Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5804898" data-attributes="member: 58416">On Wednesday nights, I DM a D&D 4th Edition game.  The 4 players I  usually have are quite familiar with the game and D&D in general.   As such, there are a lot of things I take for granted that they  understand -and, typically, they do understand them.While we are  playing, there are also usually a few other people hanging out.  Among  those who often show interest in the table while the game is going on is  a friend of the group (whom I will refer to as 'Bill') and the  step-daughter of one of the players (whom I will refer to as 'Steph.')Bill  has sat and watched the group play a few times.  He's welcome to join,  but -as of yet- has not.  Thus far, he's been content to simply watch  and listen.  He also interacts with various members of the group.  He's  not disruptive; most of the group can manage side conversations here and  there without interupting the game.  Bill has often said he has trouble  understanding some of the game elements.Yesterday night, the  group did not have dungeons tiles nor the Descent pieces and other such  things which we normally use to illustrate the battlefield available to  us.  Instead, I used a very large tablet -without lines.  I simply drew  the rooms and what the group saw by hand.  I arrived early before any of  the other members and had pre-drawn some of the encounters areas I had  expected the group would get into.  During the game, I would first  verbally describe the area, and then follow by turning to the page which  had the encounter area they were in.  When I say large table, I mean it  was large enough to be the size of a Chessex battle mat.While I  was running the game, Bill asked me a few questions about the game.  I  first explained the story which the group was playing through; he then  expressed that he had understood that part so far.  He then went on to  say that the grid and tiles was what had confused him before.  Then he  added that he more clearly understood what was going on and what was  being represented without the grid being there and just the hand drawing  of what the party saw being the map.  I'm glad he has come to a clearer  understanding of the game (maybe he'll try playing,) but the obstacle  which had stood in the way of understanding for him was something I  found odd.I can draw well enough to give a fairly clear idea of  what's going on, but I would hardly call myself an artist.  As such, I  do not believe my drawing skill had anything to do with helping Bill.   What he expressed -as I said- was the lack of the grid helping him to  more clearly see the picture.  While I do prefer to go gridless and  measure movement in a manner similar to tabletop wargaming, I typically  use the tiles for D&D on Wednesdays for 2 reasons: 1) The players  are familiar with playing that way, and 2) some of the players have  bought them, and bring them with the expectation of using them.As  I said, tiles were not available this week.  This grew from a lack of  communication about who was bringing what.  So, as I said, we simply  used paper, and I drew the scenes and maps by hand.  It was strange to  me to think that things would be easier for someone to understand  without the map.  However, that was exactly the case for Bill.  It was  more than simply him saying he understood it more; there was a genuine  look of understanding in his face and eyes when he said so.  For some  reason, the lack of 1 inch squares -an element of D&D which is  typically accepted as a normal part of the game- helped him.  Throughout  the night -when I wasn't busy interacting with a player- he asked  questions and showed interest in the game.Toward the end of the  session, Steph (the step-daughter of one of the players) was hanging out  around the table.  I needed to roll d4s for a Poison Dart Trap.  She  asked me how d4s were used.  It took some time, but eventually various  members of the group explained that you use the number on the corner of  the die rather than the number that's on the flat face of the die like  you would with a d6.  The lesson I took from this is that I  should not assume everything which makes sense to me will make sense to  others.  When teaching a game, I spend a lot of time explaining powers  and skills and feats and things of that nature -the big details.  I  never really stopped to think that some of the small details such as the  lines of the grid or how to read a d4 would be obstacles to learn the  game.  Those are things that I somewhat took for granted due to how  familiar I and the others I typically play with are with the game.  I  think it's an important lesson to realize, and it is something I will  keep in mind when I teach rpgs to others.  What makes sense to me might  not make sense to somebody else.Still, the grid thing did throw  me for a loop a little bit.  Mostly because I've tried to go gridless  with some D&D groups in the past, but they had trouble with the  concept of measuring distance without squares.  In Bill's case, the grid  is what stood in the way of him more fully understanding the game;  without it, things were clearer.Thoughts?  Comments?[OOC]I had originally posted this elsewhere, but I felt as though I'd get  some more feedback here.  While I call out D&D 4th Edition  specifically, I placed this in the general forum because it's more about  teaching/learning games in general than it is about a specific game.[/OOC]</blockquote>

Verification