We Were All New D&D Players Once

As a dungeon master and co-owner of a tabletop game and comic book shop, I meet brand-new players virtually every time I'm behind the counter or the DM screen. D&D’s recent popularity explosion has brought in countless new players. They usually are feeling both excited and intimidated, and it's my job to maintain that excitement and add confidence too.

View attachment 97899
​

I certainly understand the intimidation factor. Compared to a lot of other players, I'm relatively new myself. Until a year ago, I mostly stuck to the comics side of our shop because I never learned how to play D&D. My handful of attempts to play prior to that were frustrating and bewildering. I always had to play with groups of veteran players. I didn’t know what was going on or what I was supposed to do because nothing was explained to me. None of the other players seemed to comprehend that there was a learning curve, so I had a terrible time. I thought the game just wasn't for me.

Thanks to binge-watching Critical Role, I eventually got some context for how the game worked and how it could be fun. What a revelation! I’ve made up for lost time over the past year, and started to DM last fall. Now I run a table at D&D Adventurer’s League every week, as well as a weekly game for kids ages 8-14. I've had a lot of opportunities to observe games with new players who were welcomed with varying degrees of success, and I’ve learned a few things.

If you are a DM, a veteran player, or anyone else who deals with newbies -- particularly when you play with strangers at a game shop or convention -- here are some simple things to consider if you want them to have a good time. (If you don't want them to have a good time, go away, your fun is wrong.)

Remember: You Were a Newbie Once Too
Nothing kills a person’s excitement about a group activity like having others in the group treat them like they already should be an expert. When you’ve been playing for a long time, it becomes second nature to you, but it’s easy to forget how complicated it is for someone who is unfamiliar with the game. There are so many rules, and a lot of strange terminology the average person isn’t likely to know. None of us were born knowing which die was which, what initiative is, or how proficency works. And it’s hard to look things up in the Player’s Handbook if you don’t yet know what you’re searching for.

Make an Insight Check
We’re not all proficient in Insight, but you can always try. Ideally, the DM will make the newbie feel comfortable before the game starts, and encourage them to ask questions as they arise. If you’re playing, be a friendly neighbor. Give them space to figure things out for themselves, but be willing to offer encouragement or assistance to your neighbor in a gentle and lighthearted way. My kid players can do it without making the new player feel bad, so I believe in you!

Don’t Split the Party
When I finally started playing D&D on a regular basis, I was lucky enough to land with a group who made an effort to make me feel like I was part of the gang right away. I had a general sense of how the game worked from watching streaming games, but when I was actually at the table, I was still a little confused during the first few sessions.

I always will be grateful to the DM because he was kind and helpful, and always encouraged other players to help each other as well. The people sitting next to me could point to things on my character sheet so I learned how to figure out what I was rolling, calculate damage, and so forth. They were supportive, let me feel included, and never made me feel like I was slowing the game down or being a bother. In fact, when I was finally able to find creative and effective ways to help the party, they were almost as excited as I was.

Share the Loot
Maybe you’re reading this and thinking, “This is common sense! Who isn’t already doing this?” Good for you! But sadly, common sense is rarer than it should be. I have watched many people sigh and roll their eyes and make new players feel awkward, or just leave a new player flailing. Don’t be that person. Give the newbie a chance to share the love of the hobby. With a kind attitude, you can set a good precedent and help build a positive D&D community around you.

contributed by Annie Bulloch

 

[Eirikrautha]

I think that's because if Old Joe doesn't fit at your table, there's a good chance he understands why, and can peacefully move on to another table, somewhere. Or create his own game to get the kind of experience he wants.

With New June there's a risk that if the table doesn't make something of a wide berth for their newness, they'll leave the hobby entirely.

True. But it's not a matter of if, but to what extent. Almost every table I've ever been at has been flexible with the newbies. The question is how far you go. Do you play a different style for a session or two until the newbie gets a little more comfortable? Or six months? Or should you change your table in perpetuity to fit the style of the newcomer? I've seen no discussion of these issues at all; the assumption in all of the articles I've read ignores the growing together of newbie and group and instead focuses solely on the compromises the group must make. Some discussion of ways to help the newbie grow towards your group is warranted, even if directed to the veterans (who are the folks that read articles on this, anyway).

At some point I'm playing this game because I enjoy it, not to increase WotC's profits. I like having more folks to play with, but that's a balance, not an imperative.

 

[Sunseeker]

True. But it's not a matter of if, but to what extent. Almost every table I've ever been at has been flexible with the newbies. The question is how far you go. Do you play a different style for a session or two until the newbie gets a little more comfortable? Or six months? Or should you change your table in perpetuity to fit the style of the newcomer? I've seen no discussion of these issues at all; the assumption in all of the articles I've read ignores the growing together of newbie and group and instead focuses solely on the compromises the group must make. Some discussion of ways to help the newbie grow towards your group is warranted, even if directed to the veterans (who are the folks that read articles on this, anyway).

At some point I'm playing this game because I enjoy it, not to increase WotC's profits. I like having more folks to play with, but that's a balance, not an imperative.

I think these are mostly silly make-believe "issues". The newbie has no "compromises" to make, its entirely on Everyone Else*TM to accommodate them.

 

[Eirikrautha]

I think these are mostly silly make-believe "issues". The newbie has no "compromises" to make, its entirely on Everyone Else*TM to accommodate them.

That is your opinion, which you have every right to. But I personally do not believe that those who join an established culture have the imprimatur to expect the culture to bear the totality of the change. I believe that's the definition of colonization...

 

[Sunseeker]

That is your opinion, which you have every right to. But I personally do not believe that those who join an established culture have the imprimatur to expect the culture to bear the totality of the change. I believe that's the definition of colonization...

Jesus mate.

 

[Eirikrautha]

Jesus mate.

Hyperbolic? Absolutely, but intentionally.

When someone has a guest over, they often will make strides to make that guest feel more comfortable. They might change certain habits or practices (like changing the food offeringsat their meals for someone with a different diet). The guest, were they polite, might also endeavor to disrupt the lives of their hosts as little as possible, even if it meant slight discomfort on their part. This balanced compromise makes the event possible.

You seem to believe that the guest can demand a complete change in diet, throw out all of the host's music and consoles, a complete remodel of the house, and repainting of the rooms, just so they experience no discomfort at all. The only word I can think of to describe that attitude is "entitled." Not surprisingly, that word is often used to describe people's behavior nowadays...

 

[Sunseeker]

Hyperbolic? Absolutely, but intentionally.

When someone has a guest over, they often will make strides to make that guest feel more comfortable. They might change certain habits or practices (like changing the food offeringsat their meals for someone with a different diet). The guest, were they polite, might also endeavor to disrupt the lives of their hosts as little as possible, even if it meant slight discomfort on their part. This balanced compromise makes the event possible.

You seem to believe that the guest can demand a complete change in diet, throw out all of the host's music and consoles, a complete remodel of the house, and repainting of the rooms, just so they experience no discomfort at all. The only word I can think of to describe that attitude is "entitled." Not surprisingly, that word is often used to describe people's behavior nowadays...

Jesus mate.

 

[ad_hoc]

I think it would be helpful for new players if you can spend 10-15 minutes just having them fight waves of monsters by themselves in a mock encounter. Having them roll to attack and damage, but having the monster just die after a hit. Having them take damage but not actually track it.

I don't think this is a good idea because of how it presents the game. If this is the instruction of how to play then players will think it is a tactical combat game.

Also this is what levels 1 and 2 are for.

 

[Jester David]

Well, I certainly agree that making players feel welcome is an important part of the game. But this particular topic is not as cut and dried as some posters here would like to make it.

As someone who frequently has new players at my table (including one now who has only a few sessions in), I think it is important to remember that the job of the DM is to make sure ALL of the players have a good time. I've noticed in many discussions I've seen/read lately that there is a fetishization of new players nowadays, often at the expense of the old. I notice this a lot with folks who are themselves transitioning from newer players into veteran ones.

I think this might be the result of your perspective.
The game is doing well and more people are coming in that any time in recent history. That's exciting. It's not just new people, it's the sudden wave of new people: the fact the game is a hit with a new generation. It's not that they're valued more, just that their presence is an exciting sign for the health of the game.

Now, I haven't directly seen anyone say "Screw the six people you've been playing with for three decades, make the new guy feel happy!" but some of the responses so far definitely have an element of privileging the new over the old. In fact, I would say that, were the question put directly to the respondents on this thread, "Who bears the greatest responsibility to compromise in order to please the rest of the table?" many of you would respond with the veterans as opposed to the newbie.

There's nothing special about being an old gamer. You don't win any points for having gamed for longer. The hobby doesn't owe you anything. You don't get a medal for long service to the game.
Your prize was the time spent playing and the years of memories.

From WotC's perspective, this makes perfect sense... they already have my money, so each new player is more for them. From the perspective of my gaming group, however, I don't think that answer is anywhere near fair.

It's not just about the money. It's about the hobby not dying.
If there are no new players, then as the old gamers die or quit gaming the hobby shrinks. There's no shortage of older RPG systems that just are not played anymore. Or games in general. RPGs in general were a shrinking industry for a long time.
No one wants D&D or tabletop RPGs to go away. New people are always needed.

One of the biggest issues my new players have is differentiating between flavor text and rules text. If a description say that a spell "harnesses mystical energy to pierce the surrounding darkness, giving the character advantage on Perception checks in total darkness," my newer players frequently focus in on the concept of piercing the darkness, rather than on the mechanics of the spell as stated. For tables with a high level of fluency in the game, this can often lead to frustration by both the new and old players. If the older players have a high degree of system mastery and enjoy encounters (both combat and non-combat) with a thin margin for error and a high degree of difficulty, they can become frustrated with a character that does not have a single skill/spell/ability chosen to help in these circumstances (this happened recently with my newest player, who chose most of her high level spells based on flavor and as a result did not cast a single one in two straight sessions, as none would mechanically accomplish what she desired in those circumstances). The new player feels weak or useless, and the experienced players begin to resent them. This also creates problems for the DM, who must either dial back the expectations at the table (which is insulting in its own way when you prepare a challenging encounter for five players, when there are six at the table, because everyone knows the newbie won't really contribute), or bend long established conventions to make the newbie's misreads more viable.

Yes, there IS a learning curve to the game. Yes, mistakes will be made and poor tactical choices will occur. That happens even with experienced players learning a new ruleset. It's frustrating and annoying, but it's a short term problem. The player learns and gets better.
That's covered in the main post. This is literally the point of the thread.

It's the job of the experienced players to help and mentor without being dicks and discouraging the player. And, yes, that means occasionally taking it easy on them. The exact same thing is said with every game. When you're teaching someone chess, you don't go all out and humiliate them, and you don't go for the crippling bodyblows when teaching someone a sport. You ease them in and eventually they learn to hold their own. And once you stop looking down at them for not knowing everything, they might surprise you with creative ideas.

If the experienced players cannot mentor and play nicely with a rookie, then they shouldn't be teaching. That group shouldn't invite new players.
But that's short term gain for longterm loss. Because taking a rookie under your wing and bringing them into the game means you have a new player who is taught your style of the game. You suffer for a few months of awkward gameplay but hopefully end up with a new player who views the game through the lens of your table. It's an investment.

There's a hell of a lot of judgement in your post. Looking down on a player for daring to choose a flavourful spell. For not playing the game in the correct way. (As if there was a correct way.)
But if the DM knew they were holding back a spell for desired circumstances, why didn't the DM work those circumstances into the game? That's DMing 101.

The second example directly addresses a point in the OP's article: the influence of web series like Critical Role. Several of my veteran players have been in this group since the mid-eighties, and have never played at a table like what you might see on Critical Role. In fact, most of us would not come back after the first session. The style, focus, and tenor of those games are not anything like what we enjoy. To a new player, who knows only what they have seen on the Internet, our table would feel very different from what they might expect based on Critical Role. Should we change our table for them? Should the expectations of the new player outweight the table culture of the old?

This assumes all web series are similar to Critical Role. They're not. There's a wide, wide variety of web series out there.

This also assumes that this is a new phenomena. That it's unique to the new generation (oh those darn Millennials, ruining D&D with their streaming and their interwebs).
It's not.
I came into the game with preconceived notions from Dragonlance novels and the D&D cartoon. Others might come in with assumptions based on Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones (either the books or the adaptations), or the game Dungeon!, or video games like Final Fantasy or Zork. Perhaps Record of Lodoss War. Everyone has their biases.

And, yes this might mean the new player wants to play the game differently than you.
So what?
Guess what? I likely run the game differently from you as well. And when a player at my table takes a turn to run, they run it differently as well. We all give D&D our own spin. That theirs might be inspired or influenced by a streaming show is irrelevant, and doesn't make their style any less valid.
If a new player comes to your table and struggles with your style, that sucks but it's life. That's happened to me lots of times where "bad" groups form or awkward play occurs because of a personality class. The player either moves on and find a new group, or you compromise and find a middle ground in style. Not every player fits in with every group.
(The reverse has happened to me, where I've been the old grognard player at a table of newbies who were all stumbling over the rules and making stuff up because they couldn't remember how anything worked. And it's hard not to correct them all the time. It helps remind me what it feels like to be that newbie who's struggling over the nuances and making mistakes.)


What you seem to be describing sounds like the hipster's dilemma.
You have a cool band that no one else knows about, and its your special secret. But they they get discovered and everyone knows about them. And now you have to share the band with a larger audience. Gigs become less intimate and personal. Tickets are more expensive and harder to get. There's all these new fans who don't know the band like you do, who weren't supporting them in the early days.

You were playing D&D before it was cool. That doesn't give you the right to act as a gatekeeper for new players. And it doesn't mean these new players are less valid as fans.

 

[Eirikrautha]

Sorry, duplicate post.

 

[Eirikrautha]

You've said a lot, but not really anything to the purpose. I'll try to simplify my issues (as admittedly I've written voluminous posts to this point):

When a new player joins an established group, how much of the responsibility for helping that player fit in falls on the group and how much on the player? Note that I am assuming good faith on both parties (your response and several above seem to assume that one or more parties isn't acting in good faith).

Is the new player's fun more important than the present players' fun? If so, for how long and to what extent? Why?

On one hand, you state that having played the game for a long time does not matter (though it certainly does increase system knowledge and mold expectations). Yet you also imply that players who have been playing for a long time have more responsibility towards other players and the game. How do you reconcile this contradiction?

If length of play doesn't matter, shouldn't we all come to the table with equal respect for each other and equal responsibility to create an enjoyable game for everyone involved? Wouldn't this include the new players as well as the old? Yet, as much of the modern world seems to embrace, every article about this matter treats new players as if they are fragile flowers, who have no part in the shared responsibility to create a good table for everyone. Most of these articles are written by newer players. Why do you think there is this correlation?