D&D 4E Tips for a new 4E DM
- Thread starter strider1970
- Start date
CroBob
First Post
I can't claim I read all of what everyone else stated, yet, but I'll toss in a few suggestions and if I accidentally mention something someone else said... well, I guess that's what happens, then;
* The first adventure (perhaps even the whole campaign) will be more about learning the rules than trying make the super-besterest campaign EVAR. Don't be scared to segment it. I'm sure your experience as well as that of your players will hasten the learning, but don't be scared to learn particular sorts of rules each at a time, instead of trying to take everything in immediately.
* Something I learned early on is that things tend to move faster if you keep a sheet with your players' defense scores on it, so you don't have to ask if your attack hit them, you can just say "You totally got hammered in the face". Also, I like to have my players roll a bunch of initiatives before we begin, that way I can just plug the monsters in there and get right into the fight.
* The rules of fourth are very combat oriented, a move I like. Many nay-sayers point to this and say they removed the role-playing aspects. No. They removed the rules which restricted or made roleplaying silly ("I've killed hundreds of monsters, so I can sew better than that tailor we met back in town, lawls!"). Anyway, my point was that the combat can take a while. Each combat is more involved and tactical than in previous editions, so don't worry if they're taking forever. They will tend to take longer than in previous editions, but after you catch on to this edition it will move faster (that may be a "duh").
* The first adventure (perhaps even the whole campaign) will be more about learning the rules than trying make the super-besterest campaign EVAR. Don't be scared to segment it. I'm sure your experience as well as that of your players will hasten the learning, but don't be scared to learn particular sorts of rules each at a time, instead of trying to take everything in immediately.
* Something I learned early on is that things tend to move faster if you keep a sheet with your players' defense scores on it, so you don't have to ask if your attack hit them, you can just say "You totally got hammered in the face". Also, I like to have my players roll a bunch of initiatives before we begin, that way I can just plug the monsters in there and get right into the fight.
* The rules of fourth are very combat oriented, a move I like. Many nay-sayers point to this and say they removed the role-playing aspects. No. They removed the rules which restricted or made roleplaying silly ("I've killed hundreds of monsters, so I can sew better than that tailor we met back in town, lawls!"). Anyway, my point was that the combat can take a while. Each combat is more involved and tactical than in previous editions, so don't worry if they're taking forever. They will tend to take longer than in previous editions, but after you catch on to this edition it will move faster (that may be a "duh").
Rhenny
Adventurer
I've got a couple of tidbits to add...
1) Don't underestimate or under-use minions. They are cool and they give the players a great sense of satisfaction when they fall. That being said, use them in conjunction with other monsters in a way that makes sense - Leaders inspiring them forward, mixed with soldiers and archers, etc. The design tips in the DMs guide about encounters is actually really helpful.
2) Get familiar with Skill Challenges, and make them work for you. Many encounters can be done using skill challenges that inspire the players to come up with good ideas and roleplay. On average, a skill challenge may take 1/4 to 1/2 the time that a combat encounter takes, but if there is excitement in narration and the pcs have to make interesting decisions, the Skill Challenge can be as rewarding as any combat encounter. I use skill challenges when characters look for clues or try to find locations, when they travel through difficult terrain, when they have to enter or escape well guarded places, when they have to find a particular NPC in a town or wilderness area, when a larger battle or war ensues, when they have to overcome magical devices or traps, when they need to interact with key NPCs to gain favor, etc. You can see how much this adds to the game. Also, when PCs fail a Skill Challenge make sure there is a consequence that "throws a small monkey wrench" into their path, but like it says in the DMs guide, failing a skill check should not end the quest.
These are my top two ideas at the moment. But overall...have fun. 4e is easier to DM like others have said.
Cheers.
1) Don't underestimate or under-use minions. They are cool and they give the players a great sense of satisfaction when they fall. That being said, use them in conjunction with other monsters in a way that makes sense - Leaders inspiring them forward, mixed with soldiers and archers, etc. The design tips in the DMs guide about encounters is actually really helpful.
2) Get familiar with Skill Challenges, and make them work for you. Many encounters can be done using skill challenges that inspire the players to come up with good ideas and roleplay. On average, a skill challenge may take 1/4 to 1/2 the time that a combat encounter takes, but if there is excitement in narration and the pcs have to make interesting decisions, the Skill Challenge can be as rewarding as any combat encounter. I use skill challenges when characters look for clues or try to find locations, when they travel through difficult terrain, when they have to enter or escape well guarded places, when they have to find a particular NPC in a town or wilderness area, when a larger battle or war ensues, when they have to overcome magical devices or traps, when they need to interact with key NPCs to gain favor, etc. You can see how much this adds to the game. Also, when PCs fail a Skill Challenge make sure there is a consequence that "throws a small monkey wrench" into their path, but like it says in the DMs guide, failing a skill check should not end the quest.
These are my top two ideas at the moment. But overall...have fun. 4e is easier to DM like others have said.
Cheers.
I like the basics of 4e, but I think it is as bloated as 3.5 was at the end. My solution in 3.5e was to only allow core builds (PHB, DMG). It made it easier for me and the players to focus on the roleplaying instead of using hours upon hours reading through feat, power and magic item lists.
My advice would be to do the same in 4e, cutting down the amount of choices. Not because they are bad, but that there are just too many.
Another interesting thing would be to make characters a bit less reliant on magic items by using the option that automatically ups the hit/damage/defense bonuses of characters without magic items. The point here is to lessen the load on you as a DM.
tl;dr put 4e on a diet and you will notice that she's really pretty
My advice would be to do the same in 4e, cutting down the amount of choices. Not because they are bad, but that there are just too many.
Another interesting thing would be to make characters a bit less reliant on magic items by using the option that automatically ups the hit/damage/defense bonuses of characters without magic items. The point here is to lessen the load on you as a DM.
tl;dr put 4e on a diet and you will notice that she's really pretty
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
I think the key is not so much removing material as in saying "you can only use this and this" as just saying "here's some stuff you can use, if you REALLY want to go muck up other options for youself, go to town." If the players are all new to the system and you drop a PHB1 in front of them, chances are real high they'll create a character based on that book. Later on they may well branch out, and they may even want to change a few choices they made at the start, but at least they (and you) aren't hit with a wall of stuff to think about.
Beyond that, 4e is really good about the DM not really needing to know all the player's stuff. Yes, there are a few somewhat OP possibilities, but they aren't ridiculous, usually require the DM to give you specific items, and can always be discussed later since very few of them pop up at level 1. You certainly don't need to know every power the players might pick up, or every feat. It isn't a bad idea to take a look at the player's sheets to make sure things are done correctly (for instance pretty close to every player that has ever joined my game has had their ability scores all out of whack when they showed up, lol). Beyond that you can just assume things are OK unless something comes up that seems wrong. Ideally the players run their sheets through CB, but that might not always happen.
Beyond that, 4e is really good about the DM not really needing to know all the player's stuff. Yes, there are a few somewhat OP possibilities, but they aren't ridiculous, usually require the DM to give you specific items, and can always be discussed later since very few of them pop up at level 1. You certainly don't need to know every power the players might pick up, or every feat. It isn't a bad idea to take a look at the player's sheets to make sure things are done correctly (for instance pretty close to every player that has ever joined my game has had their ability scores all out of whack when they showed up, lol). Beyond that you can just assume things are OK unless something comes up that seems wrong. Ideally the players run their sheets through CB, but that might not always happen.
I don't really disagree with you, but you mention dropping the PHB in their hands (limited options) and the CB in the same post. The CB gives a bazillion options and would probably distract my players to a big degree.
Personally I don't like the CB because simple house rules or tailoring gets kinda wonky. For instance the WotBS from Enworld's prestige classes aren't in and won't ever be.
Throwing all the weird-ass races, paragon paths and such into a campaign without limitations works from a gameist point of view (as you said, it's fairly balanced). From the view of a setting it gets messy quite quick.
When I think about it, one of the best campaigns I have had is a PHB+Dragonlance only campaign. In other words, you get the base classes and stuff, while all the rest is tailored to the world. This worked so well because every choice made for a character got tied into the world.
In 4e I have tried the "everything works" approach with re-skinning and so on, but it feels tacked on in comparison.
tl;dr allowing everything - pull a player into 4e, limited options - pull player into the campaign/setting.
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Sure, but I think for a game starting out with brand new players in particular you probably want to let them explore the system. Give them a short list of stuff to start out with, and let them go explore the wacky parts of the system when they're ready. Super highly themed campaigns are not something I would spring on such a group. You don't really know what they're going to find engaging at this point. Figure out what sorts of players you've got and get to know them, then run that specifically tuned game. In any case I've never been that big on narrow concept settings. Sure, they are cool, conceptually. They aren't necessarily so cool to play in. My approach has always been to allow most anything, but structure the setting so that some things fit, and other things are just 'odd' and you can play them, but you'll have to figure out the details. Most races will work OK in that way in most settings.
So give them just Essentials (which is an option in the CB) and let them make their first round of characters there. Run the first adventure or 2 and ask them what they think of it all. If people are enjoying the classes and characters, keep going. If people would like to change things up, you could give them more free access to the full CB and tell them they can build a new group at the same level they are now and if they'd like, just keep going like no character changes ever happened.
Of course, if you have a different direction you want to take things, a full group rebuild would be a great opportunity to do that as well. The first group doesn't' have to be the one they're married to forever. Let them get a handle on the system. At least 1 or 2 people are likely to decide their class isn't for them.
Of course, if you have a different direction you want to take things, a full group rebuild would be a great opportunity to do that as well. The first group doesn't' have to be the one they're married to forever. Let them get a handle on the system. At least 1 or 2 people are likely to decide their class isn't for them.
Tony Vargas
Legend
If you're feeling terribly insecure and want some of that familiar Basic D&D/AD&D feel, check out D&D Essentials, starting with the Red Box (the cover art should ring a bell for you).
If you've played many other games in the interim, go ahead and jump into 4e, it really is a much better take on D&D than we've had in the past. A truely modern version of the classic 'first' RPG. It's better balanced, more playable, easier to learn, play & DM than D&D has ever been.
YES. So easy that if you're accustomed to running AD&D, you could trip yourself up.
Building encounters is /easy/. The monsters have levels, that actually mean something. The rules are consistent. Treasure is easily parceled out. Magic items also have levels, that actually mean something - stick to level-apropriate items and vanishingly few of them have any potential to break your game. Really, if you can run AD&D, you can run 4e in your sleep. It might be a little difficult if your conscious and actually stop to think about - preconcieved notions about how quirky D&D is will probably be your biggest stumbling block. Just relax and have fun with it.
Similar Threads
