D&D (2024) What do you want in the revised DMG?

[DEFCON 1]

This isn't necessarily about the topic, but the responses did make me wonder if there was a correlation between folks who want more robust and concrete encounter creation rules and folks who do not like or refuse to fudge dice rolls and/or adjust encounters mid-fight?

Honestly, I don't know if there is a correlation there or not, but I do know that for me I've never worried about making sure my encounters were built "balanced" in order to give me the really precise result of difficulty I was looking for because I do not have any problem having extra monsters just show up to make the fight more difficult (even if my notes didn't say they were there) or just removing a monster that got hit for 30 points and was left with 1 HP remaining (so I just call it dead), or any other tricks like that to "self-balance" the fights on a case-by-case basis.

It just seems like the people who would prefer not to "wing it" have a reason for not wanting to... and the idea that they do not want to adjust the encounter mid-encounter due to however they see the verisimilitude of the game to be, might be a strong reason for that? I dunno? It's just something I noticed and was curious about.

 

[Reynard]

.Remove?:

• Miscellaneous rules: mechanics for things that don't come up that often, like ship rules, chases, diseases, etc. Would a lot be lost if rules were not included?

I don't understand this sentiment. Why would you want to restrict the kinds of things that D&D is meant to do. When you take away stuff like what you listed, you shrink the game to being about nothing but fights.

 

[Reynard]

and of course the clarification that if a Druid chooses to use metal armor/shields then nothing happens. they explode, And as a bonus, take out any bards in a 30’ radius.

Think of the tactics!

I don't normally agree with Snarf but when I do, I really do.

 

[aco175]

I would use the DMG more if it was like the 4e book and contained a small town in it, like Fallcrest. I was also thinking on how it could be different than a 'starter' box where the box is designed to be something to walk you through your first campaign.

I could use a campaign planner. Some sort of outline that helps you get the bits you plan at low levels to tie in at high levels. A NPC introduced at 1st level is not- what? The threat of the orcs that the PCs never went on at 3rd level is not- what? How do I tie in PC background and goals? That kind of thing.

 

[Lyxen]

I can't see the point in creating a combat that isnt challenging in some way for the players; though it doesnt have to be deadly.

That does not make any sense, sorry. Will you or not create encounters which are not deadly ? And if yes, please explain how you consider them challenging.

Last I check monster have a "Challenge Rating", so I doubt the sole design intent of the CR/encounter design mechanics were strictly for fun and for the PCs to win all the time.

You are simply and plainly wrong: "An easy encounter doesn’t tax the characters’ resources or put them in serious peril. They might lose a few hit points, but victory is pretty much guaranteed."

So yes, some encounters are created that the PCs will win all the time, and nothing in the rules prevents people from playing with only easy encounters.

Actually the only type of encounter where there is a chance of defeat is "deadly". So yes, the game is designed for the PCs to win pretty much all the time. You might not like it, and I'm pretty sure that you use only deadly encounters for challenge, but this also means that

Perhaps WotC will change the CR system in 2024, maybe they wont and I'll be disappointed.

Then prepare to be disappointed. What you are asking is orthogonal to the way the system has been designed.

Just because it hasnt been done yet doesnt mean it cant or wont be. Some people seem to like the way it is and it works for them, such as yourself, while others like me don't. But I've seen enough people say they'd like to see it changed to know Im not alone. IMO theres room for improvement in it.

Do not call this an improvement. It does not need to be improved in that area. What you wish for is a completely different system that allows precise computations from the ground up.

 

[Lyxen]

I just want a secret sentence buried somewhere in it. In the middle of a long paragraph- “Congratulations for reading!”

So we can definitively say that … no one reads the DMG.

(I appreciate the sentiment, above, but other than useful organization and a useful index, people will just advocate for their preferences. The DMG is fine.)

Another reason for it to be reasonably fine, is that it has allowed (and probably empowered) the explosion of players across the planet. It is a book made for beginners mostly, apart some section on magic items for example. So it's not unreasonable that more experienced DM don't find much of interest in there, or actually, from a cursory reading, deduce (wrongly) that there is not much for them there.

 

[Krachek]

Remove?:

• Miscellaneous rules: mechanics for things that don't come up that often, like ship rules, chases, diseases, etc. Would a lot be lost if rules were not included?
• Worldbuilding: The worldbuilding and cosmology sections are the weakest and least relevant parts of the book. I feel to do it right, worldbuilding needs much more space that would be allotted to it in a dmg.

I agree that the cosmology part can be move to supplement that use those planes.
But the first chapter A world of your own gives key hints to build a home brew world.

miscellanous rules are not used often but are frequently present in this forum, the section can be orient more in the Rules building perspective.

 

[Oofta]

When it comes to encounter difficulty while I don't use the standard system, I use one that ignores the numbers multiplier, I find that my encounters are about as difficult as expected most of the time. However I do have to take into account the group I'm DMing for. If the martial types all have magic weapons, the CR of creatures that have resistance to non-magical weapons is way too high. Do they have effective ranged weapons or not? Makes a huge difference on the CR of flying creatures and so on. No two groups are the same, you always have to tune encounter budget to the group, I don't see how any system can account for that. I don't find that I need to fudge any dice rolls, although I may fudge enemy tactics.

So a slightly revised encounter calculation section would be good, but there's only so much that can be done.

 

[Lyxen]

So a slightly revised encounter calculation section would be good, but there's only so much that can be done.

I agree that you need to take into account the composition of the party, in particular because one need to remember that the encounter calculator is based on standard characters with no options. So you need to take to heart the section about modifying encounter difficulty as well: "Increase the difficulty of the encounter by one step (from easy to medium, for example) if the characters have a drawback that their enemies don’t. Reduce the difficulty by one step if the characters have a benefit that their enemies don’t. Any additional benefit or drawback pushes the encounter one step in the appropriate direction. If the characters have both a benefit and a drawback, the two cancel each other out."

The examples given are situational, but often forgotten, but the same applies for example for a party with high stats (standard array is used as the base), options included (feats, multiclassing, basically everything that is used in optimised character creation), magic items (again the basis of 5e is that magic items, in particular those giving bonuses, are optional and not part of the base, etc.

We often see people complaining about the result of the encounter calculator and saying that it's too easy, but when asked, say that indeed their party have rolled their stats (and of course, "luckily", all have very high numbers), all options allowed, powerful magic items, etc.

 

[el-remmen]

Robust options for tweaking classes/spells/races for different sub-genres of fantasy and power levels.

I don't give a crap about CR and encounter design and have a hard time wrapping my head around it being hard. Clearly there should be some kind of CR as a guide - but something very simple like: add up total party levels and then monsters have levels and you add them up to that number (or higher or lower depending on the level challenge you want). Will it be perfect? Nope. Does it need to be or can it even ever be expected to be? Nope. The only way to learn to good encounters is to just make them and run them, tweak them on the fly if necessary and hope you don't F it up too much.