Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5630070" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think you really SHOULD read DMG2. When I say it doesn't 'get theoretical' what I mean is you aren't going to find deep discussions of game theoretical concepts there. OTOH it is quite good at 'rubber-meets-road'. I think in terms of DMG1 we must be expecting different things. There were a LOT of good guidelines in DMG1. It wasn't a crunch-heavy book, but why should it be? Really, the PLAYERS should know the rules. A 1e style DMG honestly never made sense "Oh, the DM has all the tables and charts, you shouldn't know what your character actually needs to hit anything!" lul wut? So, yes, DMG1 is all talk. What else would it be? The writing is excellent and it covers a lot of value and I think it actually is quite an excellent Dungeon Master's GUIDE. In other words it is a textbook on the nuts-and-bolts of DMing 4e and a pretty good one.For someone with an advanced understanding of how to DM it may not be all that revelatory and then you're quite right, you could have a 50 page book with nothing but the crunch and a few paragraphs of advice on how it is intended to be used and be done with it. So, I think with DMG1 it is a matter of you're probably not the primary audience. I could see an argument for a DMG that is pure fluff and some other kind of 'Guide to adventure and world building' that was all the crunch.DMG2 OTOH has a lot of pretty specific "here's how you can fix this problem" or "here's how you can approach doing this kind of thing".</blockquote>

Verification