D&D 5E (2024) How do you run an open table game in D&D '24?

[Nobleshield]

I'm considering starting an open-table D&D campaign at my LGS since several people have come in the past couple of weeks asking about regular D&D games at the shop (there aren't really any) or wanting to learn to play; usually I'd be trying to push "OSR" style games or older editions (my personal preference) but people want to play D&D, not a game that's "just like D&D but...". I would plan to use the old "TSR Hobby Shop Dungeon" approach that I read about in Ernie Gygax's (rest in peace) Marmoreal Tomb, which is close to but not quite what the kids nowadays call "West Marches", the main points of which are:

1) Sessions are scheduled (ostensibly each week), with one single DM and not necessarily with multiple groups (unlike West Marches). Whoever shows up plays; if necessary, a player must create a new character (or promote one, but I don't think D&D'24 has henchmen anymore) to ensure a cohesive party.

2) Each session MUST start and end in a safe place (e.g., a town) to receive treasure and XP (in the old days, this was more important due to 1gp = 1xp, of course)

3) If party levels are too far apart, they need to be balanced (by people having to use/create other characters from their stable)

The first two points can be done easily enough in D&D '24. The third point is the one that seems to be the outlier because everyone I've talked to is 100% adamant that you can NEVER have varying levels within the same party; everyone needs to be equal level at all times to make things "fair", and the idea of saying "Bob your PC is 8th level, you can't play him in a group of 1st levels you need to create an alt character" is openly hostile, which defeats the whole point of people being able to play as they are able, since why commit to play every week if you know that if you miss a month, your character will just get bumped up to everyone else's level when you come back? In older editions (e.g., 1st and 2nd edition), there wouldn't be an issue since A) each class leveled at different XP rates, and B) it was assumed because of A that you could have a 2-3 level gap between PCs and it would be perfectly fine.

I can't figure out how to handle that part and keep the open table—whoever shows up gets to play self-contained adventures in an open-world style game with the current edition—since it's so focused on the "consistent party" gameplay style (which, to be fair, would also have been an issue since the 3rd edition) where everyone is always the same level. I've heard about Adventurer's League, but it seems like WotC has abandoned it except for conventions, as there doesn't seem to be any info on it for D&D 2024.

Is there any way to get around this issue? The hypothetical level gap, if some people can play every session and some can play only once a month or two, is the only thing preventing me from wanting to do this right now, because it seems like D&D'24 cannot support that. Still, it's bound to happen if you go with the idea that if this week, 5 people show up, and next week, 3 people show up, PCs shouldn't receive XP for games they haven't played.

 

[aco175]

Thank you for trying to spread the game to new players. Hopefully some will become DMs themselves and the payoff will become something you can spread into a true west marches game, maybe letting you be a player once in a while.

I also think if you are doing the work, you get to choose the play. Adventure League (AL) lets the PCs level up after each adventure and PCs from each Tier can play together fine. This lets level 1-4 all play like level 5-9. I found it a bit of problem at low levels but not a big deal after level 5. Each of the adventures are designed for level 3 or 8 with guidelines for the DM to scale based on the PCs that show up. This is more work than I would like to do, so I would make an adventure that I want and tell people what level and maybe allow +1/-1 to what was designed.

I think you will get a core group that show up and might want to play the same PCs each week. This might mean that you are making higher and higher level adventures and the problem of what to do when a new player wants to play and the rest of the PCs are level 6 and they only have a level 1 or 2 PC. You might need to advertise somehow what level is this week. AL has a system to let people start at level 5 to be able to join a higher level game.

You could also make a bunch of low level games to play over a few months. This might allow players to play as often as they can and be able to come and go. There will still be a core number the can show regularly, but this just forces them to have a few PCs as the other grow in level and cannot play with the others anymore. Plan a special night or event for the higher level PCs once a month or two to 'reward' the core players. The more players that can come and play lets you build the DMs to carry-on and start tables with more new players or make a high level adventure for the core players.

 

[kermit4karate]

I'm considering starting an open-table D&D campaign at my LGS since several people have come in the past couple of weeks asking about regular D&D games at the shop (there aren't really any) or wanting to learn to play; usually I'd be trying to push "OSR" style games or older editions (my personal preference) but people want to play D&D, not a game that's "just like D&D but...". I would plan to use the old "TSR Hobby Shop Dungeon" approach that I read about in Ernie Gygax's (rest in peace) Marmoreal Tomb, which is close to but not quite what the kids nowadays call "West Marches", the main points of which are:

1) Sessions are scheduled (ostensibly each week), with one single DM and not necessarily with multiple groups (unlike West Marches). Whoever shows up plays; if necessary, a player must create a new character (or promote one, but I don't think D&D'24 has henchmen anymore) to ensure a cohesive party.

2) Each session MUST start and end in a safe place (e.g., a town) to receive treasure and XP (in the old days, this was more important due to 1gp = 1xp, of course)

3) If party levels are too far apart, they need to be balanced (by people having to use/create other characters from their stable)

The first two points can be done easily enough in D&D '24. The third point is the one that seems to be the outlier because everyone I've talked to is 100% adamant that you can NEVER have varying levels within the same party; everyone needs to be equal level at all times to make things "fair", and the idea of saying "Bob your PC is 8th level, you can't play him in a group of 1st levels you need to create an alt character" is openly hostile, which defeats the whole point of people being able to play as they are able, since why commit to play every week if you know that if you miss a month, your character will just get bumped up to everyone else's level when you come back? In older editions (e.g., 1st and 2nd edition), there wouldn't be an issue since A) each class leveled at different XP rates, and B) it was assumed because of A that you could have a 2-3 level gap between PCs and it would be perfectly fine.

I can't figure out how to handle that part and keep the open table—whoever shows up gets to play self-contained adventures in an open-world style game with the current edition—since it's so focused on the "consistent party" gameplay style (which, to be fair, would also have been an issue since the 3rd edition) where everyone is always the same level. I've heard about Adventurer's League, but it seems like WotC has abandoned it except for conventions, as there doesn't seem to be any info on it for D&D 2024.

Is there any way to get around this issue? The hypothetical level gap, if some people can play every session and some can play only once a month or two, is the only thing preventing me from wanting to do this right now, because it seems like D&D'24 cannot support that. Still, it's bound to happen if you go with the idea that if this week, 5 people show up, and next week, 3 people show up, PCs shouldn't receive XP for games they haven't played.

First question: how much experience do you have as a DM? Because this can be tough if you haven't done it much before.

Second thing is a statement, not a question: If it isn't made clear to prospective players up front that the DM is the referee and can/will interpret and adjust the rules as they see fit, then the experience may go poorly.

No two people run any version of D&D the same way, nor should they be expected to. Yet many people still believe that they should. Set expectations properly ahead of time.

 

[bedir than]

When I've played 'pod play' with groups that intermix based on attendance and story we've never cared about level disparity. The sessions were as small as two players and as large as nine. The level variance was from 0-4. I'd never play a 1st level character with anything outside of tier 1, and the policy was that a new character started at the beginning of the tier the group as a whole was in. Levelling up via experience was rather fast when that new 5th level was fighting alongside 8th.

I've also had people join by taking over an NPC. If the group is regularly in a town or keep or fort or ship there's your pool of potential heroes. Skrunk went from coffee roaster to wild magic barbarian in a fun little story due to his hatred of what magic did to his neighborhood, as one example.

My strongest recommendation when opening a table to people you don't know, in public, with varying amounts of experience playing the game is to reduce and remove most of the house rules you think add to the game. Someone dropping in for a first session doesn't want a multi-page document or lecture on the right way to play D&D. They want to play D&D.

 

[Nobleshield]

First question: how much experience do you have as a DM? Because this can be tough if you haven't done it much before.

Second thing is a statement, not a question: If it isn't made clear to prospective players up front that the DM is the referee and can/will interpret and adjust the rules as they see fit, then the experience may go poorly.

No two people run any version of D&D the same way, nor should they be expected to. Yet many people still believe that they should. Set expectations properly ahead of time.

I've DMed in the 90s just not 5e

 

[kermit4karate]

When I've played 'pod play' with groups that intermix based on attendance and story we've never cared about level disparity. The sessions were as small as two players and as large as nine. The level variance was from 0-4. I'd never play a 1st level character with anything outside of tier 1, and the policy was that a new character started at the beginning of the tier the group as a whole was in. Levelling up via experience was rather fast when that new 5th level was fighting alongside 8th.

I've also had people join by taking over an NPC. If the group is regularly in a town or keep or fort or ship there's your pool of potential heroes. Skrunk went from coffee roaster to wild magic barbarian in a fun little story due to his hatred of what magic did to his neighborhood, as one example.

My strongest recommendation when opening a table to people you don't know, in public, with varying amounts of experience playing the game is to reduce and remove most of the house rules you think add to the game. Someone dropping in for a first session doesn't want a multi-page document or lecture on the right way to play D&D. They want to play D&D.

Completely disagree with your last recommendation here, both in fact and spirit.

Setting expectations properly doesn't equate to providing a multi-page document or a lecture on the right way to play D&D.

The right way to play IMO is what works best for this particular DM, and in many cases that also means implementing house rules.

 

[bedir than]

Completely disagree with your last recommendation here, both in fact and spirit.

Setting expectations properly doesn't equate to providing a multi-page document or a lecture on the right way to play D&D.

Setting expectations aren't house rules in my mind.

Treating other players with kindness is an expectation.

Not tracking ammunition is a house rule.

One of those is absolutely necessary to open table play in the modern world. The other is a house rule that increases the friction for a first time player.

 

[kermit4karate]

I've DMed in the 90s just not 5e

Understood. You may already be doing this, but you might want to get some smaller tuneup games under your belt before starting something that sounds as ambitious as this.

Ambitious in that it's public and open to strangers who don't know you and have no vested interest in seeing you succeed. That ups the difficulty level. That's why I emphasize setting the expectations clearly from the start.

 

[The Firebird]

We may have some common goals; I ran an AL group for a while, and I also like OSR stuff more than 5e. But as you said, 5e is what people want to do and the way to get them in the door.

The AL structure of Tiers (1-4, 5-10) works pretty well for mixing players of different levels. We only really had problems when their were very optimized players at the high end of the range playing with newbies. When there is a level 4 character with a broken build that can deal 40 damage a round playing with Dave (hi, I'm new) running a level 1 standard fighter, everyone can tell there is a mismatch.

That said, even when this occurred people got that it was the AL rules and didn't complain overly much. It helped that the rules came from an external body, I think, so we could say "sorry Dave, I know you can't contribute as much, but that is coming from WotC, not me".

As the GM you can do a lot to redirect the spotlight as well and make sure Dave can contribute.

So you might consider looking into the AL ruleset; it is established and gives some consistency. If you wanted to expand beyond one GM, it is easy to add new ones and grow the group that way.

---

If, instead you want to run your own OSR-adjacent game, I'd recommend a few different changes. I'd keep the Tier system (by which I mean, everyone has a character from the same tier) but split 1-2 off into their own thing. Then I'd cap the levels at 6. So you have three possibilities:

Levels 1-2
Levels 3-4
Levels 5-6

Have the players level every successful session. AL did it differently sometimes, but honestly it is just easier to track. Then let people swap characters in and out and make new ones. In practice no one in AL minds the character stable.

The biggest issue I foresee is what to do with walk-ins. If everyone is excited to play their level 4s, and someone walks in, do you make everyone play level 1s instead? Do you give that player a level 3 for that mod and then go back to make them start at 1? Or do you blend tiers, letting them play the level 1 with the 4s?

It's up to you and the group. I think any of these would be fine.

 

[The Firebird]

Regarding mods: I ran the Dragon of Icespire Peak as a sandbox for an AL group from 1-6 and that went great. It is also established so people looking for 'D&D' may like that. It comes with a nice hexmap. I'd try that, add some rules for travel, and maybe mix in the Phandelver content as well.