D&D 5E 9 Things "Pro" DMs Do That You shouldn't

[Mort]

No, it’s not. Usually if it happens I’ll let that player control an NPC, familiar, companion, etc.

That's better than nothing, but generally not enough. Your players are there to PLAY and play their characters. Making them wait for hours just to satisfy your (the DMs) sense is story, not ok in my book.

I don’t think this is well communicated, if that is what he means.

I think it's pretty clear - don't railroad. Don't let your (the DMs) story force a determined outcome.

Not at all. “Bell’s Gambit”, as it were, doesn’t rob anyone of agency. I’m not sure what even leads to the idea that it does?

I got the sense early on (even posted it in in a thread here) that Travis was trying to get Bertrum killed. Subtle at first but became more obvious. This does impact the other players, because every resource spent on him is wasted. But the point is, it's not great for a home game.

Eh, it depends. Liam and Marisha had a couple scenes where I was a little tired of listening to them drama at eachother again.

And that's the point. They are performing for an audience, not gaming.

OTOH, there are many half hour long scenes that only involve one or two characters that my table has loved, because we are all big fans of each other’s characters and get that not all story beats can be shoehorned into group scenes, and don’t ever want to try to hurry those scenes up just because they don’t involve my character.

If you enjoy that in the group great. But again, most people in a home game come to play not watch other people play. Unless it's REALLY known to be ok, taking up a half hour of someone else's play time is just not great.

 

[Mort]

Honestly, I always looked for a time to introduce a new character, a time where the story made sense but was quick.

Then I played with one of my current DMs and he just puts them in immediately. He comes up with some thinly veiled reason - This adventurer just happened to be adventuring inside Asmodeus stronghold too!

He does make some minimal story hook that is super easy to see he just made up.

To be honest I thought it would detract from the story thematically but in play it really doesn't. If I can suspend disbelief on the guy that has fire coming from his fingertips and can breathe water, I can suspend disbelief that this new guy just happened to show up in here.

Exactly. And the new player gets to play immediately. The possible impact to immersion or suspension of disbelief is more than worth THAT alone. The new person is there to PLAY, not spectate.

 

[Mort]

I definitely don’t think either Mercer or Mulligan are guilty of that.

But that's the point. They are doing this for an audience as much as their players. AND they are both practiced AND very good at it (though I do think Matt often goes too long).

The home game is different, your players are generally there to play, not watch you monologue and amus e yourself. My players don't have enough time at the session to hear me seeing in for a half hour at a time.

 

[Mort]

I think every one of those things (reworded with less loaded terms) is good for some folks games.

The point is, their games are meant more for an audience than their players (who are also catering to an audience). The only audience your home game should be catering to is the players.

I don’t enjoy D&D that is too…narratively casual? Too focused on game over story, maybe. I don’t give a damn what the rules say if they come into conflict with the story, and neither do my players.

But that's not exactly it. Would one of your players be ok if you killed their character off JUST to satisfy your sense of where the story "needs" to go?

I remember, when I was younger, a DM left out his notebook when he ran off to the bathroom. One of the other players looked at it and said, hey look at this! I did. The DM had scrawled into one of the encounters "one of the players is mangled..." Not might be, not could be but IS. His plan was to, in spite of whatever the characters might do, mangle one of the PCs for his (the DMs) sense of story. Sorry but that's not ok, this is not a scripted TV show.

I definitely am more like Mulligan than Mercer, in general style, but yeah sometimes introducing dramatic irony via a cinematic “cutscene” that the PCs aren’t privy to is fun. Sometimes high expectations bring out better roleplaying and greater engagement with the game and other player’s characters. Sometimes an NPC you know is most likely going to die gets the players really amped about some aspect of the story/setting/conflict and it leads to very satisfying gaming sessions. Etc.

Experiment. Screw up. Burn the rules (not literally they’ve very useful as advice) and challenge yourself. DMing is a skill. Roleplaying is a skill. Engaging meaningfully with the “crunch”, the levers and switches and buttons of the game engine, is a skill.

The game is both more fun and more satisfying the more you develop those skills, and every single thing listed in the OP can help you do that, if deployed with care and intention.

Experimentation is great, and as the DM you will screw up. But the point is, you do that for the players for their benefit. They are your audience, unlike streaming shows - which cater to a different one

 

[Mort]

I've taken the liberty of re-sequencing some of the quoted bits, below, as some relate to each other.

This assumes the ability to predict what the PCs will do and-or where the PCs will go next, which is by no means an exact science.

Doesn't have to be exact. IMO and IME, the slight hit to game continuity is more than worth it to get the new player playing instead of spectating.

Not sure what you mean here. If there's a major set-piece combat embedded in the adventure I-as-DM would rather plan for it (given the vagaries of PC actions as noted above) such that, for example, it can start and finish in the same session rather than either span across a session break or keep us up till 4 in the morning.

If you know it's coming ok and it's been building up sure. But too deliberately throw it in because you, the DM, want a three hour fight? That's the issue. It essentially railroading that could be the problem.

Not sure on this - having a secret plot involving one player doesn't impact on anyone else's agency until-unless that plot starts restraining what other players can have their characters do. Now, I admit I've never seen a player plot with a DM to intentionally set up their PC to be a red-shirt; but I've seen - and been involved in from both sides - many other secret plots.

I generally hate secret plots between the DM and a player. Players tend to think they're all James Bond about it, but 9/10 times they're Mr. Bean and it's just annoying/irritating to watch.

And, personally, I hate it when DMs Foster distrust in the group by colaberating with individual players to undermine group efforts.

Flip side: I've many times seen players on their own initiative play their PCs as red-shirts, without any help from the DM. I don't think that's what was being got at here, but I could be wrong.

Right, it's not. If a player wants to play like a red shirt that's mostly on them. Though, if a player is constantly undermining group efforts for their own amusement? That player risks not being invited back to the table. Usually, this is a group effort to accomplish specific goals. A player undermining that, especially because he thinks it's fun/funny? He's being a jerk, and that's not ok.

There's not much you can do about a DM hogging the spotlight.

If they're your friend you CAN tell them to stop.

When it comes to spotlight hogging by players, though, I'm a bit more law-of-the-jungle than some: if you want the spotlight, try doing something proactive to get it rather than just passively waiting for it to come to you.

I'm generally against players essentially screaming "me, me, ME..." at the table, that's not what I'm there for.

 

[HaroldTheHobbit]

To me several of the OP points are different aspects of the playing-for-an-audience epidemic. I find it kind of sad when so many obviously can't find enjoyment in playing pretend with friends around their table (or vtt), but have to be gazed upon by others to be fulfilled. Oh well, it's just me being an old fart I guess.

As to different pillars, at my table we pretty much do the roleplaying and social pillar thing. When there have to be combat it's mostly 4e style set pieces. As a DM I find the combat pillar less and less interesting, but find comfort in BBEG monologues - don't you dare touch them. Hand on heart, I probably spend more time writing elaborate evil guy speeches than prepping the actual combat scenes 8-P.

As to chatty NPCs, spending sessions sweettalking the one-eyed lady who sells moderately fresh fish down by the docks and have a son in the local thieves guild, or planning and executing an elaborate honeytrap for the dukes manservant to be able to delve deeper in the nobility political scheming is what keep our table going shrug.

 

[Reynard]

The problem with advice videos like this is they presume too much about why people are playing and what they want out of the game. Some groups are into 3 hour combats and others are into endlessly monologuing villains. Some like both.

What I think is true is that the GM is the one at the table primarily responsible for both pacing and equitable spotlight time. Far more important than the abity to do funny voices or recall every esoteric rule is the ability to read the room. A great GM, imo, knows the moods of all the players at the same time and does what is possible to keep them all engaged.

That said, players need to understand that sometimes it's not your turn to shine and it is okay to sit back and enjoy another player's moment.

Also, when it is your turn, for the love of all that is holy, be ready. A three hour combat that is three hours because John was on his phone when everyone else was going and has to get a recap then look up his spells EVERY TURN is no fun.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have watched the video the OP is referring to. I mostly agree with the caveats that it is table dependant. I have been with a group that liked character to. However, I think that most tables I have played at would not.
Not a fan of PvP seen it fail more often than not.

 

[bloodtide]

1. Long Monologues/narrative descriptions/cut scenes;
2. Focus too much on NPC talks;
3. Wait for the "perfect" moment to introduce a new/replacement PC;
4. Plan for Three hour long fights;
5. Putting the story before the game;
6. Have temporary characters that are planned to be killed off;
7. Allowing PVP or truly high tension Player moments;
8. Letting characters talk endlessly;
9. Setting expectations too high.

Well, you can break down each one word for word to "mean" something that someone wants. Though everything on this list is fine.....depending on what sort of game your playing. And really this does not even touch many game problems.

Some groups like mindless combat.....but some groups LIKE Long Monologues/narrative descriptions/cut scenes with plenty of NPC and Character talking and put the story first.

And plenty of groups would say the story is the game...so how do you put "story first"?


And the HUGE factor in most "three hour fights" are the S-L-O-W players.

And setting expectations too high is common, but really it's about making the game TO the set expectations. If you want to have a fast paced game: establish a time limit. You want PVP, then have at it. And so on.

 

[Bedrockgames]

So in a bit of procrastination (also because I'm trying to help my 14 year old who's DMing for his D&D club and would much rather hear advise from a random YouTuber than me!), I happened on this video. And I think I agree with every point. Summed up they are, Pro DM's do this, you shouldn't:

1. Long Monologues/narrative descriptions/cut scenes;
2. Focus too much on NPC talks;
3. Wait for the "perfect" moment to introduce a new/replacement PC;
4. Plan for Three hour long fights;
5. Putting the story before the game;
6. Have temporary characters that are planned to be killed off;
7. Allowing PVP or truly high tension Player moments;
8. Letting characters talk endlessly;
9. Setting expectations too high.


Now some of these are MUCH more important than others, but overall I agree with all of them.

Thoughts?

I am definitely not a fan of hours long combats