D&D General The DM Shortage

[Oofta]

Exactly. And that's definitely part of it. The players also don't want to deal with wading through all that old high Gygaxian either, so just go with whatever the DM says, which, more often than not, was a kitbash of AD&D and B/X anyway. Whereas now, the rules are readable and the players expect them to be followed...but they are still many and complex in places. So AD&D, as actually played, wins.

Needing to know exactly what the books say about a particular edge case is a modern thing. It barely existed back in the day. Yes, we had rules lawyers, but they were nowhere near as ubiquitous as today. And they were mostly concerned with spells. We always did some version of +/-2 through +/-5 for d20 rolls and some version of +/-10 through +/-25 for d100 rolls. Keeps is simple and no rules look ups required.

The difference of course is one's official and one's not. If that matters. And it really, really does for some.

So your argument, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the rules were so bad nobody tried to use them? That's better somehow? Am I the only one who remembers the various charts of what weapon did what damage against specific armors, or certain weapons did more damage to large creatures or ... well the list goes on.

Just because the rules were such a mess that you couldn't follow them didn't make the game easier to run IMHO. It just meant that you kind of made it up as you went along. We also tended to do more dungeon crawls, the list of classes and races was significantly smaller (all depending on exact edition and options).

If you want to keep things simple, just use the basic rules. No feats, no multiclassing, limit classes. Do dungeon crawls where you run around kicking in doors. At that point you have something similar to older versions of D&D and yes, it's similar difficulty IMHO because if you care enough to actually use the rules they make sense. In my experience, I've encountered fewer rules lawyers in 5E than I did for at least the previous two editions, and probably back to AD&D. If anyone ever questioned anything at the table in 5E the DM just made a decision (which occasionally meant looking up a rule, because that's actually possible in 5E) and we moved on. Lawyers, including rules lawyers, will always be with us.

YMMV of course, but that's kind of been my point. We'd have to find someone that picked up the book at a game store and started playing with minimal guidance like we did back in the day to answer these questions to know. Without that we just don't know. All we do know is that the game sells well and that, like all things, the DMG in particular could be better.

 

[Malmuria]

To be clear, I think 3/3.5e and 5e are also bloated just in different ways. In AD&D you have different, non-interlocking subsystems; trying to keep track of all of it seems a fools errand but you can take the pieces you want and leave the rest behind. It's also the case that if you alter one system it doesn't resonate across the entire game (e.g. an item that grants a bonus to dexterity). In wotc's "modern" design everything interacts with everything else, which on paper is very tidy but has led to a playstyle that almost necessitates constantly parsing interactions between the basic rules, character/monster abilities, and spells; meanwhile, all of those descriptions are overwrought in anticipation for such rules parsing.

 

[overgeeked]

So your argument, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the rules were so bad nobody tried to use them?

No. That Gygax's prose was so terrible that people didn't want to wade through that to try to understand the rules underneath it. The rules were, generally, fairly simple. Is the thief hidden? Make a % roll vs whatever is says on that chart. One chart that takes up about 1/3 of a page and a short paragraph description. Same thing in 5E? Rogue's DEX mod + prof bonus + (expertise?) + a d20 roll vs possible observer's WIS mod + prof bonus + (expertise?) + 10 or a d20 roll. About a dozen pages of rules, people still can't manage to get it right, and there's still arguments about how it's supposed to work.

That's better somehow?

Yes, because it's simpler.

Am I the only one who remembers the various charts of what weapon did what damage against specific armors, or certain weapons did more damage to large creatures or ... well the list goes on.

Am I the only one who remembers that basically no one ever bothered using those? Well, the list goes on.

Just because the rules were such a mess that you couldn't follow them didn't make the game easier to run IMHO.

It literally did. The prose was such a nightmare no one bothered reading it so you could just get on with playing the game. Which made things infinitely easier to run. Now you have to memorize the entire game and run it perfectly or someone will call you out.

It just meant that you kind of made it up as you went along.

Yes, exactly. Which is infinitely easier than getting 1000 pages of rules exactly right all the time.

In my experience, I've encountered fewer rules lawyers in 5E than I did for at least the previous two editions, and probably back to AD&D.

My experience is exactly the opposite. We didn't have any rules lawyers to deal with until 5E. And now they're literally everywhere.

If anyone ever questioned anything at the table in 5E the DM just made a decision (which occasionally meant looking up a rule, because that's actually possible in 5E) and we moved on.

You're lucky. In my experience 5E players will argue until they're blue in the face about literally everything that isn't perfectly according to the letter of the rules. And if you read a rule differently than they do, they rage quit. The whole rulings not rules seems to have utterly missed them.

Lawyers, including rules lawyers, will always be with us.

More rules, more rules lawyers.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I would posit that the idea of having to make everything up is one of the things that daunts new DMs the most.

Anyone here go to improv or open mic? Think about how many people go up on stage and then completely lose their nerve.

 

[Malmuria]

"For better or worse, dungeons and dragons is considered the natural entry point to the hobby, and that game has two rule books, each one bigger than the manual for your car, and if you open them up both look like an Excel spreadsheet had sex with a bible. The character sheets for dnd look less like you're about to adventure into the realm of imagination and more like you've got to fill out a wizard's tax return."

 

[Baron Opal II]

I would posit that the idea of having to make everything up is one of the things that daunts new DMs the most.

I would agree.

I've taught a handful of people how to run an rpg, and the two biggest concerns are- how do I know what the adventure is and how do I know what happens?

There's a few answers to that. Most of teaching was more coaching- let's come up with a with an adventure site, why would the characters go there? What's there to find? If there is a treasure, is that the goal and how is it guarded? Is there an action movie that would inspire the structure of the adventure site? And so on. That helps initially.

For the second, I tell them "I know what's going to happen and how the villain's plans come to fruition. Until the players get involved. Then, the villain has to react and adapt to their disruptions. At first, just react." That seemed to help.

 

[DarkCrisis]

To be clear, I think 3/3.5e and 5e are also bloated just in different ways. In AD&D you have different, non-interlocking subsystems; trying to keep track of all of it seems a fools errand but you can take the pieces you want and leave the rest behind. It's also the case that if you alter one system it doesn't resonate across the entire game (e.g. an item that grants a bonus to dexterity). In wotc's "modern" design everything interacts with everything else, which on paper is very tidy but has led to a playstyle that almost necessitates constantly parsing interactions between the basic rules, character/monster abilities, and spells; meanwhile, all of those descriptions are overwrought in anticipation for such rules parsing.

This. 5E is only easier that everything follows a simple add things together and compare.

All the different sub classes and spell sets and special abilities and feats etc etc etc is so much MORE than AD&D.

The most bloat and crunch is still 3rd Ed though IMO. The reason I’d probably never DM it again.

 

[Oofta]

No. That Gygax's prose was so terrible that people didn't want to wade through that to try to understand the rules underneath it. The rules were, generally, fairly simple. Is the thief hidden? Make a % roll vs whatever is says on that chart. One chart that takes up about 1/3 of a page and a short paragraph description. Same thing in 5E? Rogue's DEX mod + prof bonus + (expertise?) + a d20 roll vs possible observer's WIS mod + prof bonus + (expertise?) + 10 or a d20 roll. About a dozen pages of rules, people still can't manage to get it right, and there's still arguments about how it's supposed to work.

Yes, because it's simpler.

Am I the only one who remembers that basically no one ever bothered using those? Well, the list goes on.

It literally did. The prose was such a nightmare no one bothered reading it so you could just get on with playing the game. Which made things infinitely easier to run. Now you have to memorize the entire game and run it perfectly or someone will call you out.

Yes, exactly. Which is infinitely easier than getting 1000 pages of rules exactly right all the time.

My experience is exactly the opposite. We didn't have any rules lawyers to deal with until 5E. And now they're literally everywhere.

You're lucky. In my experience 5E players will argue until they're blue in the face about literally everything that isn't perfectly according to the letter of the rules. And if you read a rule differently than they do, they rage quit. The whole rulings not rules seems to have utterly missed them.

More rules, more rules lawyers.

Right. So the old games were "better" because people didn't bother wading through the rules because they were a nightmare and just ignored stuff that didn't work. Basically it was easier because groups kind of made it up as they went along. I'm not disagreeing, I'm saying that I don't see how it's better.

When I started playing I played with friends, people I knew. If you're starting DMing with a group of randos on the internet it's different, and more difficult. But after you get a bit of experience I would assume most DMs learn the value of "no", I know I did. If the DM makes up the game as they go along (either because they can't understand the rules or don't have a firm grasp but probably get 80% of it right), I don't see how it makes a difference.

I guess you never had people in older editions that argued with you how things should work. You were lucky.

 

[tetrasodium]

All? really?

I've DMd and played 5e since it's inception. I've DMd and played with complete beginners to seasoned veterans of many editions. I've rarely encountered players who expected some kind of perfect fidelity to the rules - and when I have it was more of the typical "I want the rule interpreted this way because it benefits me..." that was quickly dealt with.


Again, haven't seen that at all. People come to sessions and expect the same thing, I've always seen - a fun time throwing dice and having fun with each other and the world.



Most of the players I play with can't even sit through a session of OTHERS playing D&D. They want to play not watch mediocre improv!

It is (or it should be) a completely different experience interacting with a table of players and PLAYING than watching a stream or whatever! Even the ones that do watch streams -they have a totally different experience playing and I just haven't seen any complaints!

Right or not 5e's rulings not rules combined with excessive "ask your gm" with defaults almost always set wildly in favor of automatic success/victory certainly pushes the player expectations. Things are ok in tier1 & early tier2 but the shell game 5e plays with complexity to offload it from players to the GM creates a spike pit the GM is going to fall into as the players advance by leaps & bounds beyond the narrow band of levels that bounded accuracy is tuned for leaving them with expectation of immediate guarantee of success in all things while the GM is standing over a spiked pit armed with only pure & obvious fiat likely to trigger some form of adversarial play.

The players never have the wrong weapon because "It's magic" is the only tool provided. The players never have skills they didn't really invest in because all skills advance at the same rate or double that rate. The players never need to worry about danger because they've been making hp abilities & proficiency bonus gains for level after level since they outgrew Bounded accuracy. The players never need to worry about being undergeared because the entire system is tuned to the expectation that they are always only using starting equipment. The players don't need to worry about being at risk of getting killed because it's almost impossible for that to happen without the gm practically invoking "rocks fall" during the fight & blatantly taking all of the blame for executing someone's PC. The players know that dmg238 DC table only goes up to 30 so Bob's 12+5+d4+d20 so if bob doesn't succeed at a nearly impossible roll with any roll of 12 or better at worst & dc25 very hard with a 7 or better at worst (potentially an 8 or 3 at the lowest) that it's entirely because the gm decided to let them roll on a flatly impossible check where they never had a chance rather than because things combined to make a very hard/nearly impossible roll even more difficult

Take the "is the [rogue] hidden" in post#443

• Maybe... but is he silent too?
• Did they invest in both equally instead of other skills?... maybe...
  • or is one wayyy better than the other?... maybe
• Well Does that monster have good spot and/or listen?... maybe...
• Well does the fact that things are brightly lit add a -2 penalty to their hide check?... Maybe
• Well does the fact that they are in a huge echo-y room make it harder to be silent?... Maybe
• The rules don't say the rogue can, but can they do xyz?..Yes you be you unless the GM says no... Who cares?!... that's the GM's problem to cobble together from a selection of hurdles the rogue is almost guaranteed to clear trivially

Now it's one skill with expertise and no modifiers against a monster probably lacking the one skill needed to detect the rogue & probably not having enough at this level to have any realistic chance even if they happen to have it in their statblock. If it doesn't work the players know the gm is responsible not those monsters.

edit: @DarkCrisis it's not just ad&D <-->5e, that's 3.x

 

[overgeeked]

"For better or worse, dungeons and dragons is considered the natural entry point to the hobby, and that game has two rule books, each one bigger than the manual for your car, and if you open them up both look like an Excel spreadsheet had sex with a bible. The character sheets for dnd look less like you're about to adventure into the realm of imagination and more like you've got to fill out a wizard's tax return."

"And you know what: we had an amazing time. We played that game for years. The reason I say you can do this is coz I want you to know that roleplaying is great fun to do it badly. That's how good this hobby is."

Exactly. Calm down. Stop sweating the rules, they don't matter. Just play. It's a blast. Get out of your own way, stop pretending that everything has to be perfect or by the book and just throw some dice.