D&D (2024) Take A Closer Look At The 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide

Wizards of the Coast has just shared a video delving into the upcoming One D&D Dungeon Master’s Guide, due for release in 2024.

​

Scroll down to post #4, below, for a more detailed text summary!

• Chapter 1 -- basic concepts
• Chapter 2 -- Advice, common issues
• Chapter 3 -- Rules cyclopedia
• Chapter 4 -- Adventure building
• Chapter 5 -- Campaign building
• Chapter 6 -- Cosmology
• Chapter 7 -- Magic items
• Chapter 8 -- 'A surprise'
• Appendices -- maps, lore glossary

 

[Remathilis]

You seem to think this conflicts with the DM advice to talk to the players. It doesn’t.

It's not worth the fight. TS is the guy who thinks player characters with backstories is tantamount to DM slavery.

 

[tetrasodium]

You seem to think this conflicts with the DM advice to talk to the players. It doesn’t.

.... I don't know how you could come to that totally backwards conclusion.conclusion. It conflicts with the GM having players who actively engage in good faith collaboration.

Spoiler: this *more* than refutes that wrong assumption

No this is not a case of "give your players what they want" or "you & your players need to agree on the type of campaign" because the GM has multiple players in no way pressured to work together. Not only that the players come to the session zero & zero+N primed by a PHB to believe that they are The Main Character surrounded by sidekicks who have the job of getting with The Main Character's story.. "D&D is about telling your story" & all that. A player should write a book if they want to tell a story because the order of operations is GM describes ->players react. With that order a story forms through the events that develop & choices made not by a player telling it

How about a player facing section about how they need to work with the GM to fit the GM's world campaign & so forth rather than just stonewalling & trying to work in loopholes to get things the GM said no to or a section on how it's important for the player to remember this kind of stuff & act as if it remains the case rather than just ignore it

• Don't just dump this on the GM & walk away without player facing guidance here. The GM has very little control over this and this is a system that makes efforts to defang any risks that could be associated with doing this poorly or simply ignoring it on a later session. The bulk of this text needs to be player facing not aimed at the GM.

• point are the players encouraged to work with the GM or accept the fact that sometimes the GM might need to make changes not covered during a session zero doctoral thesis presentation because one or more players forced their hand. You as the GM need to cover every possible thing during session zero without losing player interest or allowing unexpected loopholes/problematic cracks & plsyers are under no obligation to really work with you.

That's not a reasonable or even useful section of GM facing text. Experienced GMs can handle those things easily enough given active player participation & doesn't need to be told such vague generalities. Inexperienced GMs need advice on handling it. Both types of GMs need players who are amenable to actively working with them in good faith because much of it is areas where the GM has very little control or say over things the players can't simply ignore later, getting players to that state is where the bulk of the Session Zero text needs to lie. This couple pages in TCoE may as well be a tvtropes or wikipedia entry intended for a hostile GM who doesn't understand why they are toxic.

The GM can talk to their players till the end of time but it doesn't matter if it's a conversation those players aren't ready & willing to engage in at an active or reasonable level.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It's right here in step six where for the first time it encourages talking to other players & the GM. Unfortunately the first five steps are the ones that cover every aspect of building a character & much of what is normally covered in S0. Other players are not mentioned in the first 5 steps & the DM is only mentioned in passing to note that they might give the player more options. As written the GM needs to fight the player facing guidance just to clawback the very idea that they should be involved at all.

That's... a pretty bleak interpretation. I mean, sure, I agree that the PHB could be improved by starting with a bit on how to play nice with others, but as that's stuff that people should really ought to learn on the playground, IMO it's nice but not absolutely necessary.

 

[mamba]

The GM can talk to their players till the end of time but it doesn't matter if it's a conversation those players aren't ready & willing to engage in at an active or reasonable level.

that sounds a lot more like a player problem than a rules problem. At no point do the rules say to do whatever you want no matter what and not discuss with, let alone listen to the DM and other players. Some common human interactions should be expected implicitly, these are not guidelines to overcome your debilitating social awkwardness.

 

[tetrasodium]

that sounds a lot more like a player problem than a rules problem. At no point do the rules say to do whatever you want no matter what and not discuss with, let alone listen to the DM and other players. Some common human interactions should be expected implicitly, these are not guidelines to overcome your debilitating social awkwardness.

Sure is. It's a player problem of bad assumptions of things like "tell your story" & similar that is encouraged by the player facing text. Players don't approach d&d intending to go down a bad route like that, they open the PHB where time & again they are ushered in that direction.

That's... a pretty bleak interpretation. I mean, sure, I agree that the PHB could be improved by starting with a bit on how to play nice with others, but as that's stuff that people should really ought to learn on the playground, IMO it's nice but not absolutely necessary.

I think that's an oversimplification when the problem is that there is an absolutely terrible GM facing section about session zero written for the most neophyte of newbie GMs who don't even know what a session zero is or have a ten thousand foot broad strokes type overview of what it should be but there is no equivalent player facing text with the nearest equivalent player facing text being pretty up front about pushing players in a different direction than the one that newbie GM is told about.

I don't dislike session zero as a concept but D&D (or any TTRPG) doesn't just work simply because everyone showed up. Making it work takes work from everyone at the table session after session. I dislike the way Session Zero become an excuse to dump all of the responsibility for making d&d work onto the GM while providing a "well you didn't bring that up in session zero, it should have been done then." veto to the players given absolutely no responsibility or expectation to share in that workload at any point.

 

[Hussar]

You have to give credit to sheer bloodymindedness. If you make a point and no one agrees with you, over and over again, perhaps it’s time to reassess?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You have to give credit to sheer bloodymindedness. If you make a point and no one agrees with you, over and over again, perhaps it’s time to reassess?

Oh, man, you should check out the D&D movie threads.

 

[mamba]

I dislike the way Session Zero become an excuse to dump all of the responsibility for making d&d work onto the GM while providing a "well you didn't bring that up in session zero, it should have been done then." veto to the players given absolutely no responsibility or expectation to share in that workload at any point.

players who disregard everyone and everything ‘because the PHB tells them to’ (it doesn’t), seems to be a problem only you are facing, or not even you are facing.

A session 0 is levelsetting expectations, no more, no less. No one says that if it has not been addressed then, the DM just has to roll with it (or any player for that matter). If something bothers someone, they can bring it up at any time.

If you actually have these issues, drop those players

 

[Incenjucar]

...you could always just add words explaining that it's not a 100% absolute guarantee a DM is going to do a thing...

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The GM can talk to their players till the end of time but it doesn't matter if it's a conversation those players aren't ready & willing to engage in at an active or reasonable level.

Your premise exists only on the grounds that the players hate each other and the DM, and have no wish to talk. Something I have never experienced.