Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Little Raven" data-source="post: 3999540" data-attributes="member: 10095">Yeah, I never said otherwise. I said that worldbuilding was necessary for a new DM, since the DMG doesn't provide ready-to-use examples of things like starting locales.Then please, explain how a brand new DM can pick up 3.X and start playing without developing a starting locale (including supportive NPCs, like quest-givers, McGuffins, shopkeepers), an adventure locale, and whatnot.As none of the three core books provide anything for you to just run with, a new DM would be forced to either (a) buy a setting/adventure in order to get that stuff or (b) develop it himself.D&amp;D has always had the bad habit of wanting &quot;new players&quot; to spend more money to get into the basic game than experienced players (new players would be buying the &quot;Starter/Basic&quot; set, then the 3 core books; experience players are only buying the core books), and they seem to be wising up.No, that's now how you teach a game. You teach a game by explaining the rules/systems and providing examples. You teach a DM things about how to build communities, then give him an example community. You teach him how dungeons work, then show him an example dungeon he can use. Just giving a stripped down adventure in place of a game system does nothing to teach the game, since you're removing the rules.Sounds completely different to me. This is the first time that D&amp;D is actually trying to directly tackle &quot;teaching new players&quot; the game, instead of throwing a collection of tables at them and expecting them to put it together with their own worldbuilding involved.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Little Raven, post: 3999540, member: 10095"] Yeah, I never said otherwise. I said that worldbuilding was necessary for a new DM, since the DMG doesn't provide ready-to-use examples of things like starting locales. Then please, explain how a brand new DM can pick up 3.X and start playing without developing a starting locale (including supportive NPCs, like quest-givers, McGuffins, shopkeepers), an adventure locale, and whatnot. As none of the three core books provide anything for you to just run with, a new DM would be forced to either (a) buy a setting/adventure in order to get that stuff or (b) develop it himself. D&D has always had the bad habit of wanting "new players" to spend more money to get into the basic game than experienced players (new players would be buying the "Starter/Basic" set, then the 3 core books; experience players are only buying the core books), and they seem to be wising up. No, that's now how you teach a game. You teach a game by explaining the rules/systems and providing examples. You teach a DM things about how to build communities, then give him an example community. You teach him how dungeons work, then show him an example dungeon he can use. Just giving a stripped down adventure in place of a game system does nothing to teach the game, since you're removing the rules. Sounds completely different to me. This is the first time that D&D is actually trying to directly tackle "teaching new players" the game, instead of throwing a collection of tables at them and expecting them to put it together with their own worldbuilding involved. [/QUOTE]

Verification