D&D General The DM Shortage

[Reynard]

I read about one D&D Gaming Club at a FLGS in New York City that in order to join you have to DM. You can play in X number of sessions and then you have to DM a session before you can play another session. Since you are DMing for people who you have already played with and folks who have DMed games you've played in, it makes the transition smoother. Also, because EVERYONE has to do it, and because nearly everyone is going to be a bit rough and awkward their first few times, I think it would be a more supportive environment which players more patient with less experienced DMs.

That's a really good idea. I wonder if AL could get away with something like that: you're level locked until you complete x number of GM hours.

 

[payn]

That's a really good idea. I wonder if AL could get away with something like that: you're level locked until you complete x number of GM hours.

I'd rather see some type of carrot than tell folks they cant play unless they GM.

 

[Mort]

That's a really good idea. I wonder if AL could get away with something like that: you're level locked until you complete x number of GM hours.

Most places running AL (that I've seen) don't even bother checking the validity of any characters at the table (much less that they achieved the level through actual AL play).

Further, some people just like to play not DM -or they DM A LOT and just want some low pressure playtime. I agree with @payn - I'd much rather see some kind of carrot than any kind of stick.

 

[Hex08]

I read about one D&D Gaming Club at a FLGS in New York City that in order to join you have to DM. You can play in X number of sessions and then you have to DM a session before you can play another session. Since you are DMing for people who you have already played with and folks who have DMed games you've played in, it makes the transition smoother. Also, because EVERYONE has to do it, and because nearly everyone is going to be a bit rough and awkward their first few times, I think it would be a more supportive environment which players more patient with less experienced DMs.

If it works for them that's great but I have had some perfectly competent players try their hands at running games and, well, let's just say they are still perfectly competent players.

 

[Mort]

If it works for them that's great but I have had some perfectly competent players try their hands at running games and, well, let's just say they are still perfectly competent players.

To be fair, practically no one is good (or even ok) when they first start. Like any other skill, DMing takes practice.

 

[Desdichado]

Your second point seems to contradict your first.

Well... I don't know what to say. It doesn't. Maybe don't snip sentence fragments out of context, and they'll make more sense to you? I don't know how to make it more clear. You can run all games with the same style while still preferring games that make it easier to do so. In fact, it seems blindingly obvious that you would do so, to me. That's not a contradiction, its a logical syllogism so simple that I fail to see the need to spell it out. Or... well, I did before now, I guess.

 

[Umbran]

Well... I don't know what to say. It doesn't. Maybe don't snip sentence fragments out of context, and they'll make more sense to you?

Mod Note:
Could you tone down the attitude about seven notches, please? Thanks.

 

[Ancalagon]

I too am a great fan of warhammer frpg 2nd ed (I ... don't like what I see in 4e?), and I would run games in it again...

... but I can't help but note there are a lot of mechanical similarities with Troika! The problem is the "flavor" of Troika! is completely wrong for Warhammer. I've been working on a conversion, but it's slow going alas.

 

[TheSword]

I agree with everything but the bolded bit. It's 2E or bust as far as WFRP is concerned. It's an absolutely fantastic system. A few minor tweaks and it does just about everything I want out of a grubby fantasy game. There are definitely some bits where 5E is smoother. Like monster stat blocks and talents. Every time I look up a monster in the Old World Bestiary I see the list of talents and groan. Just put the changes in the stat block and list what the thing can do. List their actual damage. Etc. Otherwise, actual play, etc...an absolute dream.

WFRP 4e works brilliants online, where the VTT does the heavy lifting and the talents and traits do automatically get added to the stat block. I’ve only ever done an introductory session f2f so I don’t really worry about it.

 

[Imaro]

Definitively easier. The whole of B/X Basic was 64-pages complete with specific procedures to follow in most cases. Whereas 5E is in excess of 988 pages without much guidance at all on how to run the game...which is kinda what this thread is about. The lack of guidance on how to DM and onboarding new DMs. If 5E were that easy to learn to run for a newb DM, this thread wouldn't exist.

Compared to 5E? Running AD&D is a breeze. The organization of the books is terrible. That's absolutely true. But the books are also filled to the brim with info, guidance, charts, tables, procedures, etc. And 2E? Even easier because the books were better written and better organized...plus there was an entire line of books specifically about various DM-focused campaign needs. Some notable books include: Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide, Castle Guide, Castle Sites, City Sites, Complete Book of Villains, Country Sites, Creative Campaigning, Dungeon Builder's Guidebook, Monster Mythology, Of Ships and the Sea, Rogue's Gallery, Sages & Specialists, and the World Builder's Guidebook. Not to mention all the great settings and the historical-period books. Chances are if you wanted to run any kind of game in 2E there was a book for that.

Mine would be, in order: OD&D, B/X, BECMI, RC, 2E, AD&D, 4E, and 5E. This is basically in order of publication because as time goes on the rules become more complicated and bloated. The only reason AD&D is "out of order" is because 2E is a cleanup of AD&D with wildly more support. I never touched 3E. Whatever people may think of 4E, it was a focused game that did what it was designed to do well.

Exactly.

Both 4E DMGs are fantastic. They're miles ahead of the 5E DMG. It's not even close.

I feel like what's missing in these discussions are the wide berth of resources outside of WotC that are easily accessible to players who want to learn to run the game. You can literally watch a multitude of styles and ways of running D&D on Youtube recorded in real time, often with many of the issues a DM runs into popping up during the game... nothing like this existed for Basic or AD&D, if you couldn't comprehend it directly from the books and didn't know someone personally who played well... you were just stuck.

That said I still honestly believe that the "shortage" of DM's has always plagued D&D and again has much more to do with what people find enjoyable for the leisure time they are devoting to D&D than how easy or hard the onboarding process is. I think more people just plain want to be a player as opposed to a DM... and I highly doubt we will see vastly improved numbers of DM's regardless of how easy the onboarding process becomes. I think that less people in general find enjoyment in facilitating the fun of others as opposed to having their fun facilitated. As an imperfect analogy... more people enjoy attending a party than planning and executing a party.