D&D 5E Regarding DMG, Starter Set and Essentials kit: Are they good for the starting DMs?

[Composer99]

The question is how much value these particular examples (setbacks) would hold for the amount of space they take up. As an extreme counterpart... do we need examples and diagrams of how to roll a die? I don't think we do but for a complete beginner maybe some would argue it's necessary... There's a point where if you are of the recommended age I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation...

The extreme counterpart is a strawman, and I will not indulge that absurdity.

This comes across as equivalent to arguing that, say, a reference manual for gardening shouldn't include any discussion (or examples) about how different plants want different amounts of sunlight because "There's a point where if you [have the recommended level of gardening competency or experience] I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation [edits made by me to fit the example]". That would be nonsensical: including content about things like sun and soil is precisely the point of having a reference manual about gardening.

Or how about a user manual for a piece of software - say, the user manual for the 2009 version of music writing software Finale. (I pick that year because that's the one I own.) Without actually teaching the user step-by-step how to use the software (much less how to read or write music), it comprehensively describes how each element of the software works, from dialogue boxes to plug-ins, because that is what it, as a user manual for software, is literally supposed to do, and it would be ridiculous to leave out any arbitrary number of dialogue boxes or menus because "There's a point where if you [have the recommended level of experience using this software] I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation [edits made by me to fit the example]".

Or another example: My university reference manual on orchestration, which I can assure you already presumes a great deal of background knowledge and competence - more, I am sure, than the DMG presumes of DMs - includes a concrete discussion on writing passages for violin - including, for instance, examples of passages written for violins on different strings, chord passages (including chords that would be awkward or impossible to finger!) - as well as discussions and concrete examples of bowing and harmonics. None of this content is an insult to the reader's intelligence, nor is it a constraint on the reader's creativity.

As a counterpoint, would you think it was acceptable for, say, the PHB to excise the entirety of chapter 10 because "There's a point where if you are of the recommended age I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation", and therefore if you can look up words such as "area", "time", "range", or "self" in the dictionary, there's no need to discuss the context in which such terms are used with respect to casting spells in the game, or even have concrete rules for how concentration works?

I mean, you're basically trying to tell me that

Let's suppose a player character wants to jump from a balcony, swing across a chandelier, and land behind an enemy on their turn so that they or one of their allies can get Sneak Attack damage against that enemy. You might decide that calls for using their action and a DC 15 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. If the check succeeds, the character does as the player has described. If the check fails, you might either decide the character fails outright - perhaps preparing to jump and realising the effort would fail, so they use their action and stay in place - or you might decide the character makes progress with a setback, perhaps either landing where they wanted to but falling prone, or landing on their feet halfway to their intended destination.

or

For example, suppose a player character wants to learn the true name of a particular fiend of great power during some downtime. You might decide that kind of lore is hard to find and call for a DC 25 Intelligence (Arcana) check as they try to track down tomes of occult lore or consult with appropriately learned sages. On a successful check, the character learns the true name, catching a lucky break as they happen to find a suitable resource close to hand. On a failed check, you might decide the character either fails to learn the true name or only makes some progress, perhaps learning a rumour of a sage in a far-away city who is said to possess a cursed tome holding the name.

or (and this last one is, I admit, a bit cheeky, being an actual quote from the DMG pg. 242)

Failure can be tough, but the agony is compounded when a character fails by the barest margin. When a character fails a roll by only 1 or 2, you can allow the character to succeed at the cost of a complication or hindrance. Such complications can run along any of the following lines:

• A character manages to get her sword past a hobgoblin's defenses and turn a near miss into a hit, but the hobgoblin twists its shield and disarms her.
• A character narrowly escapes the full brunt of a fireball but ends up prone.
• A character fails to intimidate a kobold prisoner, but the kobold reveals its secrets anyway while shrieking at the top of its lungs, alerting other nearby monsters.
• A character manages to finish an arduous climb to the top of a cliff despite slipping, only to realize that the rope on which his companions dangle below him is close to breaking.

are somehow inappropriate or insulting the intelligence of DMs because 12-year-olds can look up the word "setback" in the dictionary?

I'm not buying it in the slightest.

 

[Imaro]

The extreme counterpart is a strawman, and I will not indulge that absurdity.

This comes across as equivalent to arguing that, say, a reference manual for gardening shouldn't include any discussion (or examples) about how different plants want different amounts of sunlight because "There's a point where if you [have the recommended level of gardening competency or experience] I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation [edits made by me to fit the example]". That would be nonsensical: including content about things like sun and soil is precisely the point of having a reference manual about gardening.

Or how about a user manual for a piece of software - say, the user manual for the 2009 version of music writing software Finale. (I pick that year because that's the one I own.) Without actually teaching the user step-by-step how to use the software (much less how to read or write music), it comprehensively describes how each element of the software works, from dialogue boxes to plug-ins, because that is what it, as a user manual for software, is literally supposed to do, and it would be ridiculous to leave out any arbitrary number of dialogue boxes or menus because "There's a point where if you [have the recommended level of experience using this software] I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation [edits made by me to fit the example]".

Or another example: My university reference manual on orchestration, which I can assure you already presumes a great deal of background knowledge and competence - more, I am sure, than the DMG presumes of DMs - includes a concrete discussion on writing passages for violin - including, for instance, examples of passages written for violins on different strings, chord passages (including chords that would be awkward or impossible to finger!) - as well as discussions and concrete examples of bowing and harmonics. None of this content is an insult to the reader's intelligence, nor is it a constraint on the reader's creativity.

As a counterpoint, would you think it was acceptable for, say, the PHB to excise the entirety of chapter 10 because "There's a point where if you are of the recommended age I am going to assume you can grasp certain concepts without examples or in-depth explanation", and therefore if you can look up words such as "area", "time", "range", or "self" in the dictionary, there's no need to discuss the context in which such terms are used with respect to casting spells in the game, or even have concrete rules for how concentration works?

I mean, you're basically trying to tell me that

or

or (and this last one is, I admit, a bit cheeky, being an actual quote from the DMG pg. 242)

are somehow inappropriate or insulting the intelligence of DMs because 12-year-olds can look up the word "setback" in the dictionary?

I'm not buying it in the slightest.

On the other hand let's look at the videogame industry... nowadays hardly any videogames include the obligatory introduction tutorial and/or the vast strategy guides that used to be published for the games that were staples in the late 80's up into the late 90's (they may have faded even before then)... why do you think that even though the average videogame today is more demanding, has a greater number of combinations (button wise) are magnitudes larger and in general are more complex than those that came before, they no longer do either of these? My bet would be that they realized most people really don't have a problem figuring it out on their own and for a large number of people this approach may even be more fun to figure it out themselves. Add on top of that easily searchable resources on the internet for those who want to use them and you have a situation (very similar to ttrpg's) where there's no need to spoon-feed to players in excruciating detail everything about the game.

IMO the quickest way to kill interest in DM'ing would be to create a document so comprehensive and so detail and example laden that most people's eyes glaze over shortly after starting it or better yet... they just don't start it because it's too much.

EDIT: Just to address your question about chapter 10... you're comparing apples and oranges... these are game rules being explained... the rule to add a setback is stated and it is explained when a DM can choose to use it. I mean the word range is used in chapter 10... but I don't see example of what range is because we assume the reader knows what is meant when the word range is used.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

On the other hand let's look at the videogame industry... nowadays hardly any videogames include the obligatory introduction tutorial and/or the vast strategy guides that used to be published for the games that were staples in the late 80's up into the late 90's (they may have faded even before then)... why do you think that even though the average videogame today is more demanding, has a greater number of combinations (button wise) are magnitudes larger and in general are more complex than those that came before, they no longer do either of these? My bet would be that they realized most people really don't have a problem figuring it out on their own and for a large number of people this approach may even be more fun to figure it out themselves. Add on top of that easily searchable resources on the internet for those who want to use them and you have a situation (very similar to ttrpg's) where there's no need to spoon-feed to players in excruciating detail everything about the game.

IMO the quickest way to kill interest in DM'ing would be to create a document so comprehensive and so detail and example laden that most people's eyes glaze over shortly after starting it or better yet... they just don't start it because it's too much.

The demands that the DMG be a certain way have very little, if anything, to do with what would work for actual newbies today, and is instead an argument about something else entirely.

That said, I appreciate those that at least acknowledge that they simply want to make sure that people are told to play "the right (true) way."

 

[hawkeyefan]

All that is to say nothing of the fact that the DMG already has, without any apparent widespread controversy:
(a) how-to examples of doing DM stuff (creating a new subrace or race, both of which have fleshed-out examples, and creating a new background, which describes an example background in each step of the suggested process)
(b) example/fixed DCs for several adventuring tasks - foraging, tracking, and social interaction. However niche the first two might be in many games, the last is, strictly speaking, at the heart of what is ostensibly one of the pillars of gameplay!

The DMG is at its most useful when it provides examples. Which it does, often and of all sorts.

But if I've followed correctly, people are saying the DMG should not be for new DMs, the Starter Sets should... but suggestions to provide examples of a setback in the Starter Set are met with indifference or outright disagreement.

I can't even follow the logic to this at all.

This is really starting to feel like a rules vs rulings discussion. Some people want 5e to be more codified and more structured while others enjoy the rulings (including having to make up your own) philosophy that 5e touted from the beginning and aren't keen (and/or don't see the need) for more structure and codification than what exists now.

At some point you can't claim your game is based on rulings instead of rules when you are laying everything out in an exact format

You don't think that examples of rulings can be given?

Something like "In this situation, you might decide to do X, or perhaps Y. Think about the situation and what makes sense, and what make for an interesting situation for the characters. Here's a short list of other suggestions to serve as inspiration."

 

[pointofyou]

I don't think the people who want instruction/s in the DMG are arguing for any "one true right way."

When one first learns to play an instrument one isn't taught how to play "classical" or "jazz"or "rock and roll" or any other genre. One is taught how to hold ones hands. If one is learning a wind or brass instrument one is taught how to breathe. One learns pieces in various styles to learn scales and chords and other aspects of theory.

It is only after one has some grounding in the basics that one starts to learn more in a specific genre or style. Something like that is what we want for the DMG. There's nothing in learning how to play classical piano that precludes one from playing Jerry Lee Lewis and there's nothing about learning how to run a game with fail-forward and setbacks and degrees of success that precludes one from running an old-school dungeon.

 

[Imaro]

The DMG is at its most useful when it provides examples. Which it does, often and of all sorts.

I think it's at it's most useful when it provides options and tools for me to use however I want... but hey we are all looking for something different out of D&D.

But if I've followed correctly, people are saying the DMG should not be for new DMs, the Starter Sets should... but suggestions to provide examples of a setback in the Starter Set are met with indifference or outright disagreement.

No, but claiming it's a bad starter set because it didn't provide these is what some people feel is silly. Yes it could have examples but again there are other logistics like page count, price etc. that providing copious examples will affect. If the price increases to $30 will the number of DM's put off by that increase be made up for because now their are more examples? Will the DM's lost to the extra page count they now need to read will be made up for by these extra examples.

I can't even follow the logic to this at all.

It's not hard but I think part of it is that instead of asking for clarification you are going off what you (as someone arguing the opposite) can't follow. Is that really a mystery?

You don't think that examples of rulings can be given?

Something like "In this situation, you might decide to do X, or perhaps Y. Think about the situation and what makes sense, and what make for an interesting situation for the characters. Here's a short list of other suggestions to serve as inspiration."

Where did I say examples of rulings can't be given? Do I feel like generic examples of setbacks in a starter set are a worthwhile addition... not particularly, I think the wordcount and page space could be better served with in adventure examples... which I even posted was an idea I supported.

 

[Zaukrie]

No one claimed it was a bad starter set because it didn't provide setback examples. We suggested it would be better if it did. No one said it was bad because it didn't.

 

[Imaro]

I don't think the people who want instruction/s in the DMG are arguing for any "one true right way."

When one first learns to play an instrument one isn't taught how to play "classical" or "jazz"or "rock and roll" or any other genre. One is taught how to hold ones hands. If one is learning a wind or brass instrument one is taught how to breathe. One learns pieces in various styles to learn scales and chords and other aspects of theory.

It is only after one has some grounding in the basics that one starts to learn more in a specific genre or style. Something like that is what we want for the DMG. There's nothing in learning how to play classical piano that precludes one from playing Jerry Lee Lewis and there's nothing about learning how to run a game with fail-forward and setbacks and degrees of success that precludes one from running an old-school dungeon.

Where are these "basics" coming from? If you had to list them out what would some of them be? This I think is where the tension comes from.

 

[pointofyou]

Where are these "basics" coming from? If you had to list them out what would some of them be? This I think is where the tension comes from.

Do you think basics exist that are generally applicable?

 

[Imaro]

No one claimed it was a bad starter set because it didn't provide setback examples. We suggested it would be better if it did. No one said it was bad because it didn't.

We can theoretically make anything better by adding more to it since nothing is perfect... what practical purpose does that serve?