Mod Note:
Hey.
Next time you want to insult someone's intelligence, please don't.
Because publicly forgetting such a basic rule as "Keep it civil" isn't gonna make you look all that smart yourself.
D&D General A Rant: DMing is not hard.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Mod Note:
Hey.
Next time you want to insult someone's intelligence, please don't.
Because publicly forgetting such a basic rule as "Keep it civil" isn't gonna make you look all that smart yourself.
Sigh yourself, oh Condescending One.
I am, at the moment, mostly discussing gamers who were new in the hobby, under one year.
How many of those do you figure were over 35 in 1999, before 3e was published?
Had my own rant here about people telling fellow gamers that we are somehow not worthy because we don't play multiple games but it's just not worth it. All it really comes down to is that if you play 3 different games a week, I'm happy for you. Everyone should be free to spend their free time playing what they want. But you are not special. You are not superior. You don't have some special insight that the rest of us are purposely ignorant of.
We know there are other options out there, we just don't feel the need to play them. I like playing 5e, I know how it works, and personally I don't get tired of using the same ruleset because the stories that emerge from play, the characters that we bring to life, the scenes I bring to life for the players, the bad jokes that we tell, all of that matters most.
We know there are other options out there, we just don't feel the need to play them. I like playing 5e, I know how it works, and personally I don't get tired of using the same ruleset because the stories that emerge from play, the characters that we bring to life, the scenes I bring to life for the players, the bad jokes that we tell, all of that matters most.
"oh Condescending One"? Really?
Willie the Duck
Legend
At least historically, there was perhaps a notion that people that hadn't tried anything except D&D might be in that position because they had never heard of the other options out there (either any at all, or the one that would appeal to them). When the game was brand-spanking new, and then when it was the only thing at Walden books or the like and anything else was in a FLGS three towns over, this might have been realistic. Nowadays, it seems pretty far-fetched, although with the modern D&D boom, there perhaps are players that haven't run across anyone else who has actually played (for instance) Shadowrun, so they may have heard of such and such other game, but not had an easy way to experience it.
That, of course, is the 'try it, you might like it' level. Which is a far stretch from 'try it, you do like it, and continue to partake.' And, as mentioned, mostly the historic reason. Still, I think it explains at least part of the attitude.
I can't speak to prevalence or whose example is more representative, but I wanted to point out that others had been discussing a slightly different beast. Others above (at least the ones I noticed) were discussing people who don't play other ttRPGs (/don't cook other culture's cuisines, etc.). What you are discussing are people who have literally never tried such things, and vehemently refuse to do so. Some people in the former group will be the later group, but not all, and likely not most. I think it's reasonable to have different opinions about someone who won't try something new and someone who has tried, but doesn't want to do so again (although with a completely opt-in recreational activity that mostly only benefits oneself if they enjoy it, maybe it shouldn't be).
Hussar
Legend
Absolutely no one is saying this. This is a huge straw many that you are creating.
What is being said is that if you absolutely refuse to try other games, despite gaming for years on end, that you have a limited band of experience compared to someone who has at least tried other systems from time to time over the same span of years. And that it shows in these discussions quite clearly because you see people pontificating about other systems that they've obviously never played, trying to "prove" how those other systems are inferior.
Good grief, mention a story game in a thread and it's like chumming the water. Suggest using a technique from a more narrative based game than D&D and people lose their poop, despite having never actually had any direct experience and those same people will argue until the cows come home that the experience of people who do have direct experience with those systems is wrong and they just don't understand the games that they play.
The problem is, we ALL play D&D. Some version thereof anyway. We're on En World because we play D&D. Most of us have been gaming D&D for years. We all have considerable experience with the systems of D&D. The difference is, there is a rather loud cohort of D&D players who absolutely refuse to entertain any notion that there might be other ways of doing things that might actually work better.
And it's because there is a rather loud cohort of players for whom D&D is the be all and end all of TTRPG's and no one could possibly have an idea that isn't done better in D&D.
I think someone really new to GMing--especially someone without much experience as a player, or without much variance in that experience--might latch onto the first mostly reasonable advice they find, and then other advice might need to make sense to them before they apply it. I don't think that's inherently bad, if the first advice is reasonable. I think it'd be better if the game they were playing was more explicit about what it was doing, or what it could do, and how to get more out of it--I think it would be better if there weren't so much need (or "need") for GM advice.
I enjoy sessions where I have basically nothing pre-written, I enjoy sessions where I've written up more or less the entire situation the PCs are addressing, I enjoy sessions that go at right angles to what I expected. I've made up my own setting, and I've started four campaigns in it (two have run to level 20+). I do not think I'd remain as engaged with doing the hobby if there were a part of it I felt I had to endure.
Not disagreeing or arguing at all about 3e. I'd say 5e A) has a larger range where it works and B) needs less adjustment if you get outside that. And as someone who (as I just said) runs 1-20 campaigns, I've at least seen the level range; it's possible my players are pushing the system as hard as at some other tables, I can't claim my experiences with the game are everyone's.
I think the failure to recognize that different narrative media work differently and need different things is a persistent problem. I agree that a video game isn't a TRPG, doesn't provide the same experience or make for the same sorts of narratives; neither is a book or a movie or a TV series or a manga a TRPG. People looking to get a TRPG experience from some other medium, or expecting a TRPG to deliver the experience of some other medium, are committing a category error.
I think someone really new to GMing--especially someone without much experience as a player, or without much variance in that experience--might latch onto the first mostly reasonable advice they find, and then other advice might need to make sense to them before they apply it. I don't think that's inherently bad, if the first advice is reasonable. I think it'd be better if the game they were playing was more explicit about what it was doing, or what it could do, and how to get more out of it--I think it would be better if there weren't so much need (or "need") for GM advice.
I enjoy sessions where I have basically nothing pre-written, I enjoy sessions where I've written up more or less the entire situation the PCs are addressing, I enjoy sessions that go at right angles to what I expected. I've made up my own setting, and I've started four campaigns in it (two have run to level 20+). I do not think I'd remain as engaged with doing the hobby if there were a part of it I felt I had to endure.
Not disagreeing or arguing at all about 3e. I'd say 5e A) has a larger range where it works and B) needs less adjustment if you get outside that. And as someone who (as I just said) runs 1-20 campaigns, I've at least seen the level range; it's possible my players are pushing the system as hard as at some other tables, I can't claim my experiences with the game are everyone's.
I think the failure to recognize that different narrative media work differently and need different things is a persistent problem. I agree that a video game isn't a TRPG, doesn't provide the same experience or make for the same sorts of narratives; neither is a book or a movie or a TV series or a manga a TRPG. People looking to get a TRPG experience from some other medium, or expecting a TRPG to deliver the experience of some other medium, are committing a category error.
Basic Expert
Explorer
Becoming a good DM requires dedication and effort, but I wouldn't expect it to be "hard" for most people interested in being DMs. Some (or most) may struggle with one or more of the core DM skills, but can usually gain a modicum of proficiency given enough practice. There isn't any secret to being a great DM or hidden techniques that will elevate your games.
What are the core DMing skills? In my mind they are:
1. Leadership. As a DM you are running the game. All the players are looking to you to tell them what's going on, and to figure out what happens next. That can be a lot of pressure, even in a friend group. Some people are born leaders and revel in being at the center of everything. Others gain confidence over time. As players, it's important to support your DM and not heap undue pressure on them.
2. Rules Knowledge. As a DM, you should have a decent knowledge of the rules (at least the basics resolution systems). The more rules knowledge you have, the better, but comprehensive, encyclopedic knowledge of the game is not mandatory. If you don't know something, you can look it up (or have a player do it while keeping the game going). If a player uses a spell or power that you're not familiar with, have them read out what it does. Some people spend a lot of time reading rulebooks and have this stuff down pat. Others just can't remember the fine details of the game. As a player, don't expect the DM to know everything in the rules. Some have busy lives and are just doing their best.
3. Making Decisions. As a DM, you need to make decisions. Does this rule apply in this context or not? Should I say "yes" to the PCs' cockamamie plan or not? Hmm, I rolled up a dragon on the wandering monster chart, should I have it appear or not? Was the PCs' argument to the duke convincing or not? Should I coup de gras the downed PC or not? Often, there is no right or wrong answer. Everything is a big fat...eh..maybe... And that's where the challenge comes in. Choose right and the game is fun. Choose wrong and the game might be "ruined". Stressful! The good news is that individual decisions generally don't mean much in the agregate. Very rarely does a decision "ruin" a game. And, if it does, you can usually work with the players to retcon it. The importance is trying for consistency in your decision-making.
4. Imparting Information. This is a tricky one. How much information does the DM give the players? How might a chamber be described to indicate potential dangers or opportunities? How much backstory gives enough detail to be interesting but not so much the players get overwhelmed? How does one describe a serious threat that might result in a TPK? How does one indicate the "adventure path" to keep the PCs going in the right direction? What happens if the party absolutely refuses to take the hint? For novice DMs, running published adventures is helpful here as the well-written ones will usually have good answers to most of these questions. Otherwise, it's up to practice. I also advise completely breaking the fourth wall and telling the players outright if it appears some sort of massive misscommunication is going on.
5. Bringing the Fictional World to Life. This is the fun descriptive stuff and roleplaying that sets the scene. Some people are natural storytellers or Matt Mercer-types that really get into this aspect. Others struggle with it. As with anything, people get better with practice but this one is more about your DMing style. What feels comfortable for you. Do you like elaborate descriptions filled with hyper-specific details or poetic allusions or do you keep it terse and punchy? Once again, there isn't a best way here. Every good DM finds their voice in time. And speaking of voices, don't get hung up on perfectly replicating the voices of NPCs. Most DMs are not trained thespians and shouldn't be judged as such. Relax and have fun with it. If you don't have fun RPing NPCs, it is perfectly acceptable to say things like: "The duke thanks you for your service to the kingdom and rewards you with a chest filled with golden coins" rather than making a grand speech about it.
6. Small Group Dynamics. This is another tricky one, that requires a bit of maturity on the part of the DM (well, all players, but everyone usually looks to the DM to sort through this). This is how well your group gets along and how much everyone is having fun. It requires understanding what different players want out of the game, who has influence and who does not, who is hogging the spotlight and who is getting pushed out of it, how decisions are reached by the party, and even out-of-game scheduling, snack-bringing and other logistical concerns. Most campaigns fail because of scheduling or intra-player conflict. Managing players and groups becomes easier with greater emotional intelligence and more experience with your fellow players wherein proclivities are learned and trust is built. Some DMs are blessed with fantastically supportive groups. Others have to deal with problem-players, constant turnover, or general chaos. The good news is that life teaches one how to deal with this stuff and, better yet, DMing can help prepare you for life. How cool is that?
Apologies for the screed, but this afforded me an opportunity to think about DMing in a more systematic way. It's not so much that DMing skills are "hard", it's that DMing requires an array of skills that is rare to find all in one person. Like anything, work is required to hone the craft. I mean, is learning to play the guitar "hard"? I can't do it, and I find it mystifying, but hundreds of thousands (millions?) have done so by putting in the effort.
What are the core DMing skills? In my mind they are:
1. Leadership. As a DM you are running the game. All the players are looking to you to tell them what's going on, and to figure out what happens next. That can be a lot of pressure, even in a friend group. Some people are born leaders and revel in being at the center of everything. Others gain confidence over time. As players, it's important to support your DM and not heap undue pressure on them.
2. Rules Knowledge. As a DM, you should have a decent knowledge of the rules (at least the basics resolution systems). The more rules knowledge you have, the better, but comprehensive, encyclopedic knowledge of the game is not mandatory. If you don't know something, you can look it up (or have a player do it while keeping the game going). If a player uses a spell or power that you're not familiar with, have them read out what it does. Some people spend a lot of time reading rulebooks and have this stuff down pat. Others just can't remember the fine details of the game. As a player, don't expect the DM to know everything in the rules. Some have busy lives and are just doing their best.
3. Making Decisions. As a DM, you need to make decisions. Does this rule apply in this context or not? Should I say "yes" to the PCs' cockamamie plan or not? Hmm, I rolled up a dragon on the wandering monster chart, should I have it appear or not? Was the PCs' argument to the duke convincing or not? Should I coup de gras the downed PC or not? Often, there is no right or wrong answer. Everything is a big fat...eh..maybe... And that's where the challenge comes in. Choose right and the game is fun. Choose wrong and the game might be "ruined". Stressful! The good news is that individual decisions generally don't mean much in the agregate. Very rarely does a decision "ruin" a game. And, if it does, you can usually work with the players to retcon it. The importance is trying for consistency in your decision-making.
4. Imparting Information. This is a tricky one. How much information does the DM give the players? How might a chamber be described to indicate potential dangers or opportunities? How much backstory gives enough detail to be interesting but not so much the players get overwhelmed? How does one describe a serious threat that might result in a TPK? How does one indicate the "adventure path" to keep the PCs going in the right direction? What happens if the party absolutely refuses to take the hint? For novice DMs, running published adventures is helpful here as the well-written ones will usually have good answers to most of these questions. Otherwise, it's up to practice. I also advise completely breaking the fourth wall and telling the players outright if it appears some sort of massive misscommunication is going on.
5. Bringing the Fictional World to Life. This is the fun descriptive stuff and roleplaying that sets the scene. Some people are natural storytellers or Matt Mercer-types that really get into this aspect. Others struggle with it. As with anything, people get better with practice but this one is more about your DMing style. What feels comfortable for you. Do you like elaborate descriptions filled with hyper-specific details or poetic allusions or do you keep it terse and punchy? Once again, there isn't a best way here. Every good DM finds their voice in time. And speaking of voices, don't get hung up on perfectly replicating the voices of NPCs. Most DMs are not trained thespians and shouldn't be judged as such. Relax and have fun with it. If you don't have fun RPing NPCs, it is perfectly acceptable to say things like: "The duke thanks you for your service to the kingdom and rewards you with a chest filled with golden coins" rather than making a grand speech about it.
6. Small Group Dynamics. This is another tricky one, that requires a bit of maturity on the part of the DM (well, all players, but everyone usually looks to the DM to sort through this). This is how well your group gets along and how much everyone is having fun. It requires understanding what different players want out of the game, who has influence and who does not, who is hogging the spotlight and who is getting pushed out of it, how decisions are reached by the party, and even out-of-game scheduling, snack-bringing and other logistical concerns. Most campaigns fail because of scheduling or intra-player conflict. Managing players and groups becomes easier with greater emotional intelligence and more experience with your fellow players wherein proclivities are learned and trust is built. Some DMs are blessed with fantastically supportive groups. Others have to deal with problem-players, constant turnover, or general chaos. The good news is that life teaches one how to deal with this stuff and, better yet, DMing can help prepare you for life. How cool is that?
Apologies for the screed, but this afforded me an opportunity to think about DMing in a more systematic way. It's not so much that DMing skills are "hard", it's that DMing requires an array of skills that is rare to find all in one person. Like anything, work is required to hone the craft. I mean, is learning to play the guitar "hard"? I can't do it, and I find it mystifying, but hundreds of thousands (millions?) have done so by putting in the effort.
