D&D (2024) Experienced DMs, how useful is the 2024 DMG to you?

[Emerikol]

I think it's totally fair to be part of the discussion with different opinions and insights.

It's just that the game isn't in the book, it's what happens at the table. When one opinion is influenced by their weekly game, and the other by experiences a decade ago, it's hard to take the latter seriously. Not saying that's the case, but does this make sense?

But when it comes to D&D and the DMG, don't you think you can look at some things and just say no? I've read many DMG's over the years picking and choosing what I liked without trying every suggestion. Some just seemed bad to me.

 

[Oofta]

But when it comes to D&D and the DMG, don't you think you can look at some things and just say no? I've read many DMG's over the years picking and choosing what I liked without trying every suggestion. Some just seemed bad to me.

But at a certain point it's no longer a conversation. It's just you expressing an unfounded opinion without adding anything. I have no problem with the idea that some people don't like D&D. There are several popular things that I don't care for. But I don't go up to an NFL site discussion what people think of the latest draft picks when I have no idea who they are, what position they play, how they might add to a team when I don't have any idea who they are, what position they play or how they might add to the team. I especially don't go to that NFL site to say that I think the player is just an overpaid jock who doesn't deserve their fame.

If you never have any advice to add, a different perspective to a discussion other than just saying the equivalent of calling it a bad game repeatedly, I don't see the point. Because after a while you aren't adding to any conversation, you're just trolling for negative feedback.

Which, again, differing opinions even negative ones don't bother me. I don't get upset that someone disagrees. It's kind of like how I was teaching someone how to play a new game over the weekend and giving them all sorts of advice on how to play. If I play I want competition. If I post I want to see different ideas and why someone holds a different opinion. But when that opinion is just "I don't like it because I will never agree with the core concepts and ideas" without adding anything else, it gets tiresome.

EDIT: I'm using generic "you", not necessarily emerikol

 

[Neonchameleon]

No. I've read parts of it, and I've read a lot of analysis from reviews with wildly divergent points of view. Do you not believe reviews have value?

I believe reviews do have value. I believe the comments of people who have not read the book are of lesser value because there is always information loss through condensing into a review. And wasn't it you claiming that there weren't variant rules in the DMG?

And I also believe that the confidence and frequency with which you state your opinions on a book you admit not having read also tells me interesting things about how seriously to take your other opinions.

 

[Neonchameleon]

But at a certain point it's no longer a conversation. It's just you expressing an unfounded opinion without adding anything. I have no problem with the idea that some people don't like D&D. There are several popular things that I don't care for. But I don't go up to an NFL site discussion what people think of the latest draft picks when I have no idea who they are, what position they play, how they might add to a team when I don't have any idea who they are, what position they play or how they might add to the team. I especially don't go to that NFL site to say that I think the player is just an overpaid jock who doesn't deserve their fame.

This. I can say that watching NFL is not for me. But a part of that is that I don't then watch the NFL and I don't take part in discussions about NFL plays. And when I come for discussions about the NFL and why it's a bad spectator sport I come with facts like how long the ball is in play compared with the length of the game (doesn't make it a bad game to watch on highlights) rather than just "I've read reviews saying it's bad".

And I certainly wouldn't come into a thread marked "Longstanding NFL fans, how good a quarterback is Patrick Mahomes?" to give my opinion.

 

[Emerikol]

But at a certain point it's no longer a conversation. It's just you expressing an unfounded opinion without adding anything. I have no problem with the idea that some people don't like D&D. There are several popular things that I don't care for. But I don't go up to an NFL site discussion what people think of the latest draft picks when I have no idea who they are, what position they play, how they might add to a team when I don't have any idea who they are, what position they play or how they might add to the team. I especially don't go to that NFL site to say that I think the player is just an overpaid jock who doesn't deserve their fame.
<snip>

Well I agree that criticisms should be focused. I think a one of comment saying "I wouldn't use that" is no big deal. I think we've already beaten this horse badly in my opinion.

And I do think when I criticize 5e, when I do, I do target something specific. I don't know that I criticize it all that much as I don't know whether it is 5e or not when someone states something and I challenge it. I'm mostly just challenging what some people say and giving a different perspective.

 

[Emerikol]

This. I can say that watching NFL is not for me. But a part of that is that I don't then watch the NFL and I don't take part in discussions about NFL plays. And when I come for discussions about the NFL and why it's a bad spectator sport I come with facts like how long the ball is in play compared with the length of the game (doesn't make it a bad game to watch on highlights) rather than just "I've read reviews saying it's bad".

And I certainly wouldn't come into a thread marked "Longstanding NFL fans, how good a quarterback is Patrick Mahomes?" to give my opinion.

I think the real analogy would be a person who is a long term NFL fan from the 70's who is asked what he thinks of the new kickoff rules. He's not seen them "in play" but he might still have an opinion having just read the rule. That is what is happening here.

Edit:
And that is a real world example. The NFL majorly changed the kickoff rules this season.

 

[Retros_x]

I think its mostly a large improvement for new DMs compared to 2014. But I miss a lot of random tables and "advanced" rules that are probably returning in future expansion. I will probably use it but mostly for magic items and bastions. I have read some negative opinions about traps, but I'll be honest, I don't need precise rules for traps. I never used the trap rules of 2014 books anyway be it the DMG or Xanathars.

 

[Emerikol]

Maybe what we need are two books. One can be about table management and getting new DMs started. The second would be about serious world building, weather, city design, npc design, tons of random tables, etc etc etc. There is probably a market for both.

 

[Oofta]

Well I agree that criticisms should be focused. I think a one of comment saying "I wouldn't use that" is no big deal. I think we've already beaten this horse badly in my opinion.

And I do think when I criticize 5e, when I do, I do target something specific. I don't know that I criticize it all that much as I don't know whether it is 5e or not when someone states something and I challenge it. I'm mostly just challenging what some people say and giving a different perspective.

I learned long ago that trying to get in on a conversation about things I don't care about, know little to nothing about and don't want to learn was a waste of my time and the time of the other people involved. Maybe it means I have fewer conversations. It's like if were a baseball fan but didn't like (American) football yet I still went to NFL sites on baseball's off season only to compare the game to baseball and how I like baseball but will never care for football. Then go on to say football would be so much better if it had 9 innings. It just doesn't really apply.

On a related note, I don't see the comparison of 70s football to today's football analogy as being particularly close when talking about specific rules and decisions. The D&D game has evolved pretty dramatically since the 70s, it would be like if the NFL decided that they should play touch football and use frisbees. I do occasionally discuss how we approached the game back in ye' olden days, but that's just relating how we used the rules to play the game we wanted.

But some of the comments are also more general, and you were the one who put yourself into a specific group of posters. So if some of the comments describe square pegs when you identify as more of a rectangular peg ... and now I realize I'm all out of analogies and haven't had enough caffeine this morning.

 

[Emerikol]

I learned long ago that trying to get in on a conversation about things I don't care about, know little to nothing about and don't want to learn was a waste of my time and the time of the other people involved. Maybe it means I have fewer conversations. It's like if were a baseball fan but didn't like (American) football yet I still went to NFL sites on baseball's off season only to compare the game to baseball and how I like baseball but will never care for football. Then go on to say football would be so much better if it had 9 innings. It just doesn't really apply.

On a related note, I don't see the comparison of 70s football to today's football analogy as being particularly close when talking about specific rules and decisions. The D&D game has evolved pretty dramatically since the 70s, it would be like if the NFL decided that they should play touch football and use frisbees. I do occasionally discuss how we approached the game back in ye' olden days, but that's just relating how we used the rules to play the game we wanted.

But some of the comments are also more general, and you were the one who put yourself into a specific group of posters. So if some of the comments describe square pegs when you identify as more of a rectangular peg ... and now I realize I'm all out of analogies and haven't had enough caffeine this morning.

But your examples are just wrong. I play D&D. 5e is a VERSION of D&D. I've played D&D for a very long time. And the retroclones and lookalikes are also a form of D&D. So I'm very much in the middle of roleplaying in the D&D way.

So D&D is like the NFL. 5e 2024 is like the new kickoff rules. The entire game conceptually doesn't change every time a new edition comes out.