D&D 5E My New Players Have Quit 5th Edition

[ren1999]

Instead of adding Con I think for long term balance it is easier to just get your Level 2 or 3 hit points at Level 1 then not get HP for those levels.

2nd: d10=16+2xCon, d8=13+2xCon, d6=10+2xCon.
3rd: d10=22+3xCon, d8=18+3xCon, d6=14+3xCon.

If they multiclass early then adjust.

I'd also adjust gear so not every low level goblin with no treasure at all, isn't running around optimised with well crafted gear (70gp).
Clubs (d6), shanks (finesse, d3), primitive bows (d4), sharp sticks (d4), rocks (1), crude machetes (d6).

I'd mix up the Redbrand gear as well (65gp).

But that's more of a world-building thing.

That is a great suggestion.

 

[Ted Sandyman]

So far this summer I've introduced twenty five new players to tabletop role-playing (5E wasn't out yet, so I used a rules-lite retro version of B/X).

Thirteen of those players had characters die ... most fatalities were in the player's first session, some in their very first encounter.

Curious thing?

My players didn't quit.

In fact they loved that this game was on "hard mode" and they clamored for a chance to get back into the action.

The expectations that I established at my table before the game started and my reaction to the failure of the characters (note: failure of the characters, not the players) set the tone and ensured not only that fun was had by all, but that my new players (now perhaps a bit wiser) were eager to grab another character and try again.

Proficiency as a DM is so much more than familiarity with a game system.

 

[pemerton]

Proficiency as a DM is so much more than familiarity with a game system.

So I take it you're implying the OP is a bad GM? Nice.

 

[Ted Sandyman]

So I take it you're implying the OP is a bad GM? Nice.

Ah. You know what? Upon more reflection I meant two things:

1.) Success in the role of DM requires much, much more than a working knowledge of the rules. I suspect now that this is so obvious as to not merit mention, I could have omitted that line as it doesn't edify anyone.

2.) I implied that OP, whom I've never met, let alone gamed with, is a bad GM on the incredibly thin basis of a single post. This is the act of an ass.

My digital mouth got to running and I forgot I was a guest here and not, in fact, only in my own living room (where I can stink up the place to my heart's content).

Ren1999, I apologize. I'm in no position to judge you, your hobbies, or much else frankly. I'm sorry.

Pemerton, thank you for pointing out my error so that I can try to fix it.

 

[ST]

I think the more accurate thing to say would be "Different people like different things."

 

[shamsael]

There is nothing quite like introducing two new players to 5th Edition and having their pregenerated characters die in the surprise round of the 1st encounter without getting to take any actions.

No I will not start a campaign at 3rd level.
No I will not fudge numbers.
No I will not play monsters stupidly.
No I will not award Clerics with bonus actions to keep allies alive.

That is one thing I specifically asked. I asked for a higher starting hit point variant. ..was denied.

Personally, I think a 1st level adventure that involves fighting armed humanoids to the death is a poorly designed adventure.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Personally, I think a 1st level adventure that involves fighting armed humanoids to the death is a poorly designed adventure.

Yeah, what were they thinking, there's never been an adventure module like that before!

 

[shamsael]

I never said they weren't common, just that they're poorly designed.

 

[drjones]

I never said they weren't common, just that they're poorly designed.

This adventure is not poorly designed. It's a first adventure for 5e D&D, the core of which, rule wise, is combat. This whole thread has been pretty silly because it's based on a kind of flawed premise that a TPK in the first encounter is A. Likely and B. A natural outcome of playing the game as written and intended. It's not and it ain't. My group was only moderately cautious and I beefed up the monsters a little to make up for an extra PC but they still mostly triumphed with one fatality due to an incautious move by a squishy, wounded character.

But most importantly, we had fun. A lot of fun. If 'poor' design leads to fun, then I beg for more poor design.

 

[SigmaOne]

It's so easy for someone to claim poor design when they see something they don't like. This is almost never correct.