D&D 5E In Search Of: The 5e Dungeon Master's Guide

[Micah Sweet]

Is there an argument against making it easier to help DMs avoid classic mistakes?

I would certainly argue that it is really hard for a book to efficiently do a good job of all of: teaching beginners, teaching folks just past the beginner stage, and being a useful reference to advanced users. And I would further argue that an expensive book is often a poor choice to teach beginners, especially given all of the other tools available.

On the other side, I certainly think that the DMG could certainly be better organized and written, which would make it more friendly and useful to everyone. Beyond that, I think a dozen or score of pages at the beginning explicitly for new DMs would be a great edition.

Except for one or two people who are worried there is nothing to cut to put it in, has anyone come out against putting in a chapter explicitly to help new DMs? Has anyone come out against at least keeping new DMs in mind when reorganizing the DMG?

That is not what the DMG is for. It's a reference, and a repository of optional rules to make the game the way you want.

 

[pointofyou]

It's not incorrect. It's one way to do it.

The 2e Worldbuilder's Guidebook is an excellent resource for this. It covers big to small and small to big equally well.

Some context is good but trying to fill in all the details from the outside in is a most excellent way to drive yourself barking mad before you even start play. It's also unnecessary.

 

[Imaro]

So let's say someone has played through Lost Mines of Phandelver and then maybe Curse of Strahd.

If that person joined your game, what do you think would be challenging for them based on their experience? What would be so different about your game? I mean the character goal driven, sandbox exploration game.

Off the top of my head...

1. They would have to come up with a personal goal or goals for their character and take action to achieve them.
2.They would also have to realize that the things/hooks/people and places they experience in the world may or may not tie into those goals and it is their choice to explore or not explore them
3. They would have to negotiate with the other PC's/characters in order to collaboratively achieve their individual goals.
4. Realize there is no overarching story that can be completed but numerous factions, events, situations and places whose goals do progress and can be interacted with by the PC's to hinder or help those goals.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Except for one or two people who are worried there is nothing to cut to put it in, has anyone come out against putting in a chapter explicitly to help new DMs? Has anyone come out against at least keeping new DMs in mind when reorganizing the DMG?

The following are all just from the first page. I'd also site the OP, but it doesn't come right out and say it, and I don't want to sift through all that, and I can't see any subsequent posts because Snarf has blocked me. I could probably keep going over the other pages, but it doesn't seem necessary.

IMO, the DMG shouldn't be written for newcomer GMs - they're better off being pointed to the Starter Set and the "how to DM" videos that of course WotC have on their various channels. (I mean, surely they must have such things, and they're really easy to find...?)

If people want a toolbox of optional rules, read the 5E DMG.

If people want to learn how to run the game, read the 4E DMGs, Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master, X-Treme Dungeon Mastery, and the WEG Star Wars GM Handbook.

Starter sets are for newbie DM. It's best to have an actual adventure to walk through. In addition, they're starting to combine videos with free intro encounters.

The DMG is for experienced DMs from other editions and the person that already knows the game and wants to switch from player to DM.

So serious question here... if the core books are written for beginning DM's... what is the point of the starter sets?

 

[Imaro]

Yes. The structure of the DMG implies that you should build from the outside in with all the details. This both incorrect and a path to madness.

See this is what I don't want... the DMG stating a particular method is "wrong".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Some context is good but trying to fill in all the details from the outside in is a most excellent way to drive yourself barking mad before you even start play. It's also unnecessary.

Very little is necessary. But worldbuilding is fun, and I don't want anything that makes it harder.

 

[pointofyou]

See this is what I don't want... the DMG stating a particular method is "wrong".

I don't want it to label anything as wrong either but it doesn't seem problematic to me to label the approach that gets to play more quickly as "quicker to play" and I believe the DMG should focus on getting to play quickly or at least not make that more difficult than necessary.

 

[Imaro]

Some context is good but trying to fill in all the details from the outside in is a most excellent way to drive yourself barking mad before you even start play. It's also unnecessary.

Do you need "all" the details? I would argue even working at a more granular level you aren't filling in "all" the details. The key IMO is picking the level you want to start at and understanding what is key to have for your goal (whether that is a one shot, a series of adventures, a mini-setting for extended use or a world for multiple campaigns).

 

[pointofyou]

Very little is necessary. But worldbuilding is fun, and I don't want anything that makes it harder.

I enjoy worldbuilding too. I worked out more details than strictly necessary for my setting overall before starting to work out starting locales. I do not think pointing newcomers to the quickest way to get to play needs to make any other path more difficult.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Beginners are advised to initially build their worlds from small to big or from the inside out whilst some experienced DMs may first prefer to design the cosmos and the overarching relationships before breaking it down to the individual settlement. The former appears easier for beginners, to me at least, hence those pushing for more teaching material favour such approach.
It is all preferences.