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

[Voadam]

There's a reason that dictatorial, authoritarian, tyrannical, despotic and oppressive are all synonyms of prescriptive. Prescriptive is forced upon you.

I don't really find those synonyms under prescriptive in thesaurus.com or MerriamWebster.

Most definitions I find are simply setting down rules or norms, sometimes with a connotation of being based on tradition. The others you list generally have an oppression element different from general rule or norm making.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Dupe post

 

[Micah Sweet]

Dupe post

 

[Micah Sweet]

The book isn't just for you either. And your desires for it are no more valid than mine.

If you're providing multiple paths to playing, and describing these paths and how to use them and when, then what's the problem? The DMG already does what I'm suggesting, just in limited ways.



Chapter 9 is nothing but. If you want a game that does this, then try that!

Tyranny!!!!!



I'm not really saying to remove things. I'm saying to refocus. Keep the worldbuilding stuff if that's what you're talking about, but slim it down. Find the optimal way to present these ideas. I think the 30 pages of "A world of your own" and the 25 pages on "building a multiverse" can be slimmed down. So can many of the other sections.



Because the book isn't just for you?



Or... if you're not new to D&D we recommend the many previous books that have been published with tons more material on worldbuilding and the planes! Oh, and also you can find a whole lot of information online for free!

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you're providing multiple paths to playing, and describing these paths and how to use them and when, then what's the problem? The DMG already does what I'm suggesting, just in limited ways.



Chapter 9 is nothing but. If you want a game that does this, then try that!

Tyranny!!!!!



I'm not really saying to remove things. I'm saying to refocus. Keep the worldbuilding stuff if that's what you're talking about, but slim it down. Find the optimal way to present these ideas. I think the 30 pages of "A world of your own" and the 25 pages on "building a multiverse" can be slimmed down. So can many of the other sections.



Because the book isn't just for you?



Or... if you're not new to D&D we recommend the many previous books that have been published with tons more material on worldbuilding and the planes! Oh, and also you can find a whole lot of information online for free!

I didn't say why would WotC change it, I asked why would I advocate for them to do? If the choices are between no changes and the changes you want, I vote* for no changes.

*of course neither of us actually gets a vote.

 

[Maxperson]

If you're providing multiple paths to playing, and describing these paths and how to use them and when, then what's the problem? The DMG already does what I'm suggesting, just in limited ways.

Options are the opposite of prescriptive. If you are providing multiple paths and how to use them, there's no problem because there is no prescription.

Chapter 9 is nothing but. If you want a game that does this, then try that!

Yes. It's nothing but non-prescriptive options. I agree. The entire DMG is nothing but non-prescriptive options. The PHB on the other hand is prescriptive for the players, but not the DM who has the option to add, remove or change any rule in it.

 

[Malmuria]

I think the only reason to want the 5E DMG to remain as is... to deny that it can be improved as a reference book and also as a guide to new DMs... is fear.

People don't want D&D to exclude their preferences.

And while that's a reasonable concern, I think it gets applied unreasonably.

This is why I can't see the resistance to improving the DMG as anything other than a gut reaction of "NO DON'T CHANGE MY STUFF". And while I understand that instinct, it makes for a bizarre conversation.

The OP jokes that no one reads the DMG... but does not want it to become a book that people would actually read. It's remarkable, really.

Again, this fear of prescription. The books have rules and processes that are prescriptive. No one complains "don't tell me how fireball works, dadgummit".

I didn't say they were irrational. I said that I understand where they come from. I think we can rationalize them.

I think the dungeon master's guide could be improved considerably in terms of advice, layout, and content. But this line of argumentation about 'fear' that you are pursuing comes off as very condescending. It suggests that there are people making rational arguments, on the one hand, and people clinging to their 5e dmg, full of primal emotions and not thinking clearly, on the other. Further, I just don't think 'fear' applies to people finding the "rolling the dice" subsection to be sufficient or not. The stakes of the latter are just so small that to suggest that people have that reaction to the text out of fear is infantilizing.

 

[Imaro]

Or... if you're not new to D&D we recommend the many previous books that have been published with tons more material on worldbuilding and the planes! Oh, and also you can find a whole lot of information online for free!

So then what is the purpose of the "STARTER" set if not to be where a totally new player starts.

Also... which books for 5e are you referring to for worldbuilding and the planes for those not new to D&D?

 

[hawkeyefan]

So then what is the purpose of the "STARTER" set if not to be where a totally new player starts.

I didn’t comment on the starter set or its purpose in my post. Earlier in the thread, I said that it was an inexpensive way for a person or group to give the game a try.

I’d think that seems pretty accurate.

I wouldn’t expect those who played or ran through Lost Mines of Phandelver to then need no more guidance.

Also... which books for 5e are you referring to for worldbuilding and the planes for those not new to D&D?

I didn’t say they were for 5e. I said there are tons of books from previous editions and from third parties and videos and many, many other resources available to an experienced DM who needs advice on worldbuilding.

My point being that folks have repeatedly pointed to things beyond the actual books for newbies to learn to play. But we can also point experienced DMs to materials beyond the books.

Like, do we need 25 pages for very basic material about the planes? There are entire wikis with tons of information about them available. So why do we need those 25 pages?

It just seems odd to expect people new to the game to find alternate resources easier than experienced people.

 

[FrogReaver]

I didn't say they were irrational. I said that I understand where they come from. I think we can rationalize them.

I think they are unfounded.

And why would that happen? I'm saying they should continue that. They should just be able to discuss different methods and styles openly. Keep the multiple approaches to play. Hell, I'm saying to build on that as a foundational strength of the game.

I don't think that makes any kind of sense.

What? How is Pound of Flesh prescriptive? Have you read it? Doesn't sound like it.

Again, I didn't say they were irrational. But they are clearly fears as you have articulated perfectly well on your own.

It seems to me our discussion is over.

The underlined is self-contradictory. The bolded are all comments I elaborated on the very post you were responding to with additional detail and answers to the very questions you went on to ask. Thankfully @Malmuria already eloquently addressed the 'fear' aspect.

IMO. There's no point to continue when things get to this level.