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

[AlViking]

Hang on though. You have repeatedly insisted that there is zero value in learning anything from other systems. After all, you are the best driver of your car and learning to drive a truck would in no way improve your driving skills. You have repeatedly stated that you will not learn other systems. So, why are you asking now?

Or, to put it another way, instead of asking for concrete examples and then constantly questioning those examples, why not actually pick up the books and see for yourself how these work.

AH, by the way, the idea of Backgrounding comes from Chronica Feudalis. I knew I'd remember the name of that game.

Please stop accusing me of something I have never said. I don't believe it is necessary to play other systems in order to learn about or create the exact same techniques other games use. For example I just watched a Ginny Di on implementing some campaign planning techniques from Daggerheart even though I have no plans to play the game. That does not stop others from learning from other games if that works for them.

Why not attempt to uplift the community of gamers by sharing some interesting game mechanics instead of expecting everyone to play every TTRPG someone somewhere may played and learned an interesting technique?

 

[Warnavick]

For some people those different techniques will improve their D&D experience. For others those different techniques will detract from their D&D experience. Which a person prefers is just a matter of taste, which is why saying or implying that being a generalist is the best way to do it is getting so much pushback. It's not objectively the best way, nor objectively the worst way. It's just a way and people can decide for themselves which they like better.

I agree with this for the most part. I would clarify that just because you run multiple systems, doesn't mean you are forcing all the techniques you learned from each system in all your games. Ideally you pick the best and appropriate ideas you could incorporate. No detracting techniques should be used.

I learned a great deal about running mysteries from CoC(Call of Cthulhu) that I can transfer to any game. I also learned a whole lot of narrating horror and making a dreadful atmosphere too. Thing is I am personally never running horror campaigns in my mainstay DnD game,or in general these days, so those techniques are put aside for the most part. Which is to say that what you get out of a different system is ultimately up to you and your preferences. If you only run games that have no player narrative mechanics then the techniques from a game based around those would not be as useful for you.

Even if its not a requirement to be better, I think playing or just reading multiple systems is still a good idea though. Much like going back to lore books from 2e, using an oddly specific random table from 3.5, or adapting that one mechanic you liked from 4e. There is plenty of things to borrow, use and be inspired from other sources. Even if its just the lore/resources and not the mechanics or tips.You should just curate your sources if you know you have a specific preference to get the most out of it.

All general "you"s by the way.

 

[Warnavick]

If you want to run a Cthulhu game because the game itself looks fun obviously you should go for it. While I'm glad it works for you if I wanted to run a mystery game and felt I needed help running it there are tons of options out there that do not include learning, organizing and running a Cthulhu game.

What bothers me is that some people are saying is that I can't be a good DM if I don't run other games like Cthhulhu or that a DM running games in multiple systems matters more than any other factor.

Well I am saying the CoC(Call of Cthulhu) helped my DnD mysteries. By playing it, it taught me important design elements that I can bring with me to any game. You don't have to play CoC to be a better DM because you may have already figured out the lessons that can be taught by CoC. It certainly made me a better DM for DnD to play that system.

 

[Arilyn]

An advantage of playing a variety of RPGs is being able to recommend games to other players, especially if they only know about D&D and/or aren't too sure about the system or are getting tired of it.

A close friend of ours has played D&D casually over the years, but not that thrilled and had drifted away. We introduced him to other games and now he's hooked. Loves Vaesen, Fabula Ultima, Wildsea, Glitterhearts, Roots. He's picked up a few games we've never heard of. He's been dipping his toes into GMing, and best of all, spending more money than he should on games! So proud. (sniff)

 

[Basic Expert]

I encourage all DMs and groups to try different systems than D&D, even if it's just for casual one-shots. It's less about pilfering specific mechanics for your D&D games and more about perspective.

Learning other games systems give a great insight in how different games solve the same or similar problems. Different resolution mechanics, different character build assumptions, different reward and advancement systems, and so on.

It helps people to see the strength and flaws of any given system when you have others to compare it to. Many groups might try something new and say, "Nope, not for us," and have a renewed appreciation for D&D. That's fine. You might also find something that you didn't know you love, which is awesome.

You absolutely do not need to play multiple systems or even have any familiarity with them to be a great D&D DM (i.e. running your group through fun adventures). And specializing in a system does give one greater confidence running it, which is not nothing. Whenever there's a thread about: "What system should I run X in?" my instinct is to always say, "Whatever system you're comfortable with."

If you, as a DM, want to delve into RPG theory or become a game designer yourself, then it becomes much more beneficial to study up on major systems and industry trends. Of course, if you're interested in this, it's not exactly a chore. If you're like me, it becomes a question of too many games, too little time.

 

[nevin]

One of the things I really dislike that has come out of the rise of popularity of D&D (and to some degree other RPGs; but let's be honest, it is mostly D&D) is the monetization of convinging people that being a Dungeon master is hard.

Early on as 5E gained steam, we had people like Matt Coville and Matt Mercer conving people that yes, you can be a DM. Coville in particular built a following around explaining how to DM, but never telling his viewers that they could not do it. Others have followed, such as Ginni D, who offer similar advice.

But something I see a lot more of now is an endless stream of products aimed at DMs trying to convince them that Dming is hard and the only way to manage it is to buy this book. There are tons of books of super simplified adventures and advice on how to be a better DM and ways to cut corners, and the marketing is all "DMing is super hard, buy this to make it easier."

DMing is not that hard. We learned to do it when we were 10. We fumbled around and made weird calls and built bad adventures and still had a blast -- enough to still be doing it decades later. We need fewer products marketed as ways to make DMing easier, and more people advocating for letting new DMs screw up.

And part of this, IMO, is the professional DM cottage industry. I get why people would want a paid GM, especially as it relates to scheduling, but pro DMing amplifies the attitude that DMing is some sort of elite skill set that only someone with expertise can do. And that is nonsense. Anyone can DM.

Anyway, I saw an ad that really turned my crank. Had to get that out. Everyone can go back to their regularly scheduled Best of 2025 lists or whatever.

/rant

You forget the one thing that is hard no matter what. Dealing with people. Arguing with those that don't like your rulings, the huge extra load of work if you do anything besides run pregen modules. I think you've been DMing so long you forget playing is much easier than running the game.

 

[Zardnaar]

3e is way better for not being bored than 2e ever could be. You could play a different class/prestige class combo every year and you'd die of old age before getting close to playing them all. Same with feats, spells, monsters, and more.

And, you can play 5 years Dark Sun, 5 years Ravenloft, etc. with 3e as well.

You would get sick of the number bloat very fast. 2Es easier to run. We went from 3E to 2E and damn.
3E makes DMing harder.

 

[Maxperson]

I had a hard day at work.

I would think you had difficulties. A problem employee. A problem customer. Your computers went down. Your boss gave you multiple deadlines and there was not enough time to do them. And so on. I wouldn't think you were just tired.

 

[Maxperson]

When I asked about what specific things people learned from other games I was hoping to have a discussion of actual details - for example if another game makes exploration more interesting, how does it do that? Are there specific mechanics involved not just a focus on exploration? Is there anything that can be used in a D&D game that isn't covered by the rules? There's a ton of stuff that the core books don't cover, things that I've learned from previous editions, non-game resources, other DMs, things not directly addressed by the books I came up with. I was hoping to have a constructive conversation. Obviously I failed miserably.

Perhaps this is another thread, but are there any mechanics or rules you've gotten from other games that are useful in D&D? Any interesting house rules you've added, no matter the source?

Sure.

I think it might have been 7th Sea, but I got the idea to allow feats for flaws with mechanical detriment to them. Those flaws could be triggered once per game at an appropriate time by anyone at the table. So if someone was say paranoid and had to treat someone new as being after them in some way, any time you met someone new that could be a threat, anyone could trigger that flaw and you'd have to roleplay it out.

From another DM I got the Fate Deck. Basically it's a large deck of magic cards and they get triggered on a 1(fate roll) or sometimes a very important natural 20(only sometimes since 20s already give increased effect). The cards can be positive or negative, depending on circumstances. If you were rolling to try and cleave a door in two with your sword and rolled that 1, pulling Shatter, your sword would break. If you were rolling to try and smash the door in with your war hammer and rolled that 1, the door would shatter.

In that DMs game one of my characters was a Chosen of Osiris and had powers of course dealing with the dead. We opened up a door sealed by the power of Osiris and inside was an avatar of an evil Egyptian god and the corpses of the 100 paladins of Osiris that died sealing the tomb. preventing anything from escaping. We quickly began to lose the fight(It was an avatar!) and I asked that since nothing could escape, were the spirits of the paladins still present. He said yes. So I called them to duty once more, commanding them to reinhabit their bodies to aid us. I had no idea if it would work or not, but the DM told me to roll and said that whatever number I rolled, I would multiply that by 5 and that's how many came back to aid me. A 20 would be all 100. I rolled a 1. So I slowly reached for that fate deck, not knowing what I would find. Would it be good, or would it be bad. Turns out I pulled possibly the best card in the 300+ card deck that I could pull. Sacred Boon. All 100 came back and we trapped him inside once more. This time, though, since I was a chosen of Osiris, I had the power by myself to reseal the cave and held the door open long enough that the paladins could go to their afterlife as they should.

I can't remember which ones they were exactly, since this was 6+ years ago and I don't use them anymore, but I adopted a few different player facing rules that I learned about during talks with @pemerton and others. My players didn't like those, though, so they fell by the wayside.

I'm sure there are others that I can't remember now.

 

[Maxperson]

So for those of us not familiar with player facing - or think we know but don't want to get it wrong - what does player facing mean? What did you try to implement?

They're rules like Plot Points from page 269 of the 5e DMG. The player can use these points to alter the game in some fairly minor, but helpful way. I tried Option 1, but my players just didn't want to do things like that, so they didn't get used.