Playing D&D without study or preparation.

[Agback]

I'm not sure that it would, though. More realism does mean it's closer to the real world. But it also generally means more complex mechanics, because the real world is a complex place.

So, you save in terms of conceptual prep, yes. But you lose on the need for game-mechanics prep.

That hasn't been my experience. My experience is that so long as the game doesn't imply unrealistic things you can use common sense instead of rules, and therefore that a realistic game can have simple rules. The thing that generates irreducible complexity is unrealistic features, because the GM and players can have no common sense about what no-one has experience of, and therefore the whatever-it-is has to be described in detail.

For example, it is fairly easy to write workable rules to include guns in a game, because possible players know a lot about what guns and bullets do. High-tech devices and magical spells, on the other hand, require more complex rules: who has any intuition about what Ingel's Awful Withering does? That's why a fantasy game has a big-to-huge section describing exactly what each of hundreds of spells or magical applications does, where a realistic game has a few pages of general rules and a table or two. And that in turn is what makes realistic games easier to run without study than D&D.

All of which is not to say that the effort of learning D&D might not be a fair price for what it has to offer. YDWYDWP.

Regards,


Agback

 

[mmadsen]

More realism does mean it's closer to the real world. But it also generally means more complex mechanics, because the real world is a complex place.

There are many, many ways to make D&D more realistic without making it more complex. Not all of them will be fun, but that's another issue.

If anything, I think we need to get away from the notion that more complex equals more realistic, when often it just means more convoluted.

 

[Desdichado]

I don't do no prep, but I do like to DM with little prep. However, the caveat is that I take notes as I go, I have done the big picture prep (know my world well, etc.) and I have at least thought about what I had in mind for the evening.

But what I consider to be heavy prep, from the responses here, many of you would consider mild to medium prep at best.

To me, doing so encourages me to railroad. There's only so much prep I can do if I expect the game to play out fluidly with the players in charge of their own destinies.

 

[Desdichado]

You'll notice that low-level adventure modules read more like common fantasy stories. High-level adventures read like pure D&D.

This is completely off-topic, but that is really a profound point there. In essence, you are saying the as levels go up, D&D loses touch with the fantasy roots that supposedly spawned it and becomes increasingly self-referential instead.

Or, well, maybe that's not what you're saying. But that's what I'm saying anyway, based on my interpretation of your comment. I guess that explains my constant desire to house rule D&D into a more "low magic" setting -- I'm not interested in self-referential D&D games, I'm interested in games that reflect fantasy that I'm familiar with!

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

This is completely off-topic, but that is really a profound point there. In essence, you are saying the as levels go up, D&D loses touch with the fantasy roots that supposedly spawned it and becomes increasingly self-referential instead.

Or, well, maybe that's not what you're saying. But that's what I'm saying anyway, based on my interpretation of your comment. I guess that explains my constant desire to house rule D&D into a more "low magic" setting -- I'm not interested in self-referential D&D games, I'm interested in games that reflect fantasy that I'm familiar with!

I've been trying the opposite with Urbis - I treat the D&D rules as "canon", and then tried to come up with a setting and societies that work with them...

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Someone said to me once, "If you can have such great gaming sessions without preparation, just think of what the gaming sessions would be like with preparation."


Since then, I always prepare something. I strive for the excellent DnD experience, not just good. Though I can DM without preparation does not mean I should. I feel like it's doing my players a disservice.


BTW, all of that is IMHO.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Someone said to me once, "If you can have such great gaming sessions without preparation, just think of what the gaming sessions would be like with preparation."

Of course, there's always the danger that you will subconsciously railroad the characters into the plot or encounters that you have prepared...

 

[tburdett]

I like to create an outline that covers the story arc for the first few sessions. The first basic plot device and a couple of different directions that I expect the players will go in. Nothing elaborate.

As the players react to the story I add to the outline. I never do more than 1 or 2 sessions worth of outline at a time because you just never know what the players are going to decide to do.

Each outline entry looks something like...

"The party returns to Greyhawk to discuss what they've learned about the Dungeon of Graves with Guildmaster Von Maytr."

"Guard Captain Furd (pgs 3, 8, 11) will report the party to GM De'Greiss if the party enters the city during his watch."

"Guard Captain Jerzi (pgs 3, 10) will warn the party that GM De'Griss has a reward out for info if they enter the city during his watch. He'll wait 8 hours and then report the party to GM De'Greiss and collect the reward."

"One of the many spies in GM Von Maytrs household will report the party to GM De'Greiss if they show up."

"While the players are meeting with GM Von Maytr, they are being scryed by GM De'Greiss. He is still upset with them for helping his daughter to flee from the city. Assassins. Pain."

"Dhoru (pg 7) still owes the party for sparing his life. He'll get a warning to them if he can."

These entries help me to keep the game consistent and interesting for the players. My outline is about 80 pages long and spans about 3 years worth of game time. There is just enough detail to refresh my memory.

I've found that consistency is a big problem for DM's who like to wing it completely. It's really annoying to go to the same tavern, in the same city, and have the DM rename it every single time.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Of course, there's always the danger that you will subconsciously railroad the characters into the plot or encounters that you have prepared...

There is also the danger that I will subconsciously pee on the gaming table, since I have no free will, and no ability to choose any sort of actions in my predetermined existence.


I'm not that worried though, hasn't happened yet.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

There is also the danger that I will subconsciously pee on the gaming table, since I have no free will, and no ability to choose any sort of actions in my predetermined existence.


I'm not that worried though, hasn't happened yet.

So what happens when the PCs do something that you haven't prepared for - or when they refuse to have anything to do with the encounters and locations you have prepared for?