Dungeons & Dragons Has Done Away With the Adventuring Day

Adventuring days are no more, at least not in the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide. The new 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide contains a streamlined guide to combat encounter planning, with a simplified set of instructions on how to build an appropriate encounter for any set of characters. The new rules are pretty basic - the DM determines an XP budget based on the difficulty level they're aiming for (with choices of low, moderate, or high, which is a change from the 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide) and the level of the characters in a party. They then spend that budget on creatures to actually craft the encounter. Missing from the 2024 encounter building is applying an encounter multiplier based on the number of creatures and the number of party members, although the book still warns that more creatures adds the potential for more complications as an encounter is playing out.

What's really interesting about the new encounter building rules in the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide is that there's no longer any mention of the "adventuring day," nor is there any recommendation about how many encounters players should have in between long rests. The 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide contained a recommendation that players should have 6 to 8 medium or hard encounters per adventuring day. The 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide instead opts to discuss encounter pace and how to balance player desire to take frequent Short Rests with ratcheting up tension within the adventure.

The 6-8 encounters per day guideline was always controversial and at least in my experience rarely followed even in official D&D adventures. The new 2024 encounter building guidelines are not only more streamlined, but they also seem to embrace a more common sense approach to DM prep and planning.

The 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide for Dungeons & Dragons will be released on November 12th.

 

[Oofta]

You might need a quote since you're making a specific claim no one else can remember.

There are people like @Emerikol that refer to the DM as benevolent dictator (correct me if I misremembered!) but it's also clear that they're talking about enforcing the rules of the game, the narration of character action, the world outside of the narration of the character's actions.

They are not dictating player behavior, choices or actions. There are rare exceptions of course, like in my game if a player has their PC attack another PC, it's up to the target PC to decide if anything potentially happens.

 

[Mort]

If the player isn't playing in bad faith, they literally wouldn't ever do this.

I'm going to grab this quote - you are referring to Dungeon World, I'll reference it to 5e -

If the DM isn't DMing in bad faith, then none of the "bad" DM-dictator scenarios will come up either.

If the DM is actually focusing on the fun of the players, it goes a long way.

 

[Yaarel]

But the DM still enforces the rules of the game.

Actually. 2024 says, the DM must make sure the rules are working in a way that players are having fun.

If certain rules are unfun, a DM must mitigate them or even modify them, so that the players are having fun.


"
Adjudicate the Rules. You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun.

"

 

[Oofta]

Actually. 2024 says, the DM must make sure the rules are working in a way that players are having fun.

If certain rules are unfun, a DM must mitigate them or even modify them, so that the players are having fun.


"
Adjudicate the Rules. You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun.

"

Which is no different from what the 2014 rules said, it's just phrased a bit differently. The goal of the game is obviously to have fun.

I'll let you know later this week how the 2024 DMG phrases it.

 

[Oofta]

I'm going to grab this quote - you are referring to Dungeon World, I'll reference it to 5e -

If the DM isn't DMing in bad faith, then none of the "bad" DM-dictator scenarios will come up either.

If the DM is actually focusing on the fun of the players, it goes a long way.

Amazing how if people get along, cooperate and follow the rules and spirit of the game there's not an issue. Whether you are player to GM. Shocking.

 

[abirdcall]

Claiming your opinion is fact does not make it so.

Yeah the claim sounds like a popular myth. It's either flatly not true or it is a misrepresentation that lacks the nuance that the actual studies would have had.

This is not the appropriate forum to get into why though.

Source: I'm a therapist.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

I'm going to grab this quote - you are referring to Dungeon World, I'll reference it to 5e -

If the DM isn't DMing in bad faith, then none of the "bad" DM-dictator scenarios will come up either.

If the DM is actually focusing on the fun of the players, it goes a long way.

exactly. Which is why I'm confused why the answer to potential of a bad DM is "change the rules to take DM's power away", but the answer to a potential bad player is "that's an individual table issue, that cannot be fix at game design level. Run a session zero and talk to the player". Shouldn't the former also apply to the latter?

 

[DinoInDisguise]

Actually. 2024 says, the DM must make sure the rules are working in a way that players are having fun.

If certain rules are unfun, a DM must mitigate them or even modify them, so that the players are having fun.


"
Adjudicate the Rules. You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun.

"

Funny thing. This change is meaningless, because the DMs causing issues won't listen to it, and the DMs not causing issues already follow it.

We can look at a use case here. A DM is being an objective tyrant. Currently, players have no rule to cite and have only social levers to pull. Under this rule, players can say "by rule you have to ensure we are having fun!" But the tyrant DM just continues doing as they always did because they only care about their own enjoyment, leaving the players with only social levers.

That's my issue with much of this. The proposed solutions have zero chance of solving the hypothetical problem. But no one wants to talk about social skills, so instead we continue to try to solve social problems with words on paper.

Maybe I should go back to my hole. I'm getting excited.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, you are pedantically correct because I didn't use the proper phrase from a game I have never played. Duh. What was I thinking trying to get a straight answer. I don't know why I even bother.

I gave you several straight answers: Nothing happens.

I said that repeatedly.

What more do you want?

 

[Guest 7037866]

Here is what the 2024 Players Handbook says about being a DM.

The players drive and steer the narrative:
"The players decide."
"The players choose."
"You [the DM] determine the results of the adventurers decisions."

"
Guide the Story. You narrate much of the action during play, describing locations and creatures that the adventurers face. The players decide what their characters do as they navigate hazards and choose what to explore. Then you use a combination of imagination and the game’s rules to determine the results of the adventurers’ decisions.
"

The job of a DM is to "serve" the fun of the players.

"
Adjudicate the Rules. You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun.
"

The DM is a "lead storyteller", a "guide", even a "mastermind" who creates an adventure. But "the DM isnt your adversary". "Dungeons & Dragons [is] a cooperative game."

In 5e, such talk about a "DM dictator" isnt a thing.

First, there is a whole lot of cherry picking going on here...

Second, I would wait for the DMG to come out before one can truly define the role of the DM?

This notion of a DM saying "my way or the highway" didnt age well, and didnt survive into the D&D of future generations.

It's aging well as far as I can see.

The job of a DM is to "serve" the fun of the players. -- To be clear, these are YOUR words, not in the PHB... And are emphatically wrong and misleading.

These words are in the PHB, as you quoted, "You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun."

See, you leaped from "the group's fun" to "the fun of the players". THE DM IS PART OF THE GROUP, RIGHT???

Yeah, they are. And if allowing a race, class, subclass, rule, 3PP, or whatever doesn't contribute to the DM's fun as the mastermind of the game, as part of the group, they have to have the same weight (at a bare minimum) as the other players. FWIW, every player I've ever played any edition with agrees "You do the lion's share as the DM, you run the game, you call the shots."

So, if I outline certain things that as DM, I am not allowing, the reason is including them detracts from my fun (for whatever cause--it is immaterial). If a player won't play without that, they lose out. I am not going to run a game that isn't fun for me to participate in just so that player can have fun at my expense. It is not my responsibility as DM to compromise my fun for a player's fun. That isn't in the job description. Maybe you or other DMs are willing to ruin your own fun so the players have a great time with their fun. Kuddos for you! That ain't me.

When it comes to that point, if the group continues to want me to be DM, that player has to accept it or move on.
The group is free to have someone else DM, certainly, but depending on what that player wants (such as an evil PC) I might not continue to join as a player under that DM. Then, I will walk away and not worry about it.

Actually. 2024 says, the DM must make sure the rules are working in a way that players are having fun.

If certain rules are unfun, a DM must mitigate them or even modify them, so that the players are having fun.

"
Adjudicate the Rules. You oversee how the group uses the game’s rules, making sure the rules serve the group’s fun.
"

And here you are doing it again. Conflating "group's fun" to mean "players fun".

Finally, I don't recall anyone (but you?) using the term "dictator"? I could be wrong, I haven't read every post and I have some people blocked.

Sure, I have certainly used phrases like "absolute power", "my way or the highway", etc. but those things do not make me a dictator.

A dictator is someone who also refuses to give up their power. I am very happy to give it up and allow someone else to DM! In fact, I'm typically thrilled when I get to just play (like I do now on Wednesday nights). Now, if I said, "Sorry, guys, either I'm the DM or I'm leaving" that would be dictorial.

But, yeah, that'll never happen. Most of the time I'm DM because no one else wants to. They don't want the responsibility that goes with it. I agree under the conditions that I have things I don't allow in my games and the players accept that.