D&D 5E People don't read the 5E DMG for a reason

[Micah Sweet]

This is the question we should be discussing: why the heck do we need a DMG anyway?

I would say, we don't. It's not a good way to teach people to DM - free multimedia content would be the best way to do that; and rules would be more convenient if they where all collected together in a single well indexed book (like pretty much every other RPG).

I see your point, but given the virtual certainty that there will be a DMG, I'd prefer a better version of the one we have over a how-to book for new DMs.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Walking uphill both ways in the snow to DM your games is truly inspiring.

It's not. DMing is walking down hill on soft grass.

 

[tetrasodium]

This may be the fundamental problem with the DMG: back in 1st Edition that book contained a whole load of rules that were necessary for play. Since 2nd Edition the key rules have all been in the PHB, meaning that the DMG is needed only for the magic items and a handful of tables.

So maybe it's just a book that is struggling to justify its page count?

2e still had some rules in the DMG. The specifics of INFRA vision is one I recall

edit:infravision not darkvision..

 

[hawkeyefan]

I did that. I got accused of edition waring because I dared to criticise the sacred 4e.

I’d say it’s because you’re being needlessly combative.

And without changing the fundamental nature of the game (e.g. to be more like Blades in the Dark) there is absolutely nothing that can be done about that.

You had said that different people will DM in different ways, right? If so, then it would appear there are things that can be done to change how much work DMing is without changing the game fundamentally.

The amount of work it takes to DM is variable and that’s the kind of thing a guide to DMing should likely discuss.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I’d say it’s because you’re being needlessly combative.

All I said was I bounced off the 4e rules. How is that needlessly combative?

You had said that different people will DM in different ways, right? If so, then it would appear there are things that can be done to change how much work DMing is without changing the game fundamentally.

The amount of work it takes to DM is variable and that’s the kind of thing a guide to DMing should likely discuss.

But a book is not a good medium for that kind of discussion. If people could learn from textbooks they would sack all the teachers and close all the schools.

 

[hawkeyefan]

All I said was I bounced of the 4e rules. How is that needlessly combative?

Because you concluded that because you bounced off of 4e that meant it would be a poor source to cite in a discussion how a manual can present information.

But a book is not a good medium for that kind of discussion. If people could learn from textbooks they would sack all the teachers and close all the schools.

The idea that reading cannot teach is absurd. It may not always be the ideal method, that may be true, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be utilized.

The DMG already offers some methods to tailor the gaming experience to specific gaming groups. I don’t think that advice is the best, or that it’s anywhere near as thorough as it could be.

 

[Xamnam]

The idea that reading cannot teach is absurd. It may not always be the ideal method, that may be true, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be utilized.

For me, it's the best method, outside of a one-on-one dialogue!

 

[Stormonu]

This may be the fundamental problem with the DMG: back in 1st Edition that book contained a whole load of rules that were necessary for play. Since 2nd Edition the key rules have all been in the PHB, meaning that the DMG is needed only for the magic items and a handful of tables.

So maybe it's just a book that is struggling to justify its page count?

Sort of. The PHB is loaded down with a lot of things - races, classes, equipment, feats, spells, etc. I wouldn’t be adverse to putting magic items in the PHB, but would possibly strain the page count.

A lot of RPGs fit their main game into one book. D&D has only managed to do that once, and it got lambasted in 4E for the opposite with its PHB 1, 2, 3 and such. In many ways, D&D has too much stuff in it at its roots, and its hard to present it all in a small, slim set of books.

The one thing the PHB doesn’t really do is provide advice to play. It provides a couple springboard ideas for making this or that sort of character, but it doesn’t run you through what you need to know when you’re actually playing - like how to use a character, dungeon delving tips, out-of-combat RP or many such things. Yeah, there’s plenty of other books on the market that can tell you these things, but the PHB is primarily mechanics, more encyclopedia than a “teach me to play” manual.

And to me, that’s what the true strength of a DMG would be - advice and tools for the DM. Sure, you could put magic items in the DMG, but what a DM really needs is information of when and what to give out during the game, how to make new items and advice on what they should let PCs buy/build/sell. Same for monster & NPC creation - and how to use them, as well as a host of other aspects of the game, up to building an entire fantasy universe.

To me, the strength of the DMG should be in teaching someone how to put all these game elements together. Tables to inspire ideas and break down the components to make new stuff, and advice on how and when to use it all. It basically should be a D&D DIY kit book.

 

[EpicureanDM]

As I said in reply to someone else, you can discuss whether the 4e DMG did a good job of supporting 4e DMs - and whether that approach and presentation could be good for future editions - without commenting on the relative merits of 4e compared to other editions. Just because you aren't personally equipped to have this conversation doesn't mean that others can't.

I did that. I got accused of edition waring because I dared to criticise the sacred 4e.

You did nothing of the sort. It requires a level of objectivity about 4e that you've shown no evidence of possessing.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

This is the subtext of people complaining about the DMG "not teaching": "People DM differently to me. This BadWrongFun must be stamped out!"

You must have been fun in school.

"WHO SAID THIS IS THE ONLY PROPER ENGLISH GRAMMAR! THIS AM UNFUNBAD!"

There are plenty of books of guidance on DMing that don't push a single style but, in fact, talk about how different styles make sense for different DMs and groups.