Well, Mike Mearls got promoted. Any hope for 5e?

[shadzar]

sadly, the ability to forget the DM is a player, even though he doesnt get a PC, is had by many players.

i mean why would the DM need a player sicne they get to be EVERYTHING that isnt a PC?

it is hard sometimes to be a player in an area that has few DMs, and fewer decent ones....but in time the person that is often DM can get to play, just make sure you dont try to play in your own game, or you create another level of "bad DM" problem...

also remember, overpowering or gamebreaking, arent the only reasons something might not be allowed. it jsut might not fit, or the DM might not like it, as you didnt like some things as a DM, such as i dont like assassins, bards, and psionics.

there are plenty of things to play, and if a player pushes and pushes to play something that just isnt wanted by the DM, then odds are the DM will always look les favorably at that player int he future for badgering them.

it is all about compromise... the DM does a lot of work, so you need to let them run something fun to them, and unless he is railroading you like Amtrak, then you should be able to find something to do.

even railroads arent meant to control you ewither.. as most published adventures are pretty much jsut one linear path after another, and DMs running them might not have time or energy to make EVERYTHING up.

each group has to find that happy medium for them, and no book or other group can really help you work it out, it is something that must be done between those individual players in that specific group.

[Swordslinger]

Lets consider that in the football example: Quarterbacks, even aware ones, get sacked. They get taken by surprised from the side or someone behind them while just trying to fully play the game. That shit happens in games all the damn time. The principle about the QB hearing people easily or warnings and being able to perfectly react so as not to be surprised is pure bullshit. Hearing a warning and reacting to it in time are two different things.

Fact: being distracted makes you less aware.

Contrary to what some of you seem to think, a soldier tying his shoelaces instead of holding his gun at ready is probably not going to get the first shot off if the enemy appears.

Lastly, I notice none of your examples comes anywhere close to justifying why the DM has the fuck you you all die power, the morality police alignment power (fuck you paladins), or any of the other random fuck you powers. So the DM has them but isn''t supposed to use them? Makes perfect sense to me.

The DM has this ability because he's the game world. Without him, there's nowhere for the character to exist, therefore by simply no longer running the game world, the character's story is effectively over.

Or in terms people here can probably understand better, the WoW servers get taken down permanently and your character is effectively dead because there's no way you can play him anymore. You can remake him in another game, but the adventures of that character in that world are over.

[icyshadowlord]

The DM is not ONLY the game world, but he is also a player. It seems that one problem is that one or the other is often overlooked.

[CapnTthePirateG]

I think I can agree to that.

So my question is, what exactly should we be writing as DM advice? I'd probably start with PhoneLobster's guide to good GMing and go from there. I did find those passages in the 2e DMG, which is a good thing, as all I remembered was that currency section.

[quanta]

Okay quantu, guy who knows unspecified martial arts is staring at a door. Guy who knows jujitsu bursts through door.

Does he win without a fight?

The example is not "Someone is 5ft behind you and you don't know it" it's "You are looking at a door, and then the door opens and someone who didn't know you were there, or at least didn't know your exact location charges through."

Kaelik, K's example was he was reading a goddamn book. It really is more like "Someone is 5 ft. behind you and you don't know what he's doing."

I'm just going to ignore everything you said because it's pretty obvious you don't know anything about fighting.

Honestly. Not a single thing was correct.

Ok, great Shaolin master. I await your explanation of how someone taking your back is not really that big of a disadvantage. And also of how correct reading of an opponent's moves is unimportant and irrelevant to defense because all offensive moves can be stopped by your single l33t defensive move.

First off, why is it assumed that my opponent is equally competent? We aren't talking about the real world, where impressing the guys at the bar still means you're peanuts compared to anyone important in the world of beating people up/to death. We're talking about D&D, where if the PC isn't more competent than most of his opponents, your GM is trying really hard to kill you and by definition you are unlikely to survive two fights.

If your opponents aren't competent enough to be a threat (in the sense they'll make you spend significant resources) when they get the jump on you, your DM is playing with kid gloves.

Second, how did this guy get behind me in the first place? I have a party! Why didn't they warn me that this guy was sneaking up behind me? Why weren't they watching my back? They're trained adventurers, this should be familiar territory even for a level one party.

Not everyone in D&D has a passable spot modifier. Say the party is the typical fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard. Spot and Listen are cross-class for everyone but the rogue. A sneaky rogue-like opponent would be spotted by the rogue if the rogue was looking for monsters under swordslinger's system because obviously PC rogue has a spot/listen modifier that can probably beat the NPC rogue's hide/move silently. However, under Swordslinger's system, the PC rogue takes a sizable penalty to spot/listen for bending down to inspect the stones in the floor for hairline cracks indicating a trap (although presumably he gains a bonus to search). So the sneaky NPC rogue may not be spotted by the rogue when he's far enough away and not in the PC rogue's line of vision. Bows will also have the range for the NPC rogue to still get a shot off. Unfortunately, Mr. Wizard, Mr. Cleric, and Mr. Fighter have asstastic spot and listen modifiers (ignoring for the moment that in 3.5 there are a lot of spells that could boost the spot check of the cleric or wizard to high levels) so they don't spot the sneaky NPC rogue until he's fired a bow from inside concealment 30 ft. away. Shit, if the dungeon has a high ceiling and cover on the ceiling or an appropriate ability, the sneaky NPC monster/rogue could possibly be climbing on the ceiling with total cover or concealment. And then he drops down into melee and surprises everyone. (presumably, you could be forced to have enough people to look in 5 directions just to cover the whole area in this case if the dungeon is fairly open and threats come from the ceiling). And looking as opposed to listening matters a lot because silence is a level 2 spell that totally cockblocks listening.

[Chamomile]

If your opponents aren't competent enough to be a threat (in the sense they'll make you spend significant resources) when they get the jump on you, your DM is playing with kid gloves.

A lot of things can make a party spend significant resources while still being less competent than them. If you genuinely run into an equally competent group of opponents in every single encounter, you are dying in approximately 50% of your encounters. It is not playing with kid gloves to tone that death rate down a bit.

-snip-

That's an ambush, and ambushes have been specifically listed as an exception over and over again. This also goes back to "too busy looking up to look up." Scanning the area for traps is exactly the same as scanning it for an ambush. You're looking for something unusual and potentially dangerous in the room.

[shadzar]

So my question is, what exactly should we be writing as DM advice?

first the company making D&D has to accept that not everyone SHOULD be playing D&D. its a sad fact, and they know it, they jsut need to publically say it.

Gary DID say it in polite ways, and rude ones. but the best advice to give is to players that IF your DM isnt working, then get rid of them AS A DM.

your best player may want to DM, but behind the screen is a different world than one with a character sheet. just because they cant DM for crap, doesnt mean that cant run a PC.

I remember the RPGA DM Herald judge program thing. i failed cause it was all 3rd edition rules questions, but it failed because it went to codified in actions.

to help the DM there must be a few things going on, one including no rules lwayering, and you have to let the DM runt he world. this gives the DM an incentive to be the DM, since they get a chance to be creative.if people dont like the DMs "story" then either wait it can get better, explain to them, or trying only letting them run one-shots rather than campaigns.

just because you own a DMG, doesnt mean you should be running campaigns right away.

DMs also have to understand while they have major creative control of the plot as THEY set the obstacles, then need to let the players play.

i will use the story from that gamesday i was in for the free mini, otherwise i wouldnt have played since it was 3rd...

the group get formed by assigned tables, and a few kids, real young, and adolescences and myself. NOBODY other than myself and the DM had ever played D&D before. the DM is setting the stage pretty good, reading from the adventure and giving the background and making WotC written word into something interesting and understandable rather than the gibberish. everyone is into it, until it comes to player participation time, an encounter!

the DM finally asks, "what are you going to do?"
everyone starts looking at their character sheet for a few minutes, and myself and the DM wait, until one of them responds "what can i do?", while staring at the sheet.
the DM looks a bit dumbfounded and is still reviewing the adventure since it wasnt given to him in advance to review. so i tell the person to let me see their character sheet, and when they hand it to me i turn it upside down in front of them so only the blank back is showing. they now look more confused, as i ask him; what do you want to do?
he questions me, what do i mean? and i tell him, we are in a tavern and a fight has broken out. the map shows where we are, what is in the room, and where the opponent is. if YOU were there, what would you do? his mind was shattered, he didnt know it was that simple and said he wanted to try to attack. i told him if he wants to attack, turn the sheet back over and look at the equipment and pick something to attack with, or a weapon, or something in the room.

these new players then quickly jumped into the action and the game and started doing things.

so as the DMG passage said, when a player asked "what can i do?", the best answer to them is let them try anything, because it is there character. the DM isnt to prevent them from trying, unles it is something that REALLY couldnt be tried, but to adjudicate those actions amonst the other players and the world, and the rules itself when they come into question.

you just have to have mature players rather than ones that spout out crap like "well if you dont assume the players are doing anything, then they arent breathing".

it is always best to let the players tell the DM what they are doing, as it is their characters, and let them try ANYTHING, within reason, with their characters.

[Hieronymous Rex]

3.X WAS MORE RULES LIGHT THAN ANY OTHER EDITION 'CEPT RED BOX.

Below are the number of pages in the player's handbook or player's section of different editions:

OD&D: 34
Holmes Basic: 21
Moldvay Basic ("B/X"): 28
Mentzer Basic ("Red Box"): 63
AD&D 1e: 122 pages
AD&D 2e: I don't have it.
(A)D&D 3e: 304 pages
(A)D&D 4e: 300 pages

By raw page count, 3e is the most complex edition. However, this comparison isn't entirely fair. So, below are descriptions of character creation in each edition.

OD&D:
Generate ability scores.
Choose class and race.
Determine attack and saving throws by class.

AD&D 1e:
Generate ability scores
Annotate a hodge-podge of modifiers from scores
Choose race and class
Determine attack and saving throws by class
Choose(s) weapons, noting damage vs size and armor type, length, space, and speed factor

(A)D&D 3e:
Generate ability scores.
Choose class and race.
Determine attack and saving throws by class.
Assign skill points.
Select feat(s).
Select weapon(s), noting damage, critical range and multiplier.

(A)D&D 4e:
Generate ability scores.
Choose class and race.
Determine attack and saving throws by class.
Choose skills
Select feat(s).
Choose 2 at-wills, 1 encounter, and one daily
Calculate healing surges and surge value
Select weapon(s), noting damage and proficiency bonus

[RiotGearEpsilon]

You left 'choose spells' out of every edition except 4e.

[Hieronymous Rex]

You left 'choose spells' out of every edition except 4e.

I was excluding class specific things out of lassitude, but it is relevant. Other selected class features include Thief Skills in 2e (in 1e they were not selected individually), the variable number of skill points in 3e, Domains and/or god for clerics, and Favored Enemy.

4e greatly cuts down on work for spellcasters, since they get the same number of abilities as everyone else.

Thief skills through the editions:

*0e, all version of Basic, and 1e: % chance by level and race.
*2e: % chance by level and race, and you get to assign points.
*3e: Everyone gets skills like a 2e thief; Rogues get more skill points. Race modifies.
*4e: Rogues get Thievery & Perception as class skills.

[shadzar]

AD&D 2e: I don't have it.

TSR Archive mirror

Published: 1st print(?) - 1989
Format: 256-page perfect-bound hardback book


revised:
Published: 2nd print - 1996
Format: 320-page perfect-bound hardback book

revised duplicates most if not ALL of the tables in an appendix in the back for ease of finding, which greatly adds to the page count, as well appendixes of spells in various lists such as level, sphere/school, etc...

without the appendices it is: 163 pages + 122 pages of spells = 285 pages
OPTIONAL Chapter 5 (proficiencies): 18 pages

then consider how much was rules, and how much was descriptions and advice...but i am jsut providing data, not getting into the what was rules heavy or light, because people neglect optional and think core when they see it as 4th adopted as SOP.

OD&D:
Choose class and race.

No, there is no such thing as races... elf/dwarf/halfling were classes.

or are you meaning the miniature game that was prior to the RPG?

[Hieronymous Rex]

No, there is no such thing as races... elf/dwarf/halfling were classes.

or are you meaning the miniature game that was prior to the RPG?

While they effectively were classes; and in all versions of Basic they literally were, in OD&D demihumans are not treated as classes.

Dwarves: Dwarves may opt only for the fighting class...

Elves: Elves can begin as either Fighting-Men or Magic-Users and freely switch
class whenever they choose, from adventure to adventure, but not during the
course of a single game.

Halflings: Should any player wish to be one, he will be limited to the Fighting-Men
class as a half ling.

Also, Supplement I: Greyhawk allows demihumans to be Thieves.

[Swordslinger]

(A)D&D 3e:
Generate ability scores.
Choose class and race.
Determine attack and saving throws by class.
Assign skill points.
Select feat(s).
Select weapon(s), noting damage, critical range and multiplier.
Plan your build from levels 1-20 so you can qualify for the PrCs and feats you want in the future

fixed.

[Psychic Robot]

you know I kind of miss the simplicity of older editions of D&D. you don't have any fancy powers or abilities, you just have your attack roll and your skills. of course I kind of like races as classes too so I'm just a big doodie head anyway

[shadzar]

um no.. older editions didnt have "skills", unless you mean the player's skills.

thats right Rex, i just dont have access to them right now, so ok...just think OD&D needs to go away being a miniature wargame more than RPG, and let everything else stand as RPG. as if OD&D was the public beta of the game. its a novel thing to own, but not something you want to play...

[Swordslinger]

you know I kind of miss the simplicity of older editions of D&D. you don't have any fancy powers or abilities, you just have your attack roll and your skills.

One thing I noticed when going over old adventures is how small the monster stat blocks were in 1E/2E. When stat blocks are small, encounters seemed a lot more optional, as opposed to the newer editions where monster stats take up several pages for a single encounter.

[shadzar]

you know I kind of miss the simplicity of older editions of D&D. you don't have any fancy powers or abilities, you just have your attack roll and your skills.

One thing I noticed when going over old adventures is how small the monster stat blocks were in 1E/2E. When stat blocks are small, encounters seemed a lot more optional, as opposed to the newer editions where monster stats take up several pages for a single encounter.

well many people wanted monsters info right int he module, so they gave in to that. you dont need to bring the MM if the mosnter is right there with its stats as opposed to say

2 goblin spr, 3 goblin bow, 1 orc sword

having the HD and stuff for the creatures meant less game stalling to look it up.

[Hieronymous Rex]

of course I kind of like races as classes too so I'm just a big doodie head anyway

Don't worry, I do too.

um no.. older editions didnt have "skills", unless you mean the player's skills

Thieves and assassins do; they are explicitly called such. Also, 1e and beyond has weapon proficiencies, and 2e has optional Non-Weapon Proficiencies.

1e & 2e have optional Secondary Skills as well, which honestly are the best implementation of skills in any edition.

[K]

Lets consider that in the football example: Quarterbacks, even aware ones, get sacked. They get taken by surprised from the side or someone behind them while just trying to fully play the game. That shit happens in games all the damn time. The principle about the QB hearing people easily or warnings and being able to perfectly react so as not to be surprised is pure bullshit. Hearing a warning and reacting to it in time are two different things.

Fact: being distracted makes you less aware.

Contrary to what some of you seem to think, a soldier tying his shoelaces instead of holding his gun at ready is probably not going to get the first shot off if the enemy appears.

Except that football fields are super noisy and thirty people are running around in close proximity. Football players don't get sacked because they are "surprised", but because they are in a situation where people as fast or faster than them are running at them from favorable intercept angles. It's basically like saying "sometimes people get stabbed in the middle of battlefields."

To go back to texting, Car and Driver did a test where texting while driving slowed your reaction times by .1 seconds for a young man and .6 seconds for an old man. AT 70 MP this is a big deal, but not so much at running speed.

The trap-searching situation is actually more favorable for the players since we are assuming that other adventurers are being relatively quiet because they are keeping an eye out for monsters and unlike driving or reading your attention doesn't need to be focused on trap-searching constantly. We can also assume they are young people with good reactions, so that's between a .1 second or no extra delay at all to someone's reactions.

I think there is no mechanical or simulationist reason to nerf trap-searching and trying to shoehorn one in just compounds the awkwardness.

[shadzar]

um no.. older editions didnt have "skills", unless you mean the player's skills

Thieves and assassins do; they are explicitly called such. Also, 1e and beyond has weapon proficiencies, and 2e has optional Non-Weapon Proficiencies.

1e & 2e have optional Secondary Skills as well, which honestly are the best implementation of skills in any edition.

while NWPs are what became "skills", and i put it in quotes on purpose, the rest i wouldnt consider what the world today considers "skills".

i still call them "class features" in regards to casting magic for a wizard, using divine energy for cleric, and "thieving skills" for the rogue.

ALL the proficiencies were going a bit overboard, and i did have fun with weapon speed, and specialization, but even while playing it felt it didnt belong, as that is flavor, and doesnt need bonuses for it.

it is why so often i fight ANY sort of skill system, as if you have classes, you dont need "skills", as the class specific things are built into the class, if you dont want to play a class with its built-in features, then jsut build your own class with skills.

so you can have classes or skills, not both. it is redundant to have both.

oops, almost forgot a thought...

secondary skills are what i would consider background material for the character, to tell what sort of things they would be able to do.. again fire-building NWP as the example. a hunter might be good at it as they may run an animal into tall gras on the plains, and then need to be able to set the grass on fire while it is fresh and wet as opposed to dry and withered, or may even after a slight rain, so the hunter would be more able to make a fire in extreme conditions that others, like the thief can climb walls better that just scaling them with a rope, so he free-climbs a sheer face with his class feature, while others still can use the same ability score and climb normally.

going back to not having these "skills" of modern, means the ability scores have a function more than to provide bonuses, but then you know people will not want to roll a d20 and get UNDER their ability score, which is intuitive, because the only understanding today is a bigger numebr is better, so they have to shift the math around to make it work that way and remove the range limits and then want MORE bonuses for things....wash rinse repeat.. and we are back to the problem of "skills" in general being just a collection of bonuses rather than a system to accomplish anything or inspiration provider, such as secondary skills.

[Hieronymous Rex]

it is why so often i fight ANY sort of skill system, as if you have classes, you dont need "skills", as the class specific things are built into the class, if you dont want to play a class with its built-in features, then jsut build your own class with skills.

so you can have classes or skills, not both. it is redundant to have both.

This is true for the most part, but Secondary Skills are good for filling in gaps for where there is no class. For instance, a Bard might have been a Merchant who turned to a life of swindling people, a Fighter could be a Soldier, a Gladiator or Sailor. 2e has Kits for these things, but Secondary Skills are a somewhat more open way of handling it.

going back to not having these "skills" of modern, means the ability scores have a function more than to provide bonuses, but then you know people will not want to roll a d20 and get UNDER their ability score, which is intuitive, because the only understanding today is a bigger numebr is better, so they have to shift the math around to make it work that way and remove the range limits and then want MORE bonuses for things....wash rinse repeat.. and we are back to the problem of "skills" in general being just a collection of bonuses rather than a system to accomplish anything or inspiration provider, such as secondary skills.

Which is also how saves should have been handled from the very beginning. Ability scores already rate how tough/fast/strong willed you are, why have separate values?

[Josh_Kablack]

Below are the number of pages in the player's handbook or player's section of different editions:

OD&D: 34
Holmes Basic: 21
Moldvay Basic ("B/X"): 28
Mentzer Basic ("Red Box"): 63
AD&D 1e: 122 pages
AD&D 2e: I don't have it.

The 2nd Ed PHB is 255 pages with numbers on them plus a full-page RPGA ad. At least that's the 1989 printing version I have. I've seen a later printing with a different cover and have no idea if that has additional material or not.

Also, your 3e page counts could use some clarification

The first-run 3.0 PHB was 286 numbered pages plus a 2 sided character sheet plus a 16 page "2000 survival kit" that was really DMG and MM material made available before the publication of the DMG and MM. Plus a chargen CD. So while it's not incorrect to call it 304 pages, 286 is a better description of the player's section.

The 3.5 PHB is 317 numbered pages plus a 2 sided character sheet and an add for game novels.

[shadzar]

it is why so often i fight ANY sort of skill system, as if you have classes, you dont need "skills", as the class specific things are built into the class, if you dont want to play a class with its built-in features, then jsut build your own class with skills.

so you can have classes or skills, not both. it is redundant to have both.

This is true for the most part, but Secondary Skills are good for filling in gaps for where there is no class. For instance, a Bard might have been a Merchant who turned to a life of swindling people, a Fighter could be a Soldier, a Gladiator or Sailor. 2e has Kits for these things, but Secondary Skills are a somewhat more open way of handling it.

merchant isnt really a class, and these are all still backgrounds. again with fire-building, the confusion comes form having it EXIST as a skill. people think without it a character cannot make a simple fire, wherein the skill only shows that this person is exceptional at the TASK.

secondary skills really dont help, as they were NOT supposed to be used WITH NWPs, but instead of them.

The second method for determining what your character knows is to assign secondary skills. Secondary skills are broad areas of expertise. Most correspond to occupations that your character may have been apprenticed in or otherwise picked up before beginning his adventuring life. Secondary skills are much more general than nonweapon proficiencies. They should not be used in combination with nonweapon proficiencies, which are explained later.


Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

going back to not having these "skills" of modern, means the ability scores have a function more than to provide bonuses, but then you know people will not want to roll a d20 and get UNDER their ability score, which is intuitive, because the only understanding today is a bigger numebr is better, so they have to shift the math around to make it work that way and remove the range limits and then want MORE bonuses for things....wash rinse repeat.. and we are back to the problem of "skills" in general being just a collection of bonuses rather than a system to accomplish anything or inspiration provider, such as secondary skills.

Which is also how saves should have been handled from the very beginning. Ability scores already rate how tough/fast/strong willed you are, why have separate values?

in prior editoins you werent targetting an ability scores with an attack. that would make sense to defend with the ability score...but it doesnt make sense really to do it that way.

the saves of old were from type of things in order of priority, as the "attacks" were made against eh combination of ALL ability scores, and rather than try to make some formula to average out the ability scores strengths and such, just make a simple little system to mitigate damage based on the type of attack.

i still cant understand how people dont understand the priority of save order when i hear it today. start at the left and move right until you find a save that matches some aspect of what you are saving from...

example: a wand of polymorph would be saved as RSW since it is the save you reach first so wands are saved against and you dont even look to see the pertification/polymorph saves as wands take precident.

it even says so in the footnotes of the saves.

again, people trying to think to much about something, rather than to accept its design and use it how it was made, rather than try to question it. "comprehension is not a requisite of cooperation."

[CapnTthePirateG]

We talking about the same guys who used the demihuman level limits as an example of game balance?

[shadzar]

We talking about the same guys who used the demihuman level limits as an example of game balance?

you mean people that made/played editions prior to 3rd?