTER SET. It's in the name!

In order, it's Starter Set - Essentials - Core Rulebooks.

Even when we discuss ye olden days, when "they did it right" (or whatever), and they didn't have streaming video, and twitch, and the ability to learn in so many ways, do you know what they did have? The example everyone thinks about is Moldvay and Mentzer Basic. Which is the equivalent of a Starter Set- stripped down and with a simple module to run (and the module has additional explanation).

I think reorganization of the DMG (esp. wrt a better index) would be great! I also think that they could re-visit the material they include and remove based upon the experiences of tables. But the demand that the DMG be used for onboarding brand new DMs is ... IMO, misplaced. That's not the purpose of the book, and (TBH) reading a chapter is not a very good way to learn to DM. The best way is to do it- as in running a starter set adventure.

 

[Imaro]

I asked for challenges. Things that would present some difficulty or tension to overcome.

None of the things you mentioned seem to be much of a challenge in that regard. They seem easily surmounted. None seem so different that anyone who already had an idea on how to play D&D would really struggle with them.

Having personal goals is likely the biggest shift, but with a little help, and the other players there as guides, I don't think it's that big a deal. Especially because, as you say they will have to work together on when and how to purse these potentially unrelated goals... the new guy can just tag along and see how the others handle their personal goals before he feels the need to bring his into focus.

Now, whether that kind of game is to the person's preference, or whether a prewritten adventure would appeal to a regular player in your game, is totally a matter of taste. But I don't think either would pose much difficulty in transition.

I agree with @MGibster about how most D&D games aren't as dissimilar as we sometimes think they may be.

And like I said, I'm experiencing it right now... Getting players who have only played adventures where the story or plot is the driving factor (or where this is their expectation) takes effort to get them to switch over.

I mean you can think what you want but I'm experiencing it right now. My veteran players are pretty good at differentiating it (but it could be because I usually run this type of game)... my beginning players not so much. Just getting them to decide on a goal for their character necessitated alot of back and forth, explanation and suggestions...

Then we moved into the... "well what do I do phase" AKA... the phase where I noticed the veteran players were advancing their goals while the beginning players weren't really doing anything except helping them... again discussion with new players so that they understood better that they needed to seek out information to achieve their goals and some ways they could go about that, a discussion with the veteran players to get them more onboard with helping the beginning players achieve their goals as opposed to only driving towards their own, and finally reminding all of them that exploration in and of itself (outside of immediate goals) could lead to new goals. And I honestly still feel like the new players are unsure at times about how to proceed but they are getting better.

I mean maybe this seems easy to you but I honestly think it would have been much easier if I had run a linear adventure where the overarching story gave them all a singular motivation, driver and reason to work together while limiting exploration opportunities out of the box.

EDIT: Yeah I'm having a hard time as I actually think about this and write this stuff categorizing the play of our game now as the same as when we played through the adventure in the starter set as an introduction... but I guess that's just me.

 

[pointofyou]

Well, I did write an entire additional thread.

D&D 5E - The 5e DMG Part 2- The Purpose of the DMG

Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process. 1. Introduction- What Does "No One Reads the DMG" Actually Mean? So my undying love of Leonard Nimoy, long-running jokes, and the many nifty and obscure things tucked away in the 5e DMG led...

www.enworld.org

I think that this debate is fundamentally a category error. People that keep saying that the DMG must include a chapter (or whatever) instructing new DMs who have never DM'd before ... are (IMO) missing the purpose of the DMG. It's a reference guide for DMs, not a "learning how to DM manual."

The links I provided make that explicitly clear. The best way to learn to DM is to combine instruction with practice. So the website has a tutorial along with a sample encounter. And then it provides additional instruction along with showing that the preferred starting point if you're new to DMing is ... A STARTER SET. It's in the name!

In order, it's Starter Set - Essentials - Core Rulebooks.

Even when we discuss ye olden days, when "they did it right" (or whatever), and they didn't have streaming video, and twitch, and the ability to learn in so many ways, do you know what they did have? The example everyone thinks about is Moldvay and Mentzer Basic. Which is the equivalent of a Starter Set- stripped down and with a simple module to run (and the module has additional explanation).

I think reorganization of the DMG (esp. wrt a better index) would be great! I also think that they could re-visit the material they include and remove based upon the experiences of tables. But the demand that the DMG be used for onboarding brand new DMs is ... IMO, misplaced. That's not the purpose of the book, and (TBH) reading a chapter is not a very good way to learn to DM. The best way is to do it- as in running a starter set adventure.

How is saying the DMG shouldn't be a guide or at least include guidance for new DMs not prescriptive? It seems reasonable for someone to look at the word "guide" in the title and at least expect some guidance. It also seems silly to expect someone to learn to DM by DMing the Starter Set which after all has next to nothing in it about how to actually DM.

I do not think it is the people who want the Dungeon Master's Guide to provide actual guidance who are committing the category error here.