"I hate math"

[WizarDru]

Then I relaxed, and let the players figure out all applicable modifiers. Guess what? The game got terrifically easy for me. A player rolls, does his own math, and tells me what the result was; I compare it to the applicable AC or DC, and it's either a success or failure. Easy-peasy.

Give that man a Ceegar! They don't need to have mastered the rules any more than casual players...but they do need to be actively playing and helping things along. I rarely keep a creature's AC a secret more than a round or so...with six PCs, they can usually narrow the range very quickly. "Let's see, I hit three times, getting a 44, 40 and 36, but missing on a 32 and 31....well, that narrows it down, some."

I don't bother tracking all the bonuses the PCs have...they can take care of that. "Did you remember to add the bonus from Prayer?" "Hey, aren't you blinking?" I respect and trust my players.

I wouldn't consider it expecting rules mastery to read a spell description ahead of time and compute the DC of your spell, ready to report it when asked. I don't consider it a lot to ask to expect a PC to know his attack bonuses prior to proximate factors or what his ranges and other relevant information are. I'd expect that at 1st level, 5th level or 20th level. Players don't suddenly wake up and find themselves with three more iterative attacks one day...they've developed into them, generally. Asking someone who's played a rogue for 5, 10, 15 or 20 levels about when he can use his sneak attack and how much they do isn't unreasonable, I don't think.

High-level play isn't about pulling tight on the reins, IMHO, but about letting the PCs drive the game with you. It's a social and cooperative game. Looking to the other folks around the table to help keep the game moving is a wise thing.

 

[Ourph]

Then I relaxed, and let the players figure out all applicable modifiers. Guess what? The game got terrifically easy for me. A player rolls, does his own math, and tells me what the result was; I compare it to the applicable AC or DC, and it's either a success or failure. Easy-peasy.

That's great if you're 1) Not playing with young players. 2) Not playing with new players who don't understand all the rules yet. 3) Not playing with players who don't care to remember all the correct rules when it comes time to re-calculate their mods due to a Dispel Magic, a foe with special rules, etc. or 4) Not playing with old senile players who forget which can of Mountain Dew is theirs (guilty ), let alone what amount of BAB they assigned to Power Attack two minutes ago when it was their turn in the round.

I'm glad your players are together enough to learn and remember all the rules. Some of us aren't so lucky. All it takes it 1 player sitting at the table who's not willing or able to do that and the DM is stuck with checking/re-checking every number whenever situational modifiers pop up.

Personally, I don't LIKE that the game requires that sort of commitment to rules knowledge from the players. What kind of barrier to entry is that? When I started playing with Moldvay Basic, someone handed me a character and told me what to roll for the first hour. By the end of that hour, I knew all I needed to about the rules in order to "be a good player". Now in order to "be a good player" by your definition I need not only an encyclopedic knowledge of the PHB, but also several sections of the DMG. That's not something you learn in one hour WHILE HAVING FUN GAMING!

 

[ruleslawyer]

True, Ourph, very true. However, I think that D&D is only really so grueling at high levels and if you purposely introduce a great deal of complexity. In the cases that you mention, I would a) start the game at 1st level and go very slowly through lower levels (perhaps increasing the XP required for level advancement; b) completely remove some of the more complicated rules, such as AoOs; and/or c) reduce the number of bonus/penalty types available. There is no question that allowing your players to assume some of the responsibility assumes that your players have the ability and willingness to assume that responsibility. However, I also find that this leads to more satisfying gaming, as the game becomes less the dictatorial bailiwick of the DM and more of a collaborative process.

Note that I have a very simple means of dealing with forgetful players: If you don't remember a modifier or rules exception, and it hurts you, that's your problem. If you "forget" something that ends up helping you, my honor system kicks in: Players are obligated to pull their own weight and to help out less experienced or more scatterbrained players to deal with issues, and it's simply expected that if you forget something to your advantage, you let me know afterwards and make sure not to do it again. I don't find this a problem at all. I would find it a problem if I DM-ed a tournament game where I didn't know the players, and they didn't know each other, but I'm fortunate enough to play with friends.

 

[Ourph]

True, Ourph, very true. However, I think that D&D is only really so grueling at high levels and if you purposely introduce a great deal of complexity. In the cases that you mention, I would a) start the game at 1st level and go very slowly through lower levels (perhaps increasing the XP required for level advancement; b) completely remove some of the more complicated rules, such as AoOs; and/or c) reduce the number of bonus/penalty types available.

All very good suggestions. The main problem comes in when you have a mixed group of players. When I was running 3e I had several players who were completely "with it" as far as the rules were concerned. They knew their stats, knew their abilities and generally knew when certain modifiers did and didn't apply. I had a younger player who started out with the problems of a noob and eventually graduated to being fairly rules conversant but still not as expert as some of the older more experienced players. I had at least two of the "can't be bothered" type players and one who meant well, but would forget where he put his character sheet between rounds. If I changed the game enough to make it workable for the not so "with it" players, the responsible, informed players would have resented playing a dumbed down version of the game. Therein lies the problem. There is a tremendous range of possible rules savvy players can achieve in 3e D&D. Some other games (D20 games included) have a much narrower range of rules expertise attainable by the players, making a mixed group such as mine more compatible. Though I've never gotten a chance to play it, Mutants & Masterminds seems to me (after a thorough reading) to be a good example of what I'm talking about.

There is no question that allowing your players to assume some of the responsibility assumes that your players have the ability and willingness to assume that responsibility. However, I also find that this leads to more satisfying gaming, as the game becomes less the dictatorial bailiwick of the DM and more of a collaborative process.

Me too! If I could figure out how to clone responsible, intelligent rules-knowledgeable players who always show up on time, always bathe before the game and bring munchies or pizza money I'd be rolling in it!

Unfortunately, the men in black suits took away the Spaarti cylinders last month and told me not to make any more.

 

[WizarDru]

Correct. That rules knowledge, even for beginners, is only required at high levels. 3rd level characters aren't tossing around tons of spells, loaded with lots of feats or magic items. New players shouldn't be playing at levels where this should be an issue.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I've got my fingers crossed that Castles & Crusades will solve a ton of my problems with D20 D&D. It's OGL so it can have it's own character creation rules and not require a PHB allowing it to get away from the 3.xe "mindset" or philosophy if you will. Plus it's supposed to be fairly compatible with AD&D to boot. I'm pumped. Shorter books with less crap in them. Yay!

I just hope they don't lose thier original vision and go and try to re-invent the wheel like a few of the people who playtest have suggested on thier boards.

 

[Ourph]

Correct. That rules knowledge, even for beginners, is only required at high levels. 3rd level characters aren't tossing around tons of spells, loaded with lots of feats or magic items. New players shouldn't be playing at levels where this should be an issue.

So if you were incorporating a new player into an existing campaign you would...

1) Start the campaign over at 1st level?
2) Make the new player play a 1st level character no matter what the average level of the existing players in your campaign is?
3) Play a completely separate game with the new guy until he learned the rules?

Again, mixed groups are the norm IME and none of those options seem appealing to me.

Also, I've started new players at 1st level, and there's still a very steep learning curve for 3rd edition. I know you can always give people pregens for character generation or have them go with the class packages in the PHB, but no new player is going to want to limit themselves like that forever. So their choice is to play a character they've had no hand in customizing or get familiar with ~160 pages of rules PDQ. That's a tall order for a 10 year old, even WITH help.

 

[Funksaw]

I think that there is a call and a market for a highly simplified version of D&D which *is* playable as a full game (unlike the D&D adventure boxes) and where math takes a back seat to action and having fun.

That is not to say that the "regular" D&D market would buy it. D&D players tend to like crunch rather than fluff, tend to prefer tactics to roleplaying - that is not to say that they won't or don't roleplay - but that D&D tends to facilitate and spend more time and detail on the mechanics of system and tactics rather than roleplaying.

Indeed, I'd like to see the continued support of D&D 3.5 as a main line, and a second, smaller break-away line for those who like D&D's setting or presumptions but just want to set up action-packed adventures and intreguing stories. It would also increase sales for D&D settings, such as Eberron, which are nice, but are tied too strongly to the mechanics to be useable on it's face by GMs who are turned off by the "math" of D&D.

Indeed, I do like the idea of a return to the "Basic D&D/Advanced D&D" dichotomy - there's a significant market for rules-light gaming.

 

[Luvin Lt. Fingers]

Well, can you be more specific about the math to which you refer?

I am currently playing an 18th level Cleric. In order to speed things up, I have pre-calculated the affect of all buff spells (and in their various stackig combinations) on his stats, so that whne the time comes, I don't have to sit there and figure out To Hit, Damage, AC and Ability bonuses, etc.

As a DM, I have my lap top with me, and I use various Excel generators, as well as having the calculator program open.

Remember, though, as DM it is really up to you. If the rules bog down the story, screw the rules. They are meant to be a _guideline_. Do what's best for the story and the enjoyment of the gamers. The only time this might be a problem is with a min/maxer, munchkin, or rules lawyer. In the case of dealing with one of them, let them know that if they want to, they can figure out the math for you to help speed up the game while you take care of more important stuff. It shouldn't be up to the DM to track all the modifiers of the PCs. If they can't be bothered with the "math", tell them to accept the way you're going to do it (to make it faster) or do it themselves.

Of course, I'm fortunate enough to have two engineers at my table. ;-)

We have an engineer in our game too. The guy is a genius, and we both have minors in math. D&D is basic algebra and it keeps the mind sharp, plus most any situation in the game can be solved with simple dice rolls. Math is power (hey, you should see how much fun I have adding up all that sneak attack damage!).

 

[ashockney]

D&D players tend to like crunch rather than fluff, tend to prefer tactics to roleplaying.

Indeed, I'd like to see the continued support of D&D 3.5 as a main line, and a second, smaller break-away line for those who like D&D's setting or presumptions but just want to set up action-packed adventures and intreguing stories.

I would like to see us take D&D to a new level, which would allow for the "common gamer" to reach 40th level (ala Neverwinter Nights).

We CAN do it. I've found at least one way (with many, many thanks to everyone who posted thoughts and ideas on this thread.

Other pitfalls? Other recommendations? What would you like to see?