D&D 4E 4E DM's - what have you learned?
- Thread starter wedgeski
- Start date
MortalPlague
Adventurer
Oh man, there's a few. Some of the most important I've found...
Keep Things Moving - Unless it's something critical at stake, like a character's life or a crucial plot point, just make a ruling and move on. Nothing sucks the life out of the game like pausing to look up the exact rules for how high a character can jump, or how long it takes to copy a page of a tome, etc.
The same goes for combat, and a lot of that side of things comes to being prepared. If you know your stat blocks and have a good idea what monsters can do and will do, it keeps things flowing on the DM side of the equation. And I've found that if you keep your monsters turns fairly quick, it helps speed up the PCs turns too.
Lose Gracefully - One of the hardest lessons to learn is how to lose gracefully. When the PCs take down your villain with a single clever trick, it's hard to just swallow your pride and let it work as intended. I know I've had moments of weakness where I just rule "It doesn't work", and that never goes over well. Letting your players have their victories is the hallmark of a good DM.
As for 4th edition specifically? Most of what I've learned has to do with clever monster design. Variety in an encounter, for instance; if you put a single flying monster in an encounter against a melee-heavy party, that can be an interesting challenge. If you field a whole force of flying monsters, that's just frustrating. Also, too many insubstantial monsters, too many swarms, too many soldier monsters... the list goes on. Variety makes things much more fun. Also, I tend to use certain conditions sparingly; stunned and weakened don't often see use in my games.
Keep Things Moving - Unless it's something critical at stake, like a character's life or a crucial plot point, just make a ruling and move on. Nothing sucks the life out of the game like pausing to look up the exact rules for how high a character can jump, or how long it takes to copy a page of a tome, etc.
The same goes for combat, and a lot of that side of things comes to being prepared. If you know your stat blocks and have a good idea what monsters can do and will do, it keeps things flowing on the DM side of the equation. And I've found that if you keep your monsters turns fairly quick, it helps speed up the PCs turns too.
Lose Gracefully - One of the hardest lessons to learn is how to lose gracefully. When the PCs take down your villain with a single clever trick, it's hard to just swallow your pride and let it work as intended. I know I've had moments of weakness where I just rule "It doesn't work", and that never goes over well. Letting your players have their victories is the hallmark of a good DM.
As for 4th edition specifically? Most of what I've learned has to do with clever monster design. Variety in an encounter, for instance; if you put a single flying monster in an encounter against a melee-heavy party, that can be an interesting challenge. If you field a whole force of flying monsters, that's just frustrating. Also, too many insubstantial monsters, too many swarms, too many soldier monsters... the list goes on. Variety makes things much more fun. Also, I tend to use certain conditions sparingly; stunned and weakened don't often see use in my games.
I don't know if its 4e so much or just the continued experience from running a game the last few years, but I've learned that PC's are quite capable of pulling out remarkable feats against long odds (moreso in 4ed admittedly).
I've also seen the advantages of thinking about the environment of the encounter, and not just the monsters. The most memorable encounters tend to be the ones where there is some sort of an environmental advantage/disadvantage (be it terrain, a trap, a ritual that's ongoing, etc.). Clever PCs will find ways to use these to their advantage (even if they were initially a disadvantage).
All of it really ramps up to never underestimate the PCs, no matter how sure you are that you have them over the proverbial barrel, they can surprise you. Its a nice lesson to learn, knowing that at times, its okay to throw away the rulebook so to speak. Ironically, the DM Experience column for today comments a bit on this and talks about how he gave his group a much too powerful item (based on party level and the item itself) early on in the campaign. In theory, it could have really destroyed the campaign, but instead he's made it work and the item became a big part of the game, without breaking it.
I've also seen the advantages of thinking about the environment of the encounter, and not just the monsters. The most memorable encounters tend to be the ones where there is some sort of an environmental advantage/disadvantage (be it terrain, a trap, a ritual that's ongoing, etc.). Clever PCs will find ways to use these to their advantage (even if they were initially a disadvantage).
All of it really ramps up to never underestimate the PCs, no matter how sure you are that you have them over the proverbial barrel, they can surprise you. Its a nice lesson to learn, knowing that at times, its okay to throw away the rulebook so to speak. Ironically, the DM Experience column for today comments a bit on this and talks about how he gave his group a much too powerful item (based on party level and the item itself) early on in the campaign. In theory, it could have really destroyed the campaign, but instead he's made it work and the item became a big part of the game, without breaking it.
1) Don`t do monsters by the book. MM introduced a lot of Grind into the game. Defeating solos sometimes felt like carving a hole into the walls of Alcatratz with a spoon. Tedious and un-fun. MM3 and later publications got rid of this issue but modules that feature old monsters have to be revised. *
*Customizing monsters to fit the group`s preferred playstyle had not been all that new to me when I started 4E but the extent to which this became a focus of my preparation time definetely was something new to me.
2) Balance your skill challenges/checks carefully. Don`t do the same skills all the time. Pretty much self-explanatory, yet in the group where I am in as a player pretty much all plot-relevant imformation is gathered by Arcana checks.
3) Work with terrain! And, for crying out loud, do not just use it to block away melees! Use terrain to create immersion. It gets really boirng/annoying if terrain feels like an indestructable monster.
*Customizing monsters to fit the group`s preferred playstyle had not been all that new to me when I started 4E but the extent to which this became a focus of my preparation time definetely was something new to me.
2) Balance your skill challenges/checks carefully. Don`t do the same skills all the time. Pretty much self-explanatory, yet in the group where I am in as a player pretty much all plot-relevant imformation is gathered by Arcana checks.
3) Work with terrain! And, for crying out loud, do not just use it to block away melees! Use terrain to create immersion. It gets really boirng/annoying if terrain feels like an indestructable monster.
Ryujin
Legend
Two things:
The first was just reinforced from previous editions: If you don't know the actual rule involved don't waste time looking it up. Make a ruling, at that moment, then look it up for next time. Stopping for a rule check murders an encounter's momentum. When your encounters are already an hour and a half long, you can't afford that.
The second is to get out of the mindset, of previous editions. Forget the "Kill the caster" paradigm. It's now "Kill the striker. WITH FIRE!!!!" Find the guy who is dishing out the most damage, then try your best to take him out. It's truly amazing how that can trigger the other roles, to behave in-character. Suddenly the encounters become more dynamic and challenging.
The first was just reinforced from previous editions: If you don't know the actual rule involved don't waste time looking it up. Make a ruling, at that moment, then look it up for next time. Stopping for a rule check murders an encounter's momentum. When your encounters are already an hour and a half long, you can't afford that.
The second is to get out of the mindset, of previous editions. Forget the "Kill the caster" paradigm. It's now "Kill the striker. WITH FIRE!!!!" Find the guy who is dishing out the most damage, then try your best to take him out. It's truly amazing how that can trigger the other roles, to behave in-character. Suddenly the encounters become more dynamic and challenging.
MortalPlague
Adventurer
There's a whole wealth of good advice out there for skill challenges. Some of the best bits I've heard:
Don't tell the PCs they're in a skill challenge - It really destroys the immersion of the game if you suddenly pause and tell the players they're now in a skill challenge, and these skills may be used, etc. Far better to have it happen organically and behind the scenes.
Allow PCs to bypass the skill challenge - Say the party is trying to pry information from a crowd of unruly dock workers. If one of the PCs volunteers 100 gold pieces for the information (far more than a dock worker makes in a year), that ought to win them over right then and there. It's hard to explain why the dock workers wouldn't cooperate simply because 'there haven't been enough successes'.
Let PCs use abilities, powers, and items - Why restrict things to just skills? I've seen clever uses for powers (particularly utility powers) in skill challenges. For instance, in a game I played, we were trying to ferret out some changelings at a party. My cleric had a utility power called 'Godsight', which granted him truesight. That sort of ability would have a dramatic impact on that sort of skill challenge.
D'karr
Adventurer
I don't think the following are things that are specific to 4e or that 4e taught me, but I think they are things that 4e reinforced in my DM philosophy.
Say yes (DMG p. 28) - the basic idea of "if the player can imagine it, he can attempt it" was something that I always had in my games. 4e actually spent time reinforcing it with the "say yes" mentality. This has kept me always looking for that creative spark from the players. I'm more consciously aware that my first response should be to say yes, and then adjudicate how they can attempt it. It's not a matter of fact that they will automatically fail, as the "say no" response usually creates. This has been greatly liberating in my games on both sides of the screen. As a matter of fact when I teach D&D to new players I usually start with the "if you can imagine it, you can attempt it" phrase. That is the huge difference between a TTRPG and a CRPG and it is fantastic to see players going all out in doing "out of the box" things.
Pacing (DMG p. 24) - this is something that I always had in my games but I was quite a bit lax with it. At times this resulted in entire sessions where the players meandered about aimlessly, or "scenes" simply took too long with no purpose. I had my players running around trying to "Find the Fun." Those were the worse sessions during the game, and also in retrospect when I asked the players how they liked specifics of the adventure. 4e spent a lot of time talking to the DM about this. Exploration is perfectly fine and encouraged, but it must have a purpose and payoff. The pace of the game must feel like it's moving. Running around with no information is a waste of time. This lead to the second side of this below.
The Information Imperative (DMG p. 26)
Know your players - Player Motivations (DMG p. 8) - This is one of those that I've always kept in mind, but 4e really hammered home. During the campaign I was running I decided to use a pre-canned adventure at one point. What I found was boredom. Not because the adventure was bad, but because it did not scratch the itch that the players had. It was not "motivating" to them so it was a series of combats with barely any connection to the PCs. I learned my lesson and the next session I looked for ways to pike the interest of each player based on the things they like to do. Mind you this was a continuation of the same pre-canned adventure. But it became a more ad-hoc experience tied to each PC. The players got into it because they were invested in their own goals. This worked much better and it's something that I now keep in mind at all times. When I'm preparing an encounter I look at how it would fit with the motivations of each player. Not every encounter has something to motivate each player, but every adventure definitely has multiple encounters that will "hook" to each of their motivations.
Improvisation - (DMG p.26) Because of the "say yes" directive I've become much more aware of improvisation. The most important "rule" of improvisation is be prepared. That seems to make little sense, but I find that the more prepared I am for the players the more "realistic" the improvisation becomes when I have to "step off script". My players have been having a wonderful time simply exploring things, and I've had a wonderful time discovering some of these things at the same time with them.
Keep it simple - (Monster Design) - I have had a blast designing new monsters, or altering old favorites to keep players on their toes. Designing Count Strahd Von Zarovich for use during the exploration of Castle Ravenloft was one of the most interesting and rewarding experiences. That combat was awesome. I used the inspiration from P.N. Elrod's I Strahd as the basis for the monster, then I looked at his stats in the classic I6 adventure and started from there. Here was a creature that was a warrior, a wizard, and a vampire all wrapped up in one. The most interesting part of all of this was the "feel" of the monster as we played. He felt like a warrior, a wizard and a vampire all wrapped up in one. Everything I needed was right there in the stat block. Not once did I have to break the immersion to go look up a rule, a spell, or a piece of equipment. The encounter was fast paced and exciting. That was an extremely fun experience. 4e is tops in the area of monster design IMO, of any edition of D&D. It is simple, focused, succinct, fun, flavorful, and it is totally relevant to the use by the DM where it counts, at the game table.
Exciting combats - Once again not something new with 4e but something that is reinforced in 4e. I'm using terrain, tricks, traps, monsters and exciting locales for combats and that works wonderfully in any game. 4e just made it more fun for me because it doesn't require a lot of "making it up." The underlying framework presented gives me many examples of how things can work, and I can use those or make my own derived from the framework.
Reskinning - This is something I found fascinating working with the framework for 4e. If I wanted to play X type of character, and there was no existing class, I could rather easily reskin an existing one to fit that concept. This was refreshing because it reminded me of my BD&D and AD&D games where players would come up with alternate class concepts based on the existing ones, like the swashbuckler, etc. I also found the balance within the game rules refreshing because as a DM I could more easily help my players if they wanted to "change" something without becoming overpowering. Themes were a breath of fresh air in the design space for this purpose. The underlying mechanics did not have to break because the flavor was different. The same with powers, which have seen a lot of reskinning in my games. If a player wanted a power to work more as a mental power than a weapon power we could make that happen without breaking anything. This was liberating in a sense because the fear of breaking something was gone.
Expanding the design space - I found that the solid 4e framework allowed me to expand the design space with things that the game didn't have but I wanted in certain circumstances. These were things like Injuries, Wounds, Diseases, Curses (Hexes), flavorful magic items, etc. Designing was easier because I had a solid footing that already worked.
Running higher level games - For the first time since I'd been playing D&D I found a way to have high level games that did not break, and did not suck to prepare. I was able to keep players challenged and we all had fun.
I'm sure that I'll remember more as I go along.
Say yes (DMG p. 28) - the basic idea of "if the player can imagine it, he can attempt it" was something that I always had in my games. 4e actually spent time reinforcing it with the "say yes" mentality. This has kept me always looking for that creative spark from the players. I'm more consciously aware that my first response should be to say yes, and then adjudicate how they can attempt it. It's not a matter of fact that they will automatically fail, as the "say no" response usually creates. This has been greatly liberating in my games on both sides of the screen. As a matter of fact when I teach D&D to new players I usually start with the "if you can imagine it, you can attempt it" phrase. That is the huge difference between a TTRPG and a CRPG and it is fantastic to see players going all out in doing "out of the box" things.
Pacing (DMG p. 24) - this is something that I always had in my games but I was quite a bit lax with it. At times this resulted in entire sessions where the players meandered about aimlessly, or "scenes" simply took too long with no purpose. I had my players running around trying to "Find the Fun." Those were the worse sessions during the game, and also in retrospect when I asked the players how they liked specifics of the adventure. 4e spent a lot of time talking to the DM about this. Exploration is perfectly fine and encouraged, but it must have a purpose and payoff. The pace of the game must feel like it's moving. Running around with no information is a waste of time. This lead to the second side of this below.
The Information Imperative (DMG p. 26)
Too often I had been hinging important parts of the adventure on the result of a single die roll or the interaction with a particular NPC/monster. If a player needs to find the journal that has the BBEG plan in exquisite detail, give it to them. What good does it do to hide it inside the most inconsequential nook in a hallway and then get all flustered when the players don't find it? If it's important information then find a way to give it to them. This was also very important for those investigation adventures because I started changing the parameters to move the situation forward. An investigation adventure that constantly depends on the "specific" circumstances to give out information is the most frustrating adventure ever. It becomes a game of "guess what the DM" wants us to do, instead of a fun romp exploring and finding clues. As said before this is not something specific to 4e but 4e does a good job of reminding the DM to pay mind to this.
Know your players - Player Motivations (DMG p. 8) - This is one of those that I've always kept in mind, but 4e really hammered home. During the campaign I was running I decided to use a pre-canned adventure at one point. What I found was boredom. Not because the adventure was bad, but because it did not scratch the itch that the players had. It was not "motivating" to them so it was a series of combats with barely any connection to the PCs. I learned my lesson and the next session I looked for ways to pike the interest of each player based on the things they like to do. Mind you this was a continuation of the same pre-canned adventure. But it became a more ad-hoc experience tied to each PC. The players got into it because they were invested in their own goals. This worked much better and it's something that I now keep in mind at all times. When I'm preparing an encounter I look at how it would fit with the motivations of each player. Not every encounter has something to motivate each player, but every adventure definitely has multiple encounters that will "hook" to each of their motivations.
Improvisation - (DMG p.26) Because of the "say yes" directive I've become much more aware of improvisation. The most important "rule" of improvisation is be prepared. That seems to make little sense, but I find that the more prepared I am for the players the more "realistic" the improvisation becomes when I have to "step off script". My players have been having a wonderful time simply exploring things, and I've had a wonderful time discovering some of these things at the same time with them.
Keep it simple - (Monster Design) - I have had a blast designing new monsters, or altering old favorites to keep players on their toes. Designing Count Strahd Von Zarovich for use during the exploration of Castle Ravenloft was one of the most interesting and rewarding experiences. That combat was awesome. I used the inspiration from P.N. Elrod's I Strahd as the basis for the monster, then I looked at his stats in the classic I6 adventure and started from there. Here was a creature that was a warrior, a wizard, and a vampire all wrapped up in one. The most interesting part of all of this was the "feel" of the monster as we played. He felt like a warrior, a wizard and a vampire all wrapped up in one. Everything I needed was right there in the stat block. Not once did I have to break the immersion to go look up a rule, a spell, or a piece of equipment. The encounter was fast paced and exciting. That was an extremely fun experience. 4e is tops in the area of monster design IMO, of any edition of D&D. It is simple, focused, succinct, fun, flavorful, and it is totally relevant to the use by the DM where it counts, at the game table.
Exciting combats - Once again not something new with 4e but something that is reinforced in 4e. I'm using terrain, tricks, traps, monsters and exciting locales for combats and that works wonderfully in any game. 4e just made it more fun for me because it doesn't require a lot of "making it up." The underlying framework presented gives me many examples of how things can work, and I can use those or make my own derived from the framework.
Reskinning - This is something I found fascinating working with the framework for 4e. If I wanted to play X type of character, and there was no existing class, I could rather easily reskin an existing one to fit that concept. This was refreshing because it reminded me of my BD&D and AD&D games where players would come up with alternate class concepts based on the existing ones, like the swashbuckler, etc. I also found the balance within the game rules refreshing because as a DM I could more easily help my players if they wanted to "change" something without becoming overpowering. Themes were a breath of fresh air in the design space for this purpose. The underlying mechanics did not have to break because the flavor was different. The same with powers, which have seen a lot of reskinning in my games. If a player wanted a power to work more as a mental power than a weapon power we could make that happen without breaking anything. This was liberating in a sense because the fear of breaking something was gone.
Expanding the design space - I found that the solid 4e framework allowed me to expand the design space with things that the game didn't have but I wanted in certain circumstances. These were things like Injuries, Wounds, Diseases, Curses (Hexes), flavorful magic items, etc. Designing was easier because I had a solid footing that already worked.
Running higher level games - For the first time since I'd been playing D&D I found a way to have high level games that did not break, and did not suck to prepare. I was able to keep players challenged and we all had fun.
I'm sure that I'll remember more as I go along.
Last edited:
Well, I know, but my GM in the other group I am gaiming inn does not. I`ve benn pointing him at lots of advice (to Stalker0`s guide to Anti-Grind, for instance) but he won`t listen. He is a little set in his ways, so to speak. Hes`s not a bad GM, but it is tough to convinve him of anything.
D'karr
Adventurer
It is so interesting to see this because my own experience has been that the worse DMs I've played with were the ones that had preconceived ideas of how to run a game and didn't even bother to read the 4e DMG or DMG2.
There is a wealth of good advice in those two books for running not only 4e but any rpg. It seems those are the books nobody thinks they need to read.
