D&D General The DM Shortage

[Vaalingrade]

Dude from the Sunday Funnies has an RPG?

 

[overgeeked]

Okay. Just for giggles, here goes...lethality of AD&D vs 5E.

How many hit points at 1st level? AD&D: rolled and magic-users get 1d4. 5E: max and wizards get 1d6.

What happens at zero hp? AD&D: death*. 5E: your options are death in 2-3 rounds, you stand up with 1 hp, or you stay unconscious until someone heals you.

How much healing can a 1st level party expect? AD&D: one cure light wounds, if the cleric memorized it. 5E: two of cure wounds or healing word, if the cleric prepared it...plus medicine checks, healer feat, and healing kit.

What's the best AC you could start with? AD&D: if you got lucky and rolled high for starting gold...splint & shield, AC 17**. 5E: several classes automatically start with chain mail & shield, AC 18.

What happens when you rest for 8 hours? AD&D: regain all spells slots, but magic-users and illusionists spend 15 minutes per spell level to memorize; regain 1 hp. 5E: regain all hp, all spell slots, and up to 1/2 hit dice.

Who picks the PCs' spells? AD&D: the DM. 5E: the player.

What level do you have to be to cast raise dead? AD&D: 9th and only if you have at least 17 WIS. 5E: 5th.

What are the material components to a raise dead spell? AD&D: none. 5E: a diamond worth 500 gp.

What are the best basic melee and ranged attacks? AD&D: melee is a two-handed sword or halberd for 1d10; ranged is an arrow for 1d6 (cost 1 gp for a dozen). 5E: melee is greataxe or lance for 1d12 or greatsword or maul for 2d6; ranged is eldritch blast for 1d10 and infinite ammo.

What are your ability score bonuses like? LOL.

What are goblins like? AD&D: 1-7 hp, 1d6 damage, AC 14**, number appearing 40-400. 5E: 7 hp, 5 damage, AC 15, number appearing 3...a medium encounter for a 1st-level party is 3 goblins.

* An optional rule gives PCs up to -10 hp before death.

** AC is weird in TSR D&D compared to WotC D&D. I did the easy math and am intentionally presenting them on the same modern ascending scale to avoid confusion.

In literally every single one of those categories the rules for AD&D are far deadlier and more challenging that in 5E. There's a lot more. I just got bored so stopped.

The one exception might be the material cost of a raise dead spell, if you ignore that it's not available until nearly twice the level and only to clerics with a 17 WIS...which you have a 1.85% chance of rolling.

So you don't see the rules as being different and causing one to be more deadly? Okay. Then you must be house ruling the lethality out of AD&D and house ruling lethality into 5E.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So... and I want you to know it pains me to say this even in the text of 2e... 5e is infinitely better.

Okay then.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

There is an established wisdom that you should start playing with someone experienced (at playing at least) being the DM. This is good advice in principle, but it's good advice that has probably killed more would-be D&D groups than anything else. If your whole group is absolute beginners you probably don't know any or many veterans, and finding one who has the time and willingness to run a game for your bunch of newbies is harder still.

Mainline D&D has this problem because it is the gateway game whose beginners are often absolute beginners to all tabletop gaming, and at that stage in the hobby it is, indeed, quite daunting to go straight to the DM's chair. But it's not remotely impossible, and its unfortunate that the accepted wisdom is that one shouldn't attempt it.

 

[Malmuria]

Maybe that's a useful clue... practically every hobby is infested by the idea that your problems will be solved by buying something more. "How can I get better at playing guitar? Buy a faster guitar!" (recurring joke on music forums). There is a whole industry around each hobby, the sole purpose of which is to get your money. That isn't a problem per se, but it becomes a problem when you don't realize it is also taking your time.

wait, you mean buying a $500 DM screen won't make me a better DM??

Virtually every other gaming company can release genuinely complete campaigns, except WotC. I'm going to blame this one firmly on Chris Perkins personally, because he has to be letting it happen, and has been involved with several of them.

I feel that Perkins has good concepts but poor execution. It's interesting to listen to Dice Camera Action because you can see he runs his own adventures more as toolboxes than as something to be played through in their entirety.

However, my GMing has been influenced quite a bit by Blades and Spire, in particular. Even when running D&D. I design a loose scenario much like I would for Spire.

One thing I picked up from Blades is just to put as much information as possible "on the table" (that is, make it player facing). I don't bother with fleshing out a lot of NPCs ahead of time for example. I might have a vague idea of an important npc but until it comes up in play it doesn't matter, and when it does the details can be randomly generated or improvised.

I feel like if we really want to make people better at DMing and teach DMing better we're probably going to need someone academic to actually study this kind of thing! WotC's got the money to back studies like that, maybe they should think about it.

Well, there certainly is plenty of knowledge about how to teach people things in general. If the dmg or some other book was set up as a textbook, it would introduce concepts one at a time, scaffolding knowledge so that later chapters used information from previous ones, and provide plenty of examples and homework prompts to help dms practice on their own.

Pretty much what @Paul Farquhar said. They taught me how to run a kick in the door dungeon with an adversarial attitude. Where my job was to try to get the players to tolerate a TPK just enough that they thought the next campaign they might lie through it and so they wanted to try again. Nothing about social interacting, or roleplaying. It was all about roll playing, tactics and stupid (to me) player puzzles and challenges that had nothing to do with the characters.

I'm sure there were plenty kill-things-and-take-their-stuff games across all editions of dnd. But I don't think location-based adventures inherently lack social interaction or character motivations. Dungeons, for example, can have factions to interact with, and stories that are communicated in non-linear, non-expository form (through found items, for example). A modern example would be the OSE module Winter's Daughter.

 

[Jackdaw McGraw]

I don't know how much truth there is to the notion of a DM shortage but I'd love to think it's real for purely selfish reasons. Now I can imagine myself as an endangered golden unicorn, prancing in the twisty woods as I'm hunted by players starved for a fleshed-out and emotionally resonant campaign.
...

Jokes aside, if I hadn't already been a DM for 20+ years I don't think I would have become one in the current landscape. There's a veneer of baseline "professionalism...ism" within the hobby that I imagine for a new DM would feel akin to preparing a multimedia presentation - not just a hang with friends.

There's a lot more media to draw from now than there was 10 years ago, from livestreams, to movies/shows/video games that follow the rhythm of epic campaigns. If the best D&D is played within 'the theater of the mind' I think that theater is much bigger than it was when many of us cut our teeth on DMing, in the sense of (largely unconscious) player expectations. I feel like the hobby is simply more intimidating than it has ever been, even with its simplified rules and commitments to inclusiveness.

 

[Baron Opal II]

wait, you mean buying a $500 DM screen won't make me a better DM??

I have to tell you, that's pretty slick. If I used a screen I would be tempted.

 

[Oofta]

It's the second easiest WotC version of the game, that's for sure.

I skipped 3X so I'll take your word for it. 4E was dead simple to run. The DMGs were amazing. Still worth picking up for the advice and tips and pointers. Print out the monster. When it's that monster's turn, do the biggest thing they could that was available. You didn't need understand much, that was mostly on the players' side. PCs working together was the design intent, if the PC's did not, bad things happened.

It's absolutely a personal preference.

That's not true. Unless you define "less casual" as being DMs. A lot of people in the OSR are the same age as the bulk of the new-to-5E players. They just gravitated to the older, deadlier, and more challenging versions of the game. Entire OSR groups and discords are filled with people with less than 5-years experience with RPGs. Not all the old timers are in the OSR. There is a significant overlap in the Venn diagram, but they're not one perfectly overlapping circle.

From being told by a few hundred 5E players that is exactly what they expected.

You skipped the important word "almost" in that sentence. And I got the idea from running and playing 5E since the Next play test. The PCs are absolutely dirty with healing even from 1st level. The only way a PC dies is if the referee drops infinite dragons on them or the players simply let their friend's character die. After 5th level and you have access to raise dead, it's literally only a question of if the players will let the character stay dead.

Wow. That's either the easiest AD&D game ever or the hardest 5E game ever.

Bah, we didn't need no stinking "Advanced" D&D! We used a lot of house rules, I assume everyone did. It's not like you could actually run the game as written out of the box. I mean, I had a couple of elf PCs of mine die back in the day, but that's been the case for every edition. I've never gotten an elf PC past 2nd (a half elf once got to 3rd) in any edition and, yes, I've tried in every edition including 5E. It's a curse.

And that works...up until 5th level. Then it's a speed bump at worst.

PC death has always been a speed bump if you could get the body back to town or had a cleric that had raise dead.

If we're talking about old-school players and the OSR crowd, then I'd agree with you. If we're talking about the 5E crowd, then I'd disagree with you.

I've never seen it until 5E. I've played AD&D with people who would literally throw the video game controller against the wall across the room when they lose and even they gleefully tossed AD&D characters into the meatgrinder.

I had a guy in an AD&D game that quit because he got angry that his PC died in a way that he felt wasn't fair. I played with a guy in 4E that would sulk if he didn't dominate combat and get angry if a monster attacked them. It takes all kinds.

Yes. And when there's less rules for those characters there's less chance for misunderstanding. More rules means more misunderstandings.

It's not just the rules but the players' expectations and play style. But if you don't see how AD&D is more deadly than 5E, our points-of-view are so wildly divergent that there's essentially no common ground.

In any case, we're just talking about personal experiences. Ours differ and there is no way to verifiably "prove" anything one way or another. Our sample sizes of experience are far too infinitesimally small to make any conclusions.

 

[hawkeyefan]

One thing I picked up from Blades is just to put as much information as possible "on the table" (that is, make it player facing). I don't bother with fleshing out a lot of NPCs ahead of time for example. I might have a vague idea of an important npc but until it comes up in play it doesn't matter, and when it does the details can be randomly generated or improvised.

Yup. There is a lot D&D can learn from other games that’s unrelated to rules and more about how to present information and how to help people run games easier.

 

[Oofta]

Okay. Just for giggles, here goes...lethality of AD&D vs 5E.

How many hit points at 1st level? AD&D: rolled and magic-users get 1d4. 5E: max and wizards get 1d6.

What happens at zero hp? AD&D: death*. 5E: your options are death in 2-3 rounds, you stand up with 1 hp, or you stay unconscious until someone heals you.

How much healing can a 1st level party expect? AD&D: one cure light wounds, if the cleric memorized it. 5E: two of cure wounds or healing word, if the cleric prepared it...plus medicine checks, healer feat, and healing kit.

What's the best AC you could start with? AD&D: if you got lucky and rolled high for starting gold...splint & shield, AC 17**. 5E: several classes automatically start with chain mail & shield, AC 18.

What happens when you rest for 8 hours? AD&D: regain all spells slots, but magic-users and illusionists spend 15 minutes per spell level to memorize; regain 1 hp. 5E: regain all hp, all spell slots, and up to 1/2 hit dice.

Who picks the PCs' spells? AD&D: the DM. 5E: the player.

What level do you have to be to cast raise dead? AD&D: 9th and only if you have at least 17 WIS. 5E: 5th.

What are the material components to a raise dead spell? AD&D: none. 5E: a diamond worth 500 gp.

What are the best basic melee and ranged attacks? AD&D: melee is a two-handed sword or halberd for 1d10; ranged is an arrow for 1d6 (cost 1 gp for a dozen). 5E: melee is greataxe or lance for 1d12 or greatsword or maul for 2d6; ranged is eldritch blast for 1d10 and infinite ammo.

What are your ability score bonuses like? LOL.

What are goblins like? AD&D: 1-7 hp, 1d6 damage, AC 14**, number appearing 40-400. 5E: 7 hp, 5 damage, AC 15, number appearing 3...a medium encounter for a 1st-level party is 3 goblins.

* An optional rule gives PCs up to -10 hp before death.

** AC is weird in TSR D&D compared to WotC D&D. I did the easy math and am intentionally presenting them on the same modern ascending scale to avoid confusion.

In literally every single one of those categories the rules for AD&D are far deadlier and more challenging that in 5E. There's a lot more. I just got bored so stopped.

The one exception might be the material cost of a raise dead spell, if you ignore that it's not available until nearly twice the level and only to clerics with a 17 WIS...which you have a 1.85% chance of rolling.

So you don't see the rules as being different and causing one to be more deadly? Okay. Then you must be house ruling the lethality out of AD&D and house ruling lethality into 5E.

I can only relay that we did not have a high body count in any edition. At least not higher than we wanted.

The game has always been what you want to make it.

 

[pointofyou]

I can only relay that we did not have a high body count in any edition. At least not higher than we wanted.

The game has always been what you want to make it.

We were able to play 1e without PC deaths and we've had at least one TPK in tier 3.

The game is and always has been as deadly as the people at the table want it to be.

 

[Faolyn]

In my group, literally all but one of the players also GMs, and the one who doesn't says she will when she has a less soul-devouring job.

I think that means we've stolen all the DMs.

But we rotate games on a regular basis so we have no forever DMs and nobody is ever overwhelmed.

 

[Celebrim]

We were able to play 1e without PC deaths and we've had at least one TPK in tier 3.

The game is and always has been as deadly as the people at the table want it to be.

AD&D 1e is in many ways an extremely low lethality version of D&D because no other edition allows a PC to so outclass and overwhelm the opposition, they are likely to face. Monster level only went up to X. It's the only edition of the game were PC hit points were likely to outstrip the monsters that they fought. Plus, saving throw DCs were static, so unlike more recent editions the odds of you failing a saving throw against a peer level foe went down over time. In modern editions, you could find your chances of making a saving throw actually going down because DCs scaled faster than your save bonuses. Most PC deaths were crowded in the early levels before you had significant time invested in a character.

The actual realized level of lethality varied widely based on what method was actually used to generate ability scores, how generous the DM was with treasure, and how deadly the DM wanted the campaign to be.

 

[pemerton]

What happens at zero hp? AD&D: death*.

In Gygax's AD&D death is below 0 hp (or optionally below -3 hp) - being reduced to zero hp without dying causes unconsciousness, and the loss of 1 hp per round with death at -10.

How much healing can a 1st level party expect? AD&D: one cure light wounds, if the cleric memorized it.

In AD&D a cleric gets bonus spells based on WIS, and with 14 WIS will have 3 1st level spells memorised.

What's the best AC you could start with? AD&D: if you got lucky and rolled high for starting gold...splint & shield, AC 17**. 5E: several classes automatically start with chain mail & shield, AC 18.

In AD&D, DEX adds to AC for all armour types; the bonus is +1 per point of DEX above 14, up to +4 at 18 DEX.

What happens when you rest for 8 hours? AD&D: regain all spells slots, but magic-users and illusionists spend 15 minutes per spell level to memorize

In Ggygax's AD&D, the memorisation time is no different for clerics or druids from what it is for MUs and illusionists. And to memorise 1st level spells requires only 4 hours of rest, not 8 (but with no interruptions).

Who picks the PCs' spells? AD&D: the DM.

This is not generally the case in Gygax's AD&D. Generally a cleric or druid play picks their spells from the class list. A MU or illusionist player picks their spells from their spellbook, whose contents are determined randomly.

What level do you have to be to cast raise dead? AD&D: 9th and only if you have at least 17 WIS.

In Gygax's AD&D, there is no WIS requirement for a cleric to cast 5th level spells. 17 WIS is necessary to cast 6th level spells. I think 2nd ed AD&D is the same.

What are goblins like? AD&D: 1-7 hp, 1d6 damage, AC 14**, number appearing 40-400.

That number appearing is only for a Goblin warren or meeting a Goblin army on the march, not for dungeon encounters. In Appendix C of Gygax's DMG. the number appearing for Goblins on the 1st level of the dungeon is 6-15 (presumably 1d10+5).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

No, I don't think so. In fact, maps and plans make something "click" in my brain. I dunno.

ETA: To elaborate after thinking about it, the spatial image in my mind/memory is probably wrong. Give me a map and it snaps into place. If that makes any sense...

TBH, I think you have me beat!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The 1983 Basic Set taught you to DM with an adversarial attitude?

D&D was presented as pretty adversarial in the core rules back then. AD&D too. I think Gygax was an adversarial DM. There was material about in magazines, such as White Dwarf, that presented other approaches though. And I brought in things from other early RPGs, such as Traveller and Runequest.

 

[Ondath]

In a hilarious coincidence, I came upon this topic just when my uni's Sci-fi and fantasy club was having difficulties finding enough DMs to organise a one-shot game night through the club chat. I guess the problem is local and global!

Jokes aside, I don't know if there's more of a shortage compared to earlier years of the hobby, but DMs are certainly a rare commodity. I had to start playing by DMing because nobody else around me was willing to run a game, and out of 10-15 people I've ran games for over the last 5 years, I'd say only 5-6 of them ended up DMing regularly. Some of my players want to dip their toes into DMing and run oneshots and maybe even short campaigns, but the task of running a long campaign that goes over 5-6+ levels seems too daunting for most people I know.

As for the reasons why that might be, the scene's explosive growth is probably the biggest reason. Far more people play D&D (or other TTRPGs) than they did at any point in history, and there probably isn't enough DMs for all of them. But I'd say 5E in particular hasn't done any favours to make it easier to raise new DMs. A lot of the advice in DMG is fairly shallow, and I end up relying a lot on stuff I learnt back in 3.5/PF (seriously, the difference in depth between the 3.5 DMG and the 5E DMG is enormous), as well as the advice of older DMs that I see on the Internet (Matt Colville, the Alexandrian, Courtney Campbell... sigh even the Angry GM). If you don't know that there are a lot of unspoken assumptions that older DMs knew but the game never mentions (for instance, the procedure of dungeon delving, which the game never explicitly mentions, and the Alexandrian makes a good point that this causes a generational knowledge gap for new GMs), you end up floundering a lot, and that discourages a lot of people. I hope that the OneD&D DMG will open up some space for these unspoken GM procedures, but I'm not counting on it. If anything, 5E's approach to DM-facing content seems to have become "Here are some interesting 2-3 sentence prompts, we'll give you no guidance or constraints on what to with them, go nuts".

Honestly, there might also be a generational gap. I know that in 3.5/Pathfinder days as well as the early days of 5E, players would thoroughly read the rules and acquaint themselves with most of the sourcebooks. But now, most of my players don't even read the full content of their own race and class, let alone the rest of the book like combat rules, equipment and downtime. It may just be that the way people consume content has changed, and people prefer watching videos about how D&D works than read books and posts about it, but it is sometimes frustrating (even though I love my players to bits).

 

[LordEntrails]

But I don't think location-based adventures inherently lack social interaction or character motivations. Dungeons, for example, can have factions to interact with, and stories that are communicated in non-linear, non-expository form (through found items, for example).

Correct, but the published modules from the time period we are talking about did not have that information (generally). I'm not of an opinion one-way or other about location based vs other adventures, I'm of the opinion (related to this thread) that: 1) their has always been a DM shortage, it is not new. 2) Their are more and better tools and it is easier and cheaper to learn to be a DM today than any time in history.

 

[LordEntrails]

We are talking about a teaching tool that came out in 1983 and you are arguing against it based on your 1978 experience. I mean...

Well, apparently my memory is flawed. Woe is me.

To discuss the topics of this thread, I'm of the opinion that: 1) their has always been a DM shortage, it is not new. 2) Their are more and better tools and it is easier and cheaper to learn to be a DM today than any time in history.

Nothing you've stated so far sways me from those opinions.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think one issue that is relatively new is there has been some great mythology been built up that DMing is some great skill that you need training in before you can even start. Back in 1982 (when I started), we just did it. Sure, when we started we didn't do it well. But that didn't matter, we did it, we learned, we got better. People shouldn't be afraid to suck at first. And, as a corollary to that, players should take a great deal of care not to be critical of DMs.

One thing the core rules could do better is put a greater emphasis on turn taking as DM, and the need to share the load.