D&D General A Rant: DMing is not hard.

[Hussar]

@Hussar

And i will politely disagree. I think that skills that make good player or DM are system agnostic and lot of them are basic interpersonal skills. Boiled down to bare bones, all ttrpgs do same thing. Dm presents situation or players try something, players or DM react, there is resolution mechanic, world changes based on the outcome. Rinse and repeat. Playing different games exposes you to different paths (mechanics), but all lead to same place.

Same with driving. Skills needed to be good driver don't depend on the car. Awareness, judgment, timing, spatial sense, anticipation - those are skills that make good driver. And you can develop them to high level even if you only ever drive one car.

Wow. I so do not agree. Just because you can drive a Toyota Corolla does not mean you would be a good driver for a large truck or a high performance sports car. Sure, you can learn the basics of driving only driving one car. But, no, you are not a "good driver" if you can only drive one car.

Same as gaming. Yes, at the basic level, the play cycle is largely the same, but, those resolution mechanics MATTER. Learning how and why different games do something is so key to becoming a better DM or player. I mean, sure, some skills like basic interpersonal skills, are system agnostic. I agree there. But, learning other systems is a big step forward in learning how to be a better player and DM.

No, I do not agree with that at all. Even if all you do is read other games, it will help your game. Some games do some things better than other games. Or, rather they do things in a manner that better suits whatever goal a particular player or DM is trying to achieve.

I mean, heck, that isn't my experience at all. I can really tell the difference at the table between players who have only played one system and those that have tried more systems. Just like there is a world of difference between players who have never run games and those that have.

Someone who only plays one game and refuses to play or try anything else is like those people who travel to new countries and refuse to try the food.

 

[Zardnaar]

With respect, your personal experiences are not data, and should not be treated as such to counter arguments.

A major problem we have is that nobody does regular surveys of RPG players to maintain reliable data. But, I'll turn back to the 1999 WotC market research for some idea.

In that research, the questioned folks about how many sessions of play they went through before "reset" - starting over with new characters. The results:

If you've been playing for
less than a year - average sessions before reset 8.8
between 1 and 5 years - average sessions before reset 12.9
over 5 years - average sessions before reset 19.6

So, for what we can call "new" gamers, the average number of sessions before reset was not high - 8.8.
While we don't know the distribution, the basic assumption would be that about half of all campaigns for those new players then lasted for fewer than 8.8 sessions.

For folks in the 1-5 year range, if they were playing weekly, the game lasted - on average, about three months. Maybe six months if they played once every other week.

Thus, games falling apart quickly, for whatever reason, was common. While this was a quarter-century ago (!) I think you'd need to make a pretty compelling argument to push the idea that this still isn't the case.

I remember typical campaign was 6 sessions being thrown around a few years ago.

Mine are typically 20-30 sessions. I'm aware im not typical.

I've pulled the plug on a few in the 6-10 session range and moved on. Basically means I didnt enjoy the group dynamics of the game for various reasons.

I can pretty much guarantee level 10 if im having fun. Beyond 13 probably not as fun to work ratio starts breaking down.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There's about a gajillion different makes and models of cars out there. I've owned the same car since 2009 and it's more than good enough for what I need it to do, 99% of the time (the other 1% usually involves things I want to haul not fitting in it).

And yet I think I'm still allowed to hold opinions about cars other than my own.

Same goes for RPGs.

Except that a car isn't anywhere near as specific a thing. A car, by its design, does essentially the same things as any other car. There are tiny, tiny differences, like which specific movements the combination switch does, or whatever--but all cars drive. If you live in even a slightly urbanized area, you never need any of the fancy bells-and-whistles of any other vehicle.

Further? You have in fact driven at least two cars in your life. I'm not talking about people that have driven at least two cars in their life. I'm talking about someone who literally drove the one, singular, car that was given to them at age 16, that they've managed to keep functional for 40 years or whatever, and they insist, adamantly, that not only is this guaranteed the only car they will ever need, this car not only can but does do anything any other passenger vehicle can do. Keep cool inside? "Nah you don't need AC for that, just open the windows." Anti-lock breaks? "Just don't drive that fast, 4head." Car alarm? "I rigged up something through the stereo, trust me it works just fine. It's not like car alarms even really work anyway." Hauling? "Look, my buddy lets me use his trailer, I know I technically don't have the torque for if it's full but that just means you take multiple trips, it's fine." Abysmal gas mileage? "Yeah yeah, it's a gas guzzler, that's just the cost of doing business." On and on and on and on.

And then insisting that this car is the best car, that no other car can match it, that anything any other consumer vehicle can do, this one can do too, and anything it can't do, you'd need a commercial license for.

That's the attitude I see. Over and over and over.

It's people who have eaten pizza, declaring it the best and only worthwhile Italian dish...when it's literally the ONLY Italian dish they've ever eaten. It's people who have listened to the Beatles, the only music they've ever heard, and declared that they never need to listen to any other music--ever, nothing, they won't even listen to movie soundtracks, they just plug their ears and read the subtitles.

 

[Zardnaar]

But why does it always come off as "People who only play D&D ____" where the blank is "are afraid to try other games", "stick with the game because it's all they know", "would play other games is the only understood what those games are like". I'll never say people shouldn't play whatever game they want, personally I enjoy D&D 5e and see no particular reason to go to cost and effort to switch.

I don't really like RPGs tbh. I play D&D because at the time I liked fantasy a lot. Now I like D&D a lot.

I keep hearing about how terrible it is. Wait 5 years and the game of the month will die off.

 

[Zardnaar]

Except that a car isn't anywhere near as specific a thing. A car, by its design, does essentially the same things as any other car. There are tiny, tiny differences, like which specific movements the combination switch does, or whatever--but all cars drive. If you live in even a slightly urbanized area, you never need any of the fancy bells-and-whistles of any other vehicle.

Further? You have in fact driven at least two cars in your life. I'm not talking about people that have driven at least two cars in their life. I'm talking about someone who literally drove the one, singular, car that was given to them at age 16, that they've managed to keep functional for 40 years or whatever, and they insist, adamantly, that not only is this guaranteed the only car they will ever need, this car not only can but does do anything any other passenger vehicle can do. Keep cool inside? "Nah you don't need AC for that, just open the windows." Anti-lock breaks? "Just don't drive that fast, 4head." Car alarm? "I rigged up something through the stereo, trust me it works just fine. It's not like car alarms even really work anyway." Hauling? "Look, my buddy lets me use his trailer, I know I technically don't have the torque for if it's full but that just means you take multiple trips, it's fine." Abysmal gas mileage? "Yeah yeah, it's a gas guzzler, that's just the cost of doing business." On and on and on and on.

And then insisting that this car is the best car, that no other car can match it, that anything any other consumer vehicle can do, this one can do too, and anything it can't do, you'd need a commercial license for.

That's the attitude I see. Over and over and over.

It's people who have eaten pizza, declaring it the best and only worthwhile Italian dish...when it's literally the ONLY Italian dish they've ever eaten. It's people who have listened to the Beatles, the only music they've ever heard, and declared that they never need to listen to any other music--ever, nothing, they won't even listen to movie soundtracks, they just plug their ears and read the subtitles.

If they only want to eat pizza for Italian food so be it. Its what they like.

As long as they're not claiming they're an expert on Italian food vs Pizza why do I care?

In my experience people really love a good lecture and being preached to. Always goes down well. I cant see any negatives what so ever to that approach. Even better when Americans do it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

@Hussar

And i will politely disagree. I think that skills that make good player or DM are system agnostic and lot of them are basic interpersonal skills. Boiled down to bare bones, all ttrpgs do same thing. Dm presents situation or players try something, players or DM react, there is resolution mechanic, world changes based on the outcome. Rinse and repeat. Playing different games exposes you to different paths (mechanics), but all lead to same place.

Same with driving. Skills needed to be good driver don't depend on the car. Awareness, judgment, timing, spatial sense, anticipation - those are skills that make good driver. And you can develop them to high level even if you only ever drive one car.

Some skills are system-agnostic. Some are not.

D&D 3e, for example, outright requires the GM to constantly re-balance its structure because it doesn't work outside of a narrow level range (roughly level 7-8 is when the breakdown becomes apparent, and roughly 11-13 is where it goes fully off the rails). That's a non-system-agnostic skill, because you have to understand 3e rules extremely well in order to know even a majority of the places where its rules go pear-shaped. (I would argue 5e also requires this skill, but the required amount of that skill is much lower than it was in 3e.)

Conversely, as a Dungeon World GM, I need to be able to draft appropriate Grim Portents for each of the Fronts I produce, so that the players feel a call to action, but aren't being plotted into any particular behavior on their parts, other than the choice to participate and respond in some way or another. This has...nothing whatsoever to do with the sorts of things you do as a typical 5e GM. Like, you could elect to use it (there's a reason I suggest reading the DW GMing rules to new GMs, regardless of system), but that particular skill is completely unnecessary for the system. That's you electing to make 5e more like Dungeon World.

 

[Zardnaar]

Some skills are system-agnostic. Some are not.

D&D 3e, for example, outright requires the GM to constantly re-balance its structure because it doesn't work outside of a narrow level range (roughly level 7-8 is when the breakdown becomes apparent, and roughly 11-13 is where it goes fully off the rails). That's a non-system-agnostic skill, because you have to understand 3e rules extremely well in order to know even a majority of the places where its rules go pear-shaped. (I would argue 5e also requires this skill, but the required amount of that skill is much lower than it was in 3e.)

Conversely, as a Dungeon World GM, I need to be able to draft appropriate Grim Portents for each of the Fronts I produce, so that the players feel a call to action, but aren't being plotted into any particular behavior on their parts, other than the choice to participate and respond in some way or another. This has...nothing whatsoever to do with the sorts of things you do as a typical 5e GM. Like, you could elect to use it (there's a reason I suggest reading the DW GMing rules to new GMs, regardless of system), but that particular skill is completely unnecessary for the system. That's you electing to make 5e more like Dungeon World.

And yet youre incapable of figuring out people found 4E a boring drag from level 1.

If games only go to level 7 or 8 3E is fine?

I very strongly suspect that's what happened back then as well game ends around 7 or 8 or 8-12 sessions (1999 survey apparently). For new players. Veterans go around 19 sessions.

I have the same suspicion for thex1980s as well. Hell Mentzer has said the higher level stuff didnt sell well comparatively.