D&D General The DM Shortage

[Warpiglet-7]

You keep saying "was" like the game hasn't exploded in popularity and seen an unprecedented influx of new players (and thus GMs) since it launched. I'm honestly not sure what your point is. Yes, 5E started put as the "apology edition" but the formula also worked to draw in new players and apparently keep a bunch of them. So why hasn't an effort been made to help make GMs out of as many of those players as possible? After all, no GM, no game.

My point is they have a proven model for how to do it, introduced the last time D&D had an unprecedented influx of new players approximately 40 years ago.

Interestingly, the fact that they have complaints from both sides tells me they probably struck a good balance, in addition to the wide demographics that are playing.

This is not just for crusty grogs though some of us are pretty pleased overall…

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Insofar as this requires conversation between DM and player, as well as adjudication by the DM, this is regarded as "mother may I" mechanics.

Sure. When one side is strongly encouraged to be a Viking Hat, and the other side is strongly encouraged to meekly surrender to the Viking Hat, "mother may I" becomes a serious problem. When you cannot use explicit, open-air arguments to address problems--even well-meaning ones--you are forced to employ other tactics. "Shenanigans beget shenanigans," as CGP Grey puts it.

Most DM's I know however made sure that you get enough magical items to protect you from the game

Why? What motive is there to do this? How is a DM supposed to learn that this is correct play?

If kids are deciding to play video games instead of D&D, that is not proof that D&D is somehow failing them.

Why not? Large numbers of people deciding that something isn't worth their time is a pretty good indication that the thing in question isn't worth their time!

 

[Oofta]

Sure. When one side is strongly encouraged to be a Viking Hat, and the other side is strongly encouraged to meekly surrender to the Viking Hat, "mother may I" becomes a serious problem. When you cannot use explicit, open-air arguments to address problems--even well-meaning ones--you are forced to employ other tactics. "Shenanigans beget shenanigans," as CGP Grey puts it.


Why? What motive is there to do this? How is a DM supposed to learn that this is correct play?


Why not? Large numbers of people deciding that something isn't worth their time is a pretty good indication that the thing in question isn't worth their time!

Hmm. Can I think of a hobby that has exploded in popularity seeing double digit growth every year for nearly a decade? One that's not really new to the scene but had been around for decades before that in different iterations?

I don't see how we associate "incredible growth" with "something isn't worth there time" for one particular group of kids is any indication of an issue. It would be terrifying if everyone that ever tried D&D were secretly brainwashed zombies compelled to play the game exclusively. The game isn't for everyone. Fortunately for the hobby, it works for tens of millions.

 

[Minigiant]

You keep saying "was" like the game hasn't exploded in popularity and seen an unprecedented influx of new players (and thus GMs) since it launched. I'm honestly not sure what your point is. Yes, 5E started put as the "apology edition" but the formula also worked to draw in new players and apparently keep a bunch of them. So why hasn't an effort been made to help make GMs out of as many of those players as possible? After all, no GM, no game.

The DMG was written before the influx.

The typical steps D&D uses is

1. Bring in new players
2. New Player become vet players
3. Vet players attempt to be New DMs
4. New DMs become Vet DMs
5. Vet DMs of Xe become Vet DMs of X+1e

5th edition was stalled a Step 2 because it wasn't written to teach how to DM modern games. It was written to teach a Vet DM of 1e, 2e, 3e, Pf1e, or 4e to run 5e.

My point is they have a proven model for how to do it, introduced the last time D&D had a unprecedented influx of new players approximately 40 years ago.

The demographics changed. 5th edition's DMG was not written for the new demo. Tasha's was. But TCOE isn't the DMG.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Hmm. Can I think of a hobby that has exploded in popularity seeing double digit growth every year for nearly a decade? One that's not really new to the scene but had been around for decades before that in different iterations?

Often, an inability to come up with a good similar example means an argument by analogy is a bad idea.

I don't see how we associate "incredible growth" with "something isn't worth there time" for one particular group of kids is any indication of an issue. It would be terrifying if everyone that ever tried D&D were secretly brainwashed zombies compelled to play the game exclusively. The game isn't for everyone. Fortunately for the hobby, it works for tens of millions.

"Tens of millions"? really? The best numbers we have put it at 8 million, and that's the optimistic estimate. There are more people who have played one singular MMO--and not even necessarily the market leader!--than have ever played D&D.

More importantly, we're talking about choosing to DM, not those choosing to play any form of D&D at all. At least, I thought that was what the thread was about.

 

[Xamnam]

Now we need a test subject who has never played a TTRPG of any kind to read a 5e Starter Set and see if they can run a game..

Can? Absolutely. Will have fun if everyone is committed to it? Almost certainly. Is supported in the ways that an average party can and likely will diverge from the expectations of the adventure? Sporadically. Builds the soft skills of a DM and an understanding of why to make decisions one way or another? Rarely.

At least as far as LMoP goes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Why? What motive is there to do this? How is a DM supposed to learn that this is correct play?

Because their players are frustrated if they die all the time. Also their NPCs die too easily to players if they have no defensive items. Also, magic items are fun and having characters survive from the beginning to the end of the story (at least a few of them) always made sense... at lwast dor DMs in my group.

So. If you always had DMs that killed your characters outright. Bad for you. But it was not the average experience in my region.

 

[Zardnaar]

Because their players are frustrated if they die all the time. Also their NPCs die too easily to players if they have no defensive items. Also, magic items are fun and having characters survive from the beginning to the end of the story (at least a few of them) always made sense... at lwast dor DMs in my group.

So. If you always had DMs that killed your characters outright. Bad for you. But it was not the average experience in my region.

I didn't have to many fatalities in 2E. Key difference was you had to be a hit more careful less plot armor than 5E.

Hell even in 1E when the DM used a wight he was telegraphing it was a baddie. Tough luck to the level 3 cavalier who derp charged it and became a level 2 cavalier.

 

[Oofta]

Often, an inability to come up with a good similar example means an argument by analogy is a bad idea.


"Tens of millions"? really? The best numbers we have put it at 8 million, and that's the optimistic estimate. There are more people who have played one singular MMO--and not even necessarily the market leader!--than have ever played D&D.

More importantly, we're talking about choosing to DM, not those choosing to play any form of D&D at all. At least, I thought that was what the thread was about.

Dude, there are 13 million people registered for DndBeyond alone and that's just a fraction of the player base. Over 50 million people have played the game and 5E is the most popular version of D&D ever. Detailed numbers are hard to get, but hundreds of thousands play online every month. According to @darjr's thread on sales, the PHB was number 8 in all of books on Amazon. That's 35,610 per month if that were a sustained number (it's likely not because they're on sale, but still). I have no idea where you're getting your numbers.

Do more people eat pizza for lunch than play D&D? I assume so. But, just like comparing D&D's numbers to MMOs, it's not relevant. One group of kids deciding to not play D&D is not proof or indicative of anything. Close to a decade of double digit growth is.

I'm not saying things can't be improved. I've given some of my ideas here and there. But you don't have a book be #8 on Amazon more than 8 years after it was first published if people aren't playing the game. Even if you don't.

Most importantly, you can't have a game without a DM. Whether people "choose" to DM or not doesn't really matter.

 

[Oofta]

Because their players are frustrated if they die all the time. Also their NPCs die too easily to players if they have no defensive items. Also, magic items are fun and having characters survive from the beginning to the end of the story (at least a few of them) always made sense... at lwast dor DMs in my group.

So. If you always had DMs that killed your characters outright. Bad for you. But it was not the average experience in my region.

In all my years of playing I've had 1 killer DM. They ran exactly 1 game, it just wasn't fun for any of the players.