D&D 5E (2014) What do we hope to see in the DMG?

[TerraDave]

Some guidance on...adjudication...

I appreciate the light touch-dm empowering approach of the PHB, but some sample DCs, equipment/materials stats, more on non-combat situations, etc could be handy.

And henchmen/retainers/hirelings. This is a must.

 

[jrowland]

Definitely like to see a treatise on Dungeons (ecology of dungeons), Wilderness Exploration (towns, countr, wilderness, how to make wandering monster tables, etc), A simple Domain (ie nation-state) management system along with mass combat (simple is fine for DMG), and Ascension into hero/demi-god status. In short, a primer on BECMI progression. If the BECMI books can do it in a few pages, it can be done in the DMG without taking up too much room.

 

[steeldragons]

FULL PAGE GIANT FONT BOLD on PAGE 1 (before anything, even the Table of Contents): "All of the material in this manual are options that can be easily added to enrich your Dungeons & Dragons play experience. Everything in this manual, including alternate "rules" or ways of using "rules" established in other Dungeons & Dragons manuals are guidelines...it is afterall, the Dungeon Master's Guide. They are suggestions you may or may not want to use or explore at your particular table. The material in this book should not, under any circumstance, be considered to be required or automatically integrated to play the game. You are the Dungeon Master, use the material herein at your discretion."

Following that...

I think it's a fairly big given (we've been told) that setting specific PC races will be included.

This leads to the reasonable assumption that setting specific classes (lookin' at you artificer) will also be introduced.

We already know Death domain clerics will be there. So it is a reasonable assumption that a few other domains for "bad guy NPCs" would be there. Given there is, specifically, a "Light" domain in the PHB, I expect we will see a "Darkness" [general evilness] domain if nothing else. I would think they'd do a good 3-5 since the PHB had 7.

Magic Items and, hopefully, magic item creation (both for PC crafting and for DM "make it up") guidelines.

I expect no fewer than 3 appendices of "Random Tables": Monsters (by HD/CR, by terrain, by creature type). Treasures (coinage, gem/jewelry, magic items, art objects, rare/expensive materials, etc...). Dungeon Dressing (self explanatory, but I would like to see individual tables for, say, actual Dungeon Crawl style Dungeons, [lived in or once lived in] Castle/Keep Dungeons, Tombs/Temples, Ruins, etc... What one might find in various types of dungeons should/could vary greatly.)

"Expansion/optional module/guidlines" for "Tactical Combat" style play.

"Expansion/optional module/guidelines" for alternate Magic mechanics/systems.

"Expansion/optional module/guidelines" for more "narrative/free form" play.

"Expansion/optional module/guidelines" for various ways to handle/integrate deities & world religions (polytheism, monotheism, duotheism, animism, extremists & zealots, gnosticism, mysticism, etc...) This could be an appendix too/instead, I suppose.

Dungeon/Campaign creation guidelines. Including a nice list of "generic" plot hooks, "jumping off" adventure ideas and (hopefully) [at least] 1 small/simple sample/"starter" dungeon that can be run through as a quickie (single session) game...with suggestions of where to, organically, take your players next.

World-building system/guidelines.

Explanations/Incorporating adventure ideas of Political/World power systems: democracy, magocracy, theocracy, feudalism, imperialism, etc. etc. etc... (Possibly could be wrapped in/included in part of the world-building stuff).

General "How to DM...[for the PCs]"...likely broken down into Combat, Exploration, Interaction. Also general guides for stuff like, "How to Set a Scene", "Knowing your Players and their PCs/Player Expectations", "Making Monsters/Encounters interesting", etc. etc. etc... Sounds like a lot but none of them (other than the 3 pillars, I'm guessing) has to be particularly long. A paragraph or two of generic "FAQ" kinda "how to's".

General "How to DM...At the Table" type guidelines/ideas. How to handle conflicts among players. How to handle conflict with players. How to handle chronic absence/tardiness. How to handle hygienic issues. Just some basic interpersonal communications type suggestions.

...that's all I can really think of (at the moment) that I would hope to see in the DMG. Nearly half of this material is not stuff I, personally, necessarily need or would use. But think it would make a "good" DMG...and I'm going to buy it anyway, whatever it has. So don't really go by me.

[EDIT I forgot...
"Expansion/optional module/guidelines" for stronghold building (castle, trading/guard outpost, thieves' hideout, wizard's tower, full temple complex, abbey/monastery, "typical" elf/dwarf/halfling "clan-style" holds, etc...), settlement and dominion creation/management.

"Expansion/optional module/guidelines" for mass combat.

So add a few more pages for all of that.

 

[Gargoyle]

Half of me agrees with you, but the other half says, "If you want inspiration writing, their are a hundred non-system-specific GM Help books." Due to that, I don't see them going too deep into the fluff, unless it pertains to specific setting information.

I think we're on the same page there. Mostly what I meant was short bits of fluff, nothing long; I just want it to be an interesting read and not too dry. Some sidebars or flavor text here and there would be enough.

 

[Emerikol]

I'm mainly angling for a traditional pre-4e healing system that doesn't allow for rapid non-magical recovery.

I might buy the books if that is available. If not then I won't.

 

[Saplatt]

Most importantly: guidelines for creating and customizing new monsters and NPCs.



From what I've seen of the contents pages of the Monster Manual, it's only got about half the creatures that I'd like to run. I've seen some rough conversion guidelines for creatures based on their hit dice and size, but I'm still at a loss when it comes to evaluating special abilities.

 

[Mr Fixit]

I appreciate the light touch-dm empowering approach of the PHB, but some sample DCs, equipment/materials stats, more on non-combat situations, etc could be handy.

Speaking of which, DCs as presented under Ability Checks (p.174) seem to be a bit misleading for a novice DM particularly, or maybe I'm missing something? The table gives the following values for DCs: very easy (5), easy (10), medium (15), hard (20), very hard (25), nearly impossible (30).

Under these guidelines, an average, unremarkable character (say, 1st level, no ability bonus, but proficient with a skill) would have 35% chance to FAIL at a task that's purportedly "easy" and 60% chance to fail at a "medium" task. Similarly, a 20th level character with the best relevant ability modifier (+5) and proficient with the relevant skill (+6) would still have a not insignificant chance (20%) to fail at a task that is only of average (medium) difficulty. Doesn't that sound a bit suspicious where math is involved?

Now, it's quite possible that I'm looking at these numbers in isolation, and that are other ways of boosting the chances, e.g. giving help, advantage, etc, but still... Maybe simply to change the wording a bit? Lose the "very easy" DC because, really what's the point of that; simply assume an automatic pass for a trivial task and leave it at that. Bring all other DCs one category lower - easy (DC 5), medium (DC 10), hard (DC 15), very hard (DC 20), etc. This way a 1st level character has solid, but not too great, chances of making medium DCs (as it should be in my opinion) while guys who are very high level, proficient, and with high ability scores have a somewhat easier times meeting high DCs.

 

[TerraDave]

Speaking of which, DCs as presented under Ability Checks (p.174) seem to be a bit misleading for a novice DM particularly, or maybe I'm missing something? The table gives the following values for DCs: very easy (5), easy (10), medium (15), hard (20), very hard (25), nearly impossible (30).

Under these guidelines, an average, unremarkable character (say, 1st level, no ability bonus, but proficient with a skill) would have 35% chance to FAIL at a task that's purportedly "easy" and 60% chance to fail at a "medium" task. Similarly, a 20th level character with the best relevant ability modifier (+5) and proficient with the relevant skill (+6) would still have a not insignificant chance (20%) to fail at a task that is only of average (medium) difficulty. Doesn't that sound a bit suspicious where math is involved?

Now, it's quite possible that I'm looking at these numbers in isolation, and that are other ways of boosting the chances, e.g. giving help, advantage, etc, but still... Maybe simply to change the wording a bit? Lose the "very easy" DC because, really what's the point of that; simply assume an automatic pass for a trivial task and leave it at that. Bring all other DCs one category lower - easy (DC 5), medium (DC 10), hard (DC 15), very hard (DC 20), etc. This way a 1st level character has solid, but not too great, chances of making medium DCs (as it should be in my opinion) while guys who are very high level, proficient, and with high ability scores have a somewhat easier times meeting high DCs.

Right now, I see 15 as the challenging default. That is, something looks kind of tough...DC 15.

 

[Mr Fixit]

Right now, I see 15 as the challenging default. That is, something looks kind of tough...DC 15.

I agree. You said it yourself: "looks kinda tough", implying a challenge that isn't simply of average difficulty, yet the table pares DC 15 with the "medium" descriptor. A proficient low-level character with no ability bonus (an average Joe somewhat skilled at the task in question), as it currently stands, has only 40% chance to succeed at what is supposedly not a difficult task. Even a proficient guy with a +3 ability modifier (pretty much the maximum in early going) has only 55% chance of success. At a challenge that is "kinda tough"? Sure. At an average one? Seems kinda steep.

It's not a big problem as DC adjudication is in DM's hands, but it could lead to inexperienced DMs using PHB guidelines to assign too high DC values for the task difficulty they had in mind. Looking over some specific examples in the text, seems like devs themselves didn't really follow their own guidelines. For example, rules for breaking concentration mention DC 10 as a "default", not 15 which I would expect. Taking damage in the middle of spellcasting isn't really somethin that's "easily" shrugged of. Same goes for death saving throws - again, DC 10 and not something that seems "easy" from an in-world perspective. It's a tense moment, not necessarily tough, but not easy either.

Just moving the DC descriptions down a notch would be a more accurate representation of DCs, I think. DC 10 - average. DC 15 - hard. And so on. Nothing really changes except for the fluffy description.

 

[beej]

I mentioned this in another thread: Alternate wealth mechanics.

Counting money by the piece is not fun for me.