DMing for Group of D&D First timers HELP!

[ExtravagantEvil]

Okay, a friend of mine and I are trying to set up a group of people to play D&D with, for most of them this will only be their first or second time.
It'll be about 5 Players it seems like. I'm sticking To Core Only so they aren't intimidated by the sheer number of options out there.
Any Advice, I've DMed before and play often, but I want the playgrounds advice for helping new players have fun, experiences, things to look out for and prep for and the like.

Thank You Very Much, And Happy Gaming :smallsmile:

[Yora]

Start simple, especially when playing with people who are learning the game. Just do some simple exploring of ruins and rescuing the mayors daughter from ogres for the first couple of adventures. Saving the world by traveling to hell to defeat the dark lord is stuff better left for later, when everyone is really familar with running the whole show.

[The Boz]

Design the first few encounters to teach a single important mechanics each.
First encounter, the basics of combat. Just make it large, long, but not with a lot of enemies at once.
Second encounter, flanking and sneak attacks. Fairly simple, and fairly non-lethal on the early levels.
Third encounter, attacks of opportunity. Baddies with reach weapons in a line.
Fourth encounter, archers babysitting casters. Make them feel the pain just when they're about to become really potent.
Fifth encounter, specific damage resistance. Let them feel fear. Let them run away in panic.
etc

[Dr.Epic]

Keep it simple and ease them into combat. Have it mostly RP based.

[Traab]

Design the first few encounters to teach a single important mechanics each.
First encounter, the basics of combat. Just make it large, long, but not with a lot of enemies at once.
Second encounter, flanking and sneak attacks. Fairly simple, and fairly non-lethal on the early levels.
Third encounter, attacks of opportunity. Baddies with reach weapons in a line.
Fourth encounter, archers babysitting casters. Make them feel the pain just when they're about to become really potent.
Fifth encounter, specific damage resistance. Let them feel fear. Let them run away in panic.
etc

I agree with this except make it two encounters per tactic. The first time it lets them see how it should be done. The second is to see if they mastered it, or at least understood it enough to remember what they are supposed to do.

[Lord Il Palazzo]

I'd probably talk to each of them beforehand to see what kind of character they were interested in playing. Explain various party roles like skillmonkey, primary melee, battlefield control and the like and see who's drawn to what style of play.

I'd also keep the classes open for the first adventure or two. At the end of each session, if anybody's not liking how their character plays, let them roll up a new one. There's no harm to be done in a little experimentation to find the right fit.

Regarding the starting level, it's tempting to go with level 1 as things are much simpler, but I'd personally avoid this as it leaves the casters too vulnerable and with too little to contribute when it does come time to do some combat. My first campain started at level 5 and honestly worked really well.

[ExtravagantEvil]

I'd probably talk to each of them beforehand to see what kind of character they were interested in playing. Explain various party roles like skillmonkey, primary melee, battlefield control and the like and see who's drawn to what style of play.
I was planning on having the first session be largely based on Character building and so on, working on the RP things they want, and what kind of character they'd play



I'd also keep the classes open for the first adventure or two. At the end of each session, if anybody's not liking how their character plays, let them roll up a new one. There's no harm to be done in a little experimentation to find the right fit.
This sounds interesting, but I'm not sure, the first character I find should be something more special than that. Besides, I don't want rash judgements to be made, so I do like this idea, but If it must be used, it'd be more a last resort.



Regarding the starting level, it's tempting to go with level 1 as things are much simpler, but I'd personally avoid this as it leaves the casters too vulnerable and with too little to contribute when it does come time to do some combat. My first campain started at level 5 and honestly worked really well.
I Like level 1, and will probably keep it that way. By no means do I invalidate your position, but only think that it would be easier Character creation wise, and helps the PC's grow used to the Scales of power, and remember basic mechanics withouth Too many numbers clogging the field.

[some guy]

I was planning on having the first session be largely based on Character building and so on, working on the RP things they want, and what kind of character they'd play
I always try to keep the technical sides of character building to a mininum with a bunch of new players. Have you thought about maybe 1 tutorial session before starting for 'real'? What I once did was leave feats out of character generation and offered them when it came up in play (maybe the same can be done with skills?). You get messy characters, but a lot of people get turned off by the initial infodump of making characters.




I Like level 1, and will probably keep it that way. By no means do I invalidate your position, but only think that it would be easier Character creation wise, and helps the PC's grow used to the Scales of power, and remember basic mechanics withouth Too many numbers clogging the field.

I usually let new players be level 2. You don't get that many new abilities at level 2, but with a bit more hitpoints the players have a higher survivability.

[Sidmen]

I strongly agree with starting at level 2, generally you don't gain any new abilities (maybe a feat and a few spells) and you won't die instantly when you meet anything stronger than a goblin. (I just died at level 1 to a random skeleton).

I'd suggest going with the tried and true "King's Tourney" format for the first session. In addition to the wealth of possibilities it opens up for roleplaying "That knight stole my daughter!", "My son entered the Melee, I'm afraid for his safety!" - it allows you to get people familiar with combat in a non-deadly manner.

[Lord Il Palazzo]

I was planning on having the first session be largely based on Character building and so on, working on the RP things they want, and what kind of character they'd playThis is definitely a good plan. When I first played, this is what we did, with our DM (the only one in the group who had played before) suggesting races and classes based on what each of us wanted to play.


This sounds interesting, but I'm not sure, the first character I find should be something more special than that. Besides, I don't want rash judgements to be made, so I do like this idea, but If it must be used, it'd be more a last resort.I don't disagree with you, but I would urge you to at least keep the option on the table in case someone really isn't meshing with their character. If a player just isn't having fun, sometimes changing characters is really what they need.


I Like level 1, and will probably keep it that way. By no means do I invalidate your position, but only think that it would be easier Character creation wise, and helps the PC's grow used to the Scales of power, and remember basic mechanics withouth Too many numbers clogging the field.Fair points. I have a group that's at least played before (even if only once) and level 1 was just a bit low for their tastes. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

[ExtravagantEvil]

I don't disagree with you, but I would urge you to at least keep the option on the table in case someone really isn't meshing with their character. If a player just isn't having fun, sometimes changing characters is really what they need.

Oh of course, 2 - 3 Sessions in, somebody seems to be having no fun as the character they have going, or find something not sitting well with it, of course I'd allow a change. I just want to not make it a "Flavor of the Week" effect, for lack of a better phrase. So if after one or two meets, someone doesn't like the play style or the personality they have for say, Grognar Boarsteel the Dwarven Barbarian of the Mulnalen Highlands, and would rather play something more subdued, sure. Or if they want to have more to do during the fights. Or any major reason.

I can understand the statements about Level 2 being a good starting point. I can see the points made on Survivability, and I understand them and find them reasonable. However, since WBL also increases at level 2, and most people I know hate shopping in most RPG's.
I'd hate for them to get bored, even with 900gp, which is still healthy amount of funds, and further, 1st level is the simplest to me, and I want to ensure that it starts very simple, because we know that the rules can get complicated to a degree, at least from an outside looking in (New Guy) perspective. However, the arguments are sound and make sense.


I always try to keep the technical sides of character building to a mininum with a bunch of new players. Have you thought about maybe 1 tutorial session before starting for 'real'? What I once did was leave feats out of character generation and offered them when it came up in play (maybe the same can be done with skills?). You get messy characters, but a lot of people get turned off by the initial infodump of making characters.
.

Underline = Agreement. I agree entirely with the first portion, which is why I purposefully restricted it to the Core Rule Books and the SRD. I feel like, not to sound derogatory to my fine intelligent players and friends, but I seek not to confuse them. By doing it a little left field like that would actually bamboozle them more than just simple Character Gen., Further, I find both they and I specifically, would have trouble running that, and often, introducing the old fashioned way works just fine, but I can see what you mean here.

[W3bDragon]

A few words of advice for you on this venture:

* Resist the urge to tell them anything they pick is "bad" or "unoptimized" or whatever. Let them pick and choose as they please and let them make horrible characters. The most fun that a new player has is getting an image in his head as to what his character is, and trying to remake that with whatever is available in the core book. If the barbarian picks endurance and toughness, let him do it. You know you'll be going a bit easy on them their first time out, so don't worry. Someone's making a wizard with strength 15? Sure, why not? Do let them get hung up on character roles. Let them figure it out as the game goes on.

* I agree with you about starting at level 1. Just avoid running too many combats at that level. I'd suggest a bit of exploration, some inter-party RP and RPing with a NPC, plus 1 simple encounter to take them to 2nd level. As for the encounter, perhaps some vermin slaying would do well. Clearing an inn's storehouse from a monstrous rat infestation for example. They do no more than 1 point of damage, 2 on a crit. So no insta-death axe crits.

* You'll want to slowly, very slowly, introduce new mechanics during combat. Here's a list I used before of 3.5 mechanics that you'd want to introduce. You want to introduce them at most one per fight. Or ideally, one every other fight. By the time they're 5th level or so, you'd have all these covered.

- Grapple
- Bullrush
- Trip
- Disarm
- Difficult Terrain
- Different modes of movement
- Counterspelling
- Concealment
- Cover
- Ambushing

Note that I didn't include stuff that would have to be used every encounter, like attacks of opportuinity or stablization. These need to be introduced fairly quickly.

* One great way of having new players really get into the heads of their characters is doing character interviews. Once creation is done, go around the room, one player at a time, and ask them a few simple questions about their character. Encourage them to speak in character.

- What's your character's name? How does he introduce himself?
- What do you look like? Any distinguishing features?
- Do you have any family? What do they do?
- What were you like when you were a kid? Mischievous? Quiet? Plotting? Flighty?


If the players are a bit uncomfortable with the interview, don't push it, just ask a few simple questions and move on. However, if they're getting into it, add more questions, for example:

- Tell us a story of something that happened to you as a kid.
- What is your character's current motivations?

I could go on forever, but that should give you a good feel for your players. Notice their reactions during combat, during RP, during exploration and problem solving. See what they enjoy the most and throw more of that in.

Good luck!

[zanetheinsane]

I've been introducing a game full of mostly new players and I agree with the poster that said to introduce a specific mechanic with each session.

For one of my last sessions, our fighter was participating in a local Temple of Kord's sporting competition with 3 NPCs: one strong, one dexterous, and one 'balanced' and described them as such so that the player had an idea of what each opponent was good at.

The rules of the game were simple: a large metal ball starts in the center of the field and each player starts one side of the field with their goal next to them. Whoever rolls the metal ball into their own goal wins and is granted Kord's favor and acceptance to join the church.

There were some easy mechanics for rolling the ball. The field was 5x5 and as long as you were next to the ball and standing you could make a strength check to roll the ball. For every 1 over 10, you could roll the ball 1 square (up to a maximum of 5). Rolling the ball out of the field reset the match (ball in center, players at sides). Since the ball started in the intersection at the very center and it counted as 1 to roll it into that square, you could not win the game in a single turn.

Simple game, very easy to win, except there was a catch. The players could fight each other (no weapons) but the only allowed attacks were Bull Rush, Grapple, and Trip. Anyone that struck another combatant was disqualified! I made sure to explain when a certain attack would normally provoke an attack of opportunity but that because it was a friendly match and against the rules, the NPCs would not be inclined to take it (the player made one NPC mad enough to hit him and the NPC was disqualified).

The player had a good incentive to play (he wanted to join the temple) and since he was a fighter he got a good lesson in combat options that weren't simply running up to an enemy and striking it. Instead of feeling like he was in a situation where there was no way to lose, he was motivated because he knew that failure meant he wouldn't be the one chosen into the church. Too often failure in D&D is simply equated with death which can be pretty daunting for newer players.

I've found it quite a fun challenge as a DM weaving these "lessons" into parts of the adventure so that they seem natural instead of a 'tutorial' or hand-holding session.

[Sudain]

Underline = Agreement. I agree entirely with the first portion, which is why I purposefully restricted it to the Core Rule Books and the SRD. I feel like, not to sound derogatory to my fine intelligent players and friends, but I seek not to confuse them. By doing it a little left field like that would actually bamboozle them more than just simple Character Gen., Further, I find both they and I specifically, would have trouble running that, and often, introducing the old fashioned way works just fine, but I can see what you mean here.

Consider having a few pre-gened characters if they want that. Also; I highly highly suggest running with "If you can describe what you want to do, I can tell you what you'd need to do it." It allows their imaginations to take over and enjoy the expereince. Overtime you can intro them into the abyss of rules.

Tons of other great advice here as well.

[TheThan]

Design the first few encounters to teach a single important mechanics each.
First encounter, the basics of combat. Just make it large, long, but not with a lot of enemies at once.
Second encounter, flanking and sneak attacks. Fairly simple, and fairly non-lethal on the early levels.
Third encounter, attacks of opportunity. Baddies with reach weapons in a line.
Fourth encounter, archers babysitting casters. Make them feel the pain just when they're about to become really potent.
Fifth encounter, specific damage resistance. Let them feel fear. Let them run away in panic.
etc

this is great. and its a good way to introduce the combat system. but it needs to be expanded upon a little bit. design a whole adventure to teach them the rules (as the quote suggests). then design anther adventure that focuses on the other aspects of the game, such as skills and roleplaying.

[MukkTB]

Start level 1 so they don't have to deal with the complications of a higher level. Design an adventure that's not going to gib them.
Start easy and focus on the story. If they want mindless hack and slash they can go play WoW.

[Rapidghoul]

A good idea
This.

I support starting with level 1 for completely new players. Also, try to make sure you have all the party roles covered (melee, caster, healer, skill monkey). My first ever campaign had no dedicated healer with six players; there was a druid, but he played Chaotic-Bastard alignment and wouldn't help anyone but his animal companion. I played a bard and ended up being the only healer. Sessions never went well, and combat was boring since none of us wanted to get into combat without heals handy.

TL;DR: Start them at level 1, try to get a well-rounded party, and teach them as you go.

[onemorelurker]

If you're worried about the survivability of first-level characters, you can always say that everyone gets some bonus HP (which is something I really like about 4e). I know that introducing houserules can be tricky when people aren't sure of the real rules yet, but in my experience, players (especially new players) of first-level characters can to be very hesitant, because they don't wanna die. If you put a little padding between them and death, they're more likely to try things.

[ExtravagantEvil]

Also; I highly highly suggest running with "If you can describe what you want to do, I can tell you what you'd need to do it." It allows their imaginations to take over and enjoy the expereince. Overtime you can intro them into the abyss of rules.
Tons of other great advice here as well.

The Bolded section is the way I generally do it, so thank you for reinforcing that :smallsmile:.

[Keegan__D]

I've helped my friend host a few newbie games, and we sit down and explain all we can think of with each one individually. The more people who know the rules, the better. This is usually done when hanging out before game comes up, but we've rushed it once on the first day, two-to-one learning. We always give all the options to the players, merely emphasizing that core is easiest to grasp. If they want to do something, and they grasp the rules quickly, let them be what they want. Teaching by trial may not be the fastest way, but it lets everyone learn their own way, and enjoy the game slightly differently.

Be sure to teach stuff you know. We tried learning and teaching Naruto d20, and neither of us read up enough and couldn't hope to explain everything since we've always played 3.5. This goes for rules in the system you aren't perfectly familiar with. If you're uncertain about something when teaching or before going in, research it. Be sure you're giving accurate information.

Parts of going over the rules is fair play, party balance, making sure things are covered, and even giving them a few tips they could only learn from playing a few games, like what to expect in a dungeon, or what to expect from certain DMs. The players always seem to have a good time, and most are still playing.

[ExtravagantEvil]

Okay, so I've got what looks like the semblance of a party matrix going here, and it seems to be the following for the party numbers
a Fighter (Mounted Combat, Sword and Shield)
2 Wizards
A Ranger*
and Cleric*
And a 6th Guy as a Bard*

They've been talking amongst themselves it seems, having some mild "prep" towards this. The asterisks are "maybes". My main worry is having 2 Wizards and A Cleric.
Not due to Tier 1 Issues, they are first timers no tricks being pulled really, even if they're intelligent people. I fear that the Book Keeping'll be irksome, any thoughts on helping players that want to do Tier 1 straight out of the gate?

[killem2]

I personally as a first time DM, don't like the idea of starting at level 2. I used level 1 as the meeting grounds and story telling for all the players. There is a lot of potential there to get people up to level 2 from sheer adventures to get them together.

[Snowbluff]

I'd suggest looking through a DMG. It'll teach important things like Standard Treasure and Encounter Level.

[killem2]

I also like the magic item compendium.

[ExtravagantEvil]

I'd suggest looking through a DMG. It'll teach important things like Standard Treasure and Encounter Level.

Oh of course I know that, fairly easy, as I said above, I'm decently versed in the game, and my system mastery is decent also. It's the PC's that I'd like to know how to assist, and I might toss them occasional goodies from Magic Item Compendium when rolling up treasure, just because they build using core doesn't mean I, as DM, can't throw them something interesting.

[killem2]

Oh of course I know that, fairly easy, as I said above, I'm decently versed in the game, and my system mastery is decent also. It's the PC's that I'd like to know how to assist, and I might toss them occasional goodies from Magic Item Compendium when rolling up treasure, just because they build using core doesn't mean I, as DM, can't throw them something interesting.

I believe the MIC is more balanced than the DMG for treasure.