DMG & MM: Players Stay Out?
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
shilsen said:
That's true but the point is that with this new edition, there's a perfect opportunity for that "sense of wonder" to be recaptured by even the most experienced D&D players, without the DM having to shuffle things around or homebrew/houserule, etc... I guess what I am suggesting is that if WotC doesn't build the DMG and MM in such a way that players *need* them, and does build the PHB to be complete, and said players are not intending to run a game anytime soon, 4E is the perfect opportunity to *not* buy and read the DMG and MM and let the game, both mehcnaically and setting-wise, unfold for you, via the DM.
Darkwolf71
First Post
Oh boy, this topic never goes well.
It should be self-evident that anyone who plays as well as DMs is going to be at least passingly familiar with information that a player who only plays and has no intention of ever DMing would be.
In reality though all players, it seems, are expected to be familiar with and even own a DMG. Now, I know this isn't the case for every player in every group but it is, I think, the accepted norm. So much so that it isn't unusuall for non-DMG owning players to be flipping through another players copy at the table.
Grymar said:
It should be self-evident that anyone who plays as well as DMs is going to be at least passingly familiar with information that a player who only plays and has no intention of ever DMing would be.
In reality though all players, it seems, are expected to be familiar with and even own a DMG. Now, I know this isn't the case for every player in every group but it is, I think, the accepted norm. So much so that it isn't unusuall for non-DMG owning players to be flipping through another players copy at the table.
Lurks-no-More
First Post
I think that time and experience has shown that trying to keep rules hidden from the players is not only futile, it's a bad idea. It undermines the trust at the table, limits the players needlessly, and adds nothing to the "sense of wonder".
shilsen
Adventurer
As a design decision, and for reasons of useability and clarity too, I agree that it's a good idea if the books are designed so that a player only needs to look at the PHB to play. And personally I don't have any problems with a DM saying to the players that there are certain things that he'd prefer the players not to know about.Reynard said:
At the same time, if a player wants to look at the DMG and MM simply because he's really interested in the new system and how it works, I think it would be unfair for the DM to tell him he can't. Also, I think it's up to the player to decide if sense of wonder is a big factor in the game for him (and it isn't, for many people) or not. If a player would be happier knowing everything in the DMG and MM, and was capable of separating that OOC knowledge from his character's, I would have no problem with it. I've played in games with DMs where they were using published adventures I knew intimately (and I told the DM about it) and had a blast doing it. In fact, there was an additional pleasure in seeing how the DM concerned ran things differently than I would. And when I did things the PC would do even though I had player info that told me it would be a bad idea, there was great amusement and anticipation while I waited for the axe to fall.
In short, what I'm saying is that this is a subject which has so much to do with individual playstyle and the given group that there's no way to define one approach as inherently better than the other. The best approach, I think, is to do what you suggested and build the PHB to cover everything players will need, and leave it up to the individual groups to decide what degree of disclosure from DMG & MM works for them.
