D&D (2024) I have the DMG. AMA!

[Not a Decepticon]

How much is the DM permitted to interact with a Bastion and is it really something utterly detached from the setting wotld?

 

[mamba]

No, they don't.

New DMs can play the game as-is. No reason not to.

At some point in the future... they will have become experienced enough to determine that the game as-is is not what they want.

of course they can decide to play it without optional rules, but having them helps tweak the game to your table’s preferences and gets you thinking about tweaks earlier than just getting handed a set of rules would

So maybe not ‘need’ as in ‘required’ but more a ‘benefit from having’

I believe trial and error is not something to be avoided and new players "saved from". I believe it is the hallmark of learning. And becoming a better DM.

and yet we do send our kids to school instead of saying ‘go out into the world and figure it out by trial and error’

There will be plenty of that, even with better support for optional rules

 

[Imaro]

Happy to answer but need to start out by saying that what they did actually write in the PHB about resting & recovery is the problem that leads to

Spoiler: this

There are significant parts of the mechanics★ that are structured to encourage the adversarial "we(players) don't need to trust or work with you and the rules make it clear" seed to grow & bloom if the GM ever feels the need to cross the line using fiat to restrict the resting or use fiat in a way that makes the choice to let it burn matter.

Telling the GM rulings not rules & to talk to/work with the players while providing the players on the other side of the GM screen RAW written in ways that encourage it gets interpreted as some kind of divine writ is cross purpose with one getting treated as somehow being "more equal" in ways to expect outrage when fiat gets used in ways lowering that to simply equal

★(like rest RAW & SR classes along with no required magic item expectations in monster/encounter math)

This didn't really answer my question... and reading this I'm unsure what they wrote in the PHB to encourage an adversarial stance between players and DM's.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m not trying to simulate real life passage of time. I don’t think most DMs are trying to do that either. Nor do I think it’s necessary. There are games that this does matter for because it is part of the mechanics of the game, such as Shadowdark. But 5e? Nah.

My playstyle is closer to Shadowdark then, I suppose.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

No, they don't.

New DMs can play the game as-is. No reason not to.

At some point in the future... they will have become experienced enough to determine that the game as-is is not what they want.

At that moment they will know what it is they don't like. They will figure out the rule that doesn't work for them. They might not know what it is they would prefer... but then again, there is no one thing WotC could produce in any "variant rules" section or book that would guarantee them getting what they want. So this newly-experienced DM will need to experiment. Come up with new ideas. Google it. See what others have done. Work it out. Become an even more experienced DM.

And at some point even further in the future, they will have that Eureka! moment where they figure out what it is they want. Naturally. On their own. Through trial and error. And really learning about themselves and their preferences in how they want their D&D game to run.

To think it is beneficial to circumvent all that learning by thinking we can just give them an answer right up front... an answer to a question they most likely aren't even asking and wouldn't like the answer given to them anyway... I believe is a poorer decision.

I believe trial and error is not something to be avoided and new players "saved from". I believe it is the hallmark of learning. And becoming a better DM.

Cool, cool. Then by that logic certainly this whole DMG is an utter waste of time, and just detriment for this glorious Oberoni learning process! People can just figure this on their own, no need to pay WotC for advice or rules and miss all this wondrous learning by mistake.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But without those shareholders, there would be no company, and no product.

The only options available are A) a commercial product or B) no product.

Plenty of game companies aren't publicly owned.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It's not that they won't like WOTC. It's that D&D won't hold that special place. It will just be some game they played as a young adult. I think D&D players of the 1980's got a lot more out of their games than the players of 2024. And this board is not a good example. The die hards are here.

Play with a lot of 2024 players, do you? Because I do, and I played with a lot of 80's players (and 90's Players, and oughts players, and 10's players), and I have no idea where you get your impression from

 

[TiQuinn]

My playstyle is closer to Shadowdark then, I suppose.

Have you played it, or read the rules? You might dig it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, they don't.

New DMs can play the game as-is. No reason not to.

At some point in the future... they will have become experienced enough to determine that the game as-is is not what they want.

At that moment they will know what it is they don't like. They will figure out the rule that doesn't work for them. They might not know what it is they would prefer... but then again, there is no one thing WotC could produce in any "variant rules" section or book that would guarantee them getting what they want. So this newly-experienced DM will need to experiment. Come up with new ideas. Google it. See what others have done. Work it out. Become an even more experienced DM.

And at some point even further in the future, they will have that Eureka! moment where they figure out what it is they want. Naturally. On their own. Through trial and error. And really learning about themselves and their preferences in how they want their D&D game to run.

To think it is beneficial to circumvent all that learning by thinking we can just give them an answer right up front... an answer to a question they most likely aren't even asking and wouldn't like the answer given to them anyway... I believe is a poorer decision.

I believe trial and error is not something to be avoided and new players "saved from". I believe it is the hallmark of learning. And becoming a better DM.

Showing people that there's more than one way to handle something mechanically is not the same as bypassing trial and error. You're basically arguing against education.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And that does not matter.

What doesn't matter? My point, or the fact that I disagree with yours?

I guess both.