Do we coddle new Players?

[Mark]

I think it's a gradual shift in the nature of the game. Which is somewhat ironic given where the game seems to be headed, with the rise of miniatures and a more rules-oriented approach.

From my perspective, the only thing that has changed since 1974 is that the DM has to do less guess work while adjudicating. There isn't any less roleplaying, in fact there seems to be more by individual players as they play longer. I've seen no such shift.

I think 2nd edition was a larger leap towards the idea of keeping players alive. D&D was born out of wargaming roots, so it was natural to have people die in the early versions of the game.

I think you are generalizing your own experiences, though I'm not saying that they are invalid nor am I saying that others may not have shared your experience. However, I am saying that my own experience does not mirror yours. Dying is part of the rules of the game, has always been part of the rules of the game, and if it were removed or downplayed so as to make it negligible would fundementally change the game to the extreme.

Nowadays, I'll be damned if I let a DM kill me willy-nilly after I just spent a couple of days writing up 6 pages of character history. That's not fun, that's just plain mean.

I think you need to define "willy-nilly" because I get the feeling that your investment in your characters prompts you to use that term more broadly than I would use it.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

I tend to avoid kililng players deliberately but don't go out of my way to avoid kiling them

Damn! You run a hard game!

 

[Hjorimir]

I coddle in the sense that I make sure they understand the mechanics behind everything they are doing. For example, if a new player wants to cast a spell and is standing within the threatened area of an opponent I make sure to remind them that the action will provoke an AOO and they may either want to take a 5-foot step or cast defensively. If any of the veterans say they are casting a spell within that same area and fail to mention words like "defensively" or "after I take a step here" then I just roll the attack automatically.

What I don't do is fudge the rolls to give a new player a false sense of security. How can I ever expect them to have a grasp of balance in the game if they think that a first level character will survive a fight with ogres? Sure, there is a chance that character would survive. But that isn't the norm and I let the dice fall as they may.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

New players should always be the "star" of their first game. The only skill checks needed to be made are ones that they have, etc.

The wife of one of my gaming buddies plays about three times a year. I let her spellcasters cast all spells spontaneously. Call me a munchkin, but I want the game to be as accessable as possible without boning the rest of the players.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

IMO, the point of this is not that we "have" to let them live for a few levels in order to keep them hooked on the hobby. We are, in fact, doing them a disservice by coddling them in their gaming infancy. We ought to be strengthening them through trials by fire. How can we expect them to grow into strong, experienced players if they never even lose a character? To build a strong gamer base, you need strength in the individual gamers. You can't just dole out experience points for the characters, you need to give experience to the players as well, and as we all know, experience can't truly be given, it must be earned.

I think that Knights of the Dinner Table has most clearly embodied the spirit of this attitude. Maybe new players should be trained on Hackmaster rather than D&D?

Ozmar the Old-School Gamer

'Trials by fire?' I think you may be putting a little too much emphasis on how 'tough' you get losing your character. So if that player quits that's OK then? Great. I think i understand why the gaming industry has shrunk so dramatically. And KotDT has to be the worst example of [non]role playing in exsistance.

I'm not saying new players should never lose a character or three. Good gravy the character does have the most lethal of all occupations (adventurer). What I am saying is that new players, especially those coming into a group od experienced players, should have a few sessions where they can experience success and fun. Losing characters is a 'unfun' event no matter how you try to dress it up as 'toughing' the player. What it may do, in reality, is turn them off the game entirely.

 

[Stone Angel]

Hmmm....Now that I think about it I probably do, but more for story promotion and preservation.

But no one ever did it to me, I used to go through characters like jolly ranchers back in the day!


The Seraph of Earth and Stone

 

[Piratecat]

At one point in high school I lost five characters in five subsequent weeks, all to another player (playing an antipaladin) and a so-so DM. It sucked, and it wasn't even close to fun. I don't miss meat-grinder DMs at all.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

I coddle in the sense that I make sure they understand the mechanics behind everything they are doing. For example, if a new player wants to cast a spell and is standing within the threatened area of an opponent I make sure to remind them that the action will provoke an AOO and they may either want to take a 5-foot step or cast defensively. If any of the veterans say they are casting a spell within that same area and fail to mention words like "defensively" or "after I take a step here" then I just roll the attack automatically.

What I don't do is fudge the rolls to give a new player a false sense of security. How can I ever expect them to have a grasp of balance in the game if they think that a first level character will survive a fight with ogres? Sure, there is a chance that character would survive. But that isn't the norm and I let the dice fall as they may.

This is what I am talking about! Thanks Hjormir - you expressed my feelings better than I could

 

[Hjorimir]

I once killed a guy six times in one session. For some reason unknown to me, my players keep coming back.



(I've softend in my old age, however. Only one TPK and one character death for me in the last year of DMing.)

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I think they should get the equivalent of the three-second-invulnerability you see often in computer games.

Consider this: They are new to the game. They don't know all the rules and stuff too well. And then because of that, their character dies. I don't think that's right. Give them close calls, yes, but don't kill their PC's in the first couple of rounds. Let them get acclimated to the game.

Besides, they might have taken quite some time in creating their first character (the first ones always take the longest), and might be scared off the hobby for good if the didn't character even last as long as it took them to make it. "What, I have to do that again?"

As has been said, 3e isn't as fast as older editions when it comes to character creation, a necessary side-effect of being able to have characters that differ in more than name, race and class.