D&D (2024) Not enough DMs / new edition

[DEFCON 1]

Call me a cynic, but I honestly do not believe it is the ease or difficulty of DMing that makes someone choose to do it. People DM mainly for other reasons-- they like creating stories and outlines and plots, their personality is such that being the one "in charge" comes naturally to them, they want to play bad enough that they will run a game just so there is a game to be played, they are a multitasker at heart and enjoy the challenge of juggling many balls at once (or as @overgeeked mentioned they have ADHD and are just wired to perform better doing many tasks rather than just one), or they have played enough that they've developed a very specific or idiosyncratic preference towards gaming and running games is the only way to assure themselves they can get the type of game they want.

It doesn't matter how easy you make it... most people just don't want the responsibility of running the game. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the type of person who would want to DM would strive to do so regardless of how easy or hard it was. If the act of DMing was that enticing to someone, they're the kind of person who will do all the required legwork and reading necessary to learn how to do it. After all... who are the people who usually are the ones we hear about who don't learn the rules? The players. The DMs almost always do learn the rules, because acquiring that knowledge is part and parcel with wanting to acquire the ability to DM. Few are the DMs who don't learn how the game works and are still able to maintain a table of players (at least a table of players who do care how the game works.)

So while making the rules and instruction clear on how running the game works and starting simple and moving towards more complexity is never a bad thing... I also don't think we or WotC needs to go over the top with it. Because quite frankly I am adamant in the belief that the more you try to parcel out the rules just like they were board game instructions, the further you get away from what roleplaying games are. Some of you might not like "Rulings, Not Rules"... but Rulings are exactly the thing that makes a roleplaying game DIFFERENT that a board game. Because you CAN'T have a rule for everything in an RPG because no game can guess the infinite number of things that the players will think to do. The game can give suggestions on how to adjudicate actions, and indeed that's part of the necessary instruction the rules should pass on to people... but thankfully the type of person who would be predisposed to dungeonmaster is probably the type of person who would be okay with doing so.

 

[ezo]

Since I've been playing in 5E, there've been about 15 or so members of the two groups I've been in, at this point 6 of us have DM'd at one point or another, with only myself and one other having played or DM'd prior editions. The other 4 are all new to D&D as of 5E, and the two of us experienced have encouraged the others to try their hands at DMing if they are interested.

All four did a decent job, and two of the four have gone on to DM their own games when they moved away.

DMing doesn't have to be daunting or difficult, but it takes time and dedication to learn and especially to master. The part where I feel a DM has truly become a "force" is when they can handle the unexpected, just roll with it, have fun, and keep the game fun for the players.

 

[Burnside]

Does anybody know if Passive checks are still a thing in the new books? Because in my experience they’re nice in theory but don’t really work at the table. I feel like they’re better suited to CRPGs than TTRPGs, at least as written.

 

[Cadence]

One way to do that may be not presenting the GM with a 250 page adventure they are required to learn before session 1 while also committing to for the next 18-24 months.

Starter boxes instead of the big books are supposed to be a thing?

I do like the idea of a bunch of smaller adventures.

2 pages seems way too small to be useful for a new DM to me, unless by adventure you mean the equivalent of an outside area and two or three rooms. To me it feels like I'd want the new DM to have a, maybe partial, monster stat-block and guidance on what some ability checks do and conditions players might get, to be right there, instead of spread across several books they have to refer to.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Although, a book with a bunch of encounter set-ups divorced from an adventure could be useful.

As in actual encounter setups, not 'encounter - one Hill Giant Fat Joke and five orcish drunk dads'.

 

[Reynard]

Starter boxes instead of the big books are supposed to be a thing?

I do like the idea of a bunch of smaller adventures.

2 pages seems way too small to be useful for a new DM to me, unless by adventure you mean the equivalent of an outside area and two or three rooms. To me it feels like I'd want the new DM to have a, maybe partial, monster stat-block and guidance on what some ability checks do and conditions players might get, to be right there, instead of spread across several books they have to refer to.

I have seen more one page dungeons I would hand to a new GM long before I would hand them even something like Sunless Citadel. Training wheels in small bites are very useful for learning. There's a reason we don't tell 6th grade history students to start with The Rise And Fall of the Roman Empire.

 

[Cadence]

I have seen more one page dungeons I would hand to a new GM long before I would hand them even something like Sunless Citadel. Training wheels in small bites are very useful for learning. There's a reason we don't tell 6th grade history students to start with The Rise And Fall of the Roman Empire.

I'm confused about the jump from my (roughly) "two pages seems too short to me because I think I'd like to include enough they don't have to refer to several other books and for it to be more than two rooms and the outside" to "the rise and Fall of the Roman Empire for 6th graders." It feels like there is space in between.

I've never gone looking for one page adventures before. Could any of the ones you like on 8 5"x11" (or rest of the world equivalent) be made more friendly for the new DM by going to 11"x17" and providing a bit more guidance/suggestions? If nothing else, maybe give a bigger map and a couple sketches to help with descriptions. Or, maybe putting some of the rules they'll need from the books on the right half so the new DM doesn't need to go look them up?

 

[DEFCON 1]

I have seen more one page dungeons I would hand to a new GM long before I would hand them even something like Sunless Citadel. Training wheels in small bites are very useful for learning. There's a reason we don't tell 6th grade history students to start with The Rise And Fall of the Roman Empire.

This is also why Matt Colville says that his 'The Delian Tomb' is the most successful starter adventure of all time. Mainly because it is short and simple to run.

Now granted, I do not know what metrics he is using to determine this as being "fact" (is number of times downloaded a thing and any sort of useful measurement?) But I do have to think that if enough people looking to DM are either told about or they stumble upon his YouTube video series... 'The Delian Tomb' is the immediate gateway into putting into practice what Colville tries to teach. So maybe he's right? It is a short "five-room dungeon" that just happens to be promoted by one of the most known DM instructors on the 'net, so that kind of advertising is something you cannot discount.

 

[Cadence]

This is also why Matt Colville says that his 'The Delian Tomb' is the most successful starter adventure of all time. Mainly because it is short and simple to run.

Now granted, I do not know what metrics he is using to determine this as being "fact" (is number of times downloaded a thing and any sort of useful measurement?) But I do have to think that if enough people looking to DM are either told about or they stumble upon his YouTube video series... 'The Delian Tomb' is the immediate gateway into putting into practice what Colville tries to teach. So maybe he's right? It is a short "five-room dungeon" that just happens to be promoted by one of the most known DM instructors on the 'net, so that kind of advertising is something you cannot discount.

Googling around, is there a canonical version of it? I found a one pager that didn't have any detail at all and a six or seven pager that seemed to spelled out everything. Neither looked particularly "official", but having something like that longer one looks like it would be great for the group of teens I DM for who want to get into it.

 

[Lupin]

Discontinue the esoteric technical jargon of "challenge ratings".

Instead use "levels" for both monsters and player characters, whose meaning is obvious.

How about we call them "[#] Hit Dice"? Instead of Level 1, a player character is a 1 HD PC, with his party facing monsters mainly of 1 or 2 HD. That's one less "level" being used in the rules mix.

In principle, it should be easy to create a monster of a specific level on the fly, using a chart. A DM can customize it with normal player character rules, plus a hit point boost and heavy damage for several rounds.

Establish a reliable sense of what level a monster needs to be for "medium difficulty" for the players to encounter.

Relatedly, establish how many lower level monsters approximate a certain level monster.

Making encounter building simple to understand and do, helps make DMing a joy.

It would help to be in the rulebooks, for sure, and can attest to its usefulness: Sly Flourish's approach (Forge of Foes, 5e Monster Building Document) has been very helpful. I've been running his WIP game Lightning 5e (D&D 5e ultralite) which uses an even simpler monster-building chart; I can then just drape it in the flavor of a monster from another book like OSE, Rules Cyclopedia, or the 5.1 SRD. "# Attacks per turn is 2? Okay, let's say it's a Giant Toad so it has two types of tongue attack: a grab-and-eat move which deals two attacks' worth of damage, and some kinda tongue-whip." Easy to do that sort of thing on the fly when the math is simplified.