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

[kenada]

I get the feeling that 4e and PF2 were both much more prescriptive in how their games should be played when compared to 5e. Do you think that's accurate?

PF2 is about having adventures (in the D&D sense), but it doesn’t force you to play a certain way. I’ve encountered assumptions PF2 is for AP play, but that’s not supported by the text. I ran an old-school exploration-driven sandbox, and it worked pretty well. I know a few others here are also doing non-AP play to good effect.

What the GMG does, which is available online for free, is start with the basics (pacing, things to consider, etc) before delving into how the system is put together. It then goes into variants and new subsystems for those who are interested in those things. It’s a really solid book.

 

[FrogReaver]

Was it? I didn’t play 4e as a open sandbox, but off the top of my head, I can’t think of any reason you couldn’t. Certain players both play 4e more narratively and swear that the game was designed with that in mind. OSR grim and gritty would probably have been harder, but I don’t think it would have taken very many more pages to present the playstyle and the variant rules to implement it.

You seem to be arguing that 4e can be played other ways (i agree) instead of whether 4e rules prescribe a particular way to play (what we are talking about). There's a difference there. Let's start talking about the same thing!

Actually, that might be the way to do it. Take the 4e layout. Immediately after the GM Toolbox section, include a new chapter: Playstyles. Devote 4-5 pages to each playstyle: why people play it, what rules variants can be used to run it.

IMO, one of the worst things you can do to a new DM is give them a ton of options up front. New learners in general can quickly get overwhelmed that way.

 

[FrogReaver]

What the GMG does, which is available online for free, is start with the basics (pacing, things to consider, etc) before delving into how the system is put together. It then goes into variants and new subsystems for those who are interested in those things. It’s a really solid book.

I just get a few snippets of the Game Master Guide on that site. Maybe I am navigating incorrectly.

 

[kenada]

Firstly - I cannot speak to PF2, but if it is in any way like PF1 and 3.x then the font is small and allows for much more information to be delivered to its readers. WotC changed their style from 4e onwards.

I pulled my copies of the PF2 Gamemastery Guide and the 5e DMG. The DMG uses a narrower leading than the GMG, but the font sizes appear about the same. While the GMG conceivably is less dense, I find the DMG nicer to read. I think PF2 is set too loosely.

 

[kenada]

I just get a few snippets of the Game Master Guide on that site. Maybe I am navigating incorrectly.

You have to click into each of them. It’s unfortunately not very good for long-form reading, but it’s usually adequate for looking up something. (Edit: Also, the intro sections are just not very long. There’s more meat e.g., to Running Encounters.)

 

[Oofta]

How about actual guidance? There are platitudes but no actual guidance. How about actual descriptions about how actually using the dice actually changes the way actual people actually play?

I'm not suggesting the DMG should specify One True Way to play the game. I'm saying it should help DMs figure out how to run the games they want to run whatever those are. I am not sure why this seems so difficult to grasp.

Because you're not giving actual specifics and responding in platitudes? The DMG is not going to tell you specifically what to do because that's not it's goal. The game gives examples, gives options, but it's always clear that people need to figure out what works best for them.

There will always be a bit of trial and error when figuring out how to DM. You are asking too much if you think there is any way a book could boil down the choices into what will work for a group, but they do give guidance. Take the Roll of the Dice section Rolling with it:

Relying on dice also gives the players the sense that anything is possible. Sure, it might seem unlikely that the party’s halfling can leap on the ogre’s back, pull a sack over its head, and then dive to safety, but with a lucky enough roll it just might work.​

​

A drawback of this approach is that roleplaying can diminish if players feel that their die rolls, rather than their decisions and characterizations, always determine success.​

​

It gives very clear and concise benefits and drawbacks. How is that not actual advice? It doesn't matter for this whether you're doing an urban mystery or a dungeon crawl, the benefits and drawbacks will be the same. What else could they do? Have a quiz "Answer these 20 questions to see what kind of DM you are?" Because that's just not practical, you may as well tell them what's best based on their astrological sign.

For many things the only way to learn is through experience. I can read all the books I want on how to drive, and some may be useful, but ultimately I've got to get behind the wheel.

 

[pointofyou]

Because you're not giving actual specifics and responding in platitudes? The DMG is not going to tell you specifically what to do because that's not it's goal. The game gives examples, gives options, but it's always clear that people need to figure out what works best for them.

There will always be a bit of trial and error when figuring out how to DM. You are asking too much if you think there is any way a book could boil down the choices into what will work for a group, but they do give guidance. Take the Roll of the Dice section Rolling with it:

Relying on dice also gives the players the sense that anything is possible. Sure, it might seem unlikely that the party’s halfling can leap on the ogre’s back, pull a sack over its head, and then dive to safety, but with a lucky enough roll it just might work.​

​

A drawback of this approach is that roleplaying can diminish if players feel that their die rolls, rather than their decisions and characterizations, always determine success.​

​

It gives very clear and concise benefits and drawbacks. How is that not actual advice? It doesn't matter for this whether you're doing an urban mystery or a dungeon crawl, the benefits and drawbacks will be the same. What else could they do? Have a quiz "Answer these 20 questions to see what kind of DM you are?" Because that's just not practical, you may as well tell them what's best based on their astrological sign.

For many things the only way to learn is through experience. I can read all the books I want on how to drive, and some may be useful, but ultimately I've got to get behind the wheel.

You want specifics. I said it before and I said it again and I'll say it one more time.

I want the book to be laid out and organized so actual people can actually read and use it. An actual functional index would be revelatory.

I want a basic explanation of what people usually expect from the game as players. This might need some granularity and some acknowledgment that people sometimes want and expect different things. It should probably include some specific advice for meeting those expectations.

I want some specific commentary on why a DM would run one way as opposed to another. This doesn't need to be judgmental but rather than just telling the new DM they can run in these ways it seems useful to explain at least some of why people run those ways.

I want the effects of and reasoning behind optional rules explained. I'd strongly prefer for those optional rules to have actual thought put into them and I'd strongly prefer for the explanations I want to actually reflect the effects of the optional rules on play.

I want instruction on worldbuilding to focus on getting the most play out of the least work and getting quickly to play. It's fine to work out complicated geography and functional calendars but I do not believe those things are exactly necessary to start play. Telling new DMs to figure out some broad strokes of the setting then some specifics of where play starts then fill things in as needed would be nice. An example of doing so with thought processes explained would be superb.

Is that specific enough?

All those things seem as though they might be more helpful for newer DMs and some might be useful for more experiences ones as well.

 

[Maxperson]

How is a new DM supposed to know what details they need and what details they don't if there's no advice on the topic?

The DMG tells the DM what the default assumptions are. The rest is advice on how to change those default assumptions and what it would look like if they did, and some little extras that the DM can choose. I expect a new DM will just go with the defaults until he is comfortable enough to tinker, and by then he will have an idea of what he wants to change and why.

 

[Maxperson]

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

Never mind. I read the second paragraph differently than it seems it was intended.

 

[hawkeyefan]

One True Wayism at its "best."

That was sarcasm. As @pointofyou immediately said after the bit you quoted.

Calling for change to the DMG is no more one true wayism than calling for it to remain as is.