PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Soon to be first-time DM with a question



Beta
2014-10-14, 06:49 AM
Hello all!

I am soon to be a first-time DM, and I've got a conundrum that I hope I can get some advice on from an experienced DM

Short version:

I've got 6-7 players who want to play DnD with me, but none of them have any tabletop RPG experience and I have no DM experience. :smallfrown: Any advice will be very welcome!
Is it doable to DM that many first-time players? Or should I tell them I want a max of 5 players? Or start with 2 smaller groups and merge them after 2-3 play sessions?




Detailed version:

I've had 2 introduction games in DnD before(as a player), and now I am gonna DM a game for 2 friends and my girlfriend. My girlfriend's sister and her friend really wanna join aswell but we suspect they'll probably stop caring after the first/second session. Plus one friend really insists on inviting another 2 people (who I've never met yet) and maybe even a third (who I have met once) to the party.

Can I tell him that a party of 6-7 is really too much too handle for a game of DnD or am I just overconcerned? I'm confident that I can adjust monster encounters to fit a larger party but NONE of these players have ever played a tabletop RPG before and I've never DM'ed before, so I'm afraid gaming sessions will be 4 hours of me explaining and looking up things I don't know and 10 minutes of actual play. I don't want to bore them so they'll never be interested again, but maybe I'm just seeing problems that don't exist. Plus I think with 4 players it will be hard enough to find 1 day per month where everyone has time, I shudder to think how hard it will be to plan for 6-7 players...

I've already introduced my GF and the two friends with the castle ravenloft boardgame as a sort of step up from Monopoly into tabletop RPG's, but they're still a long way to go to character sheets, describing your actions, etc.



Side note:

Im not even sure yet which edition I'm gonna pick. Options are DnD 3.0, 4 or 5.

I've got the 3.0 edition Player handbook, DM guide and monster manual, but because 3.5 and pathfinder are things that exist, 3.0 must be unbalanced / not fun somehow, plus I think this might be the most complex edition of those I'm considering?

I think 4ed fits these players best, since they all play several MMORPG's and I've already introduced them to Castle Ravenloft, however I will first have to purchase all the books and I think you really need maps and figures to be able to play this?(which I don't have(except for castle ravenloft)) I am willing to find some second hand source books and I really do like how wizards and fighters have an equal amount of abilities/spells to use and clerics are not mandatory to have, but it does add a bit of an expense plus a delay waiting on the books delivery.

I got the 5ed starter set, so that's an option aswell. Maybe I'll just run them through the included adventure (Lost Mine of Phandelver). This might be the easiest option since I've already got the source material and a suitable campaign. I'm thinking after we finish that we can always decide then which edition we wanna do. From online commentaries I get the impression that this edition is most focussed on story telling and would therefor be easiest to run with beginners and without maps + minis?

lytokk
2014-10-14, 08:10 AM
Just a thing about the 3rd vs 3.5 vs pathfinder vs 4th vs 5th editions. Just because it's newer doesn't make it inherently better. From what I've heard, 4th edition is very easy to get into, but my advice as a DM, is to run the edition you're most familiar with, specifically because you're a first time DM.

In regards to needing miniatures and a battle grid, a chessboard works just fine unless you want to go out and buy something. I say chess instead of checkers since chessboards have a wider variety of pieces.

If you're going to have 5-7 players and all of them new, you're going to need a session 0, which is where everyone comes together to create their characters. Its at this point you can look up the rules you need for each character and really know what you're getting into. If you decide to run a 3.0 game, chances are you're going to get some repeat classes with the number of players you have. But one of the best things about 3.0 is that you could end up with 7 fighters, who all are played completely different based on their selection of feats and their base stats. Also, in session 0 you could always run some simple combats, something not associated with the game you end up running just to get people used to the combat rules. Then, when you meet for session 1, they have some experience.

I do recommend starting the game at low levels. Prb level 2 works best. Level 1 characters are all a hit (lucky or unlucky) away from death. Lower levels means less tricks for the players to have to know, and less for you to have to know the rules to.

If rule questions come up, don't be afraid to enact rule zero, which is basically the rule of DM's call. If you can't find the explanation you need quickly, make a judgement call, and make a note to look it up after the game. Let the players know if you were right or wrong, and then tell them how its going to work from that point forward.

Jay R
2014-10-14, 09:36 AM
I strongly urge that first-time players start at level one. Don't complicate their decisions unnecessarily.

If you have 6-7 players in the game, you will usually be running for 5, since not everybody can show up each time.

Star with small adventures that can end at the end of the session, so it doesn't matter that not all the players showed up.

When something comes up that you don't know the rule for, don't ever spend more than two minutes looking up the rule. Make a decision and move on. If you turn out to be wrong, then you can deal with that at the beginning of the next session. If the game is fun, that's not a problem.

Make encounters that are too easy at first, while they are still learning what their characters can do. The first few encounters are about learning the rules, not about this specific challenge.

And have fun doing it. Your attitude, good or bad, will be infectious.

Madfellow
2014-10-14, 11:53 AM
Can I tell him that a party of 6-7 is really too much too handle for a game of DnD or am I just over-concerned?

I think this might be the most complex edition of those I'm considering?

I think you really need maps and figures to be able to play this?

I get the impression that this edition is most focussed on story telling and would therefor be easiest to run with beginners and without maps + minis?


1) I think you might be over-concerned just a little. Yes, a large group can be difficult to handle for a first-timer, but it's not catastrophic. The group will all be learning the system at the same time, and you guys can help each other get a handle on things. With that large a group, odds are good that at least one of you will become a Rules Lawyer. Identify who it is as quickly as you can and enlist this person's help. They will be invaluable.

2) 3e, 3.5, and Pathfinder put a big focus on character customization and are notoriously unbalanced. Spellcasting characters are inherently more powerful than non-casters, and are also more complicated to play. In addition, both 3.5 and Pathfinder have a lot of splatbooks published that add more races, classes, and other character options, adding to the potential complexity you might have to deal with. And with an inexperienced group, it'll be difficult to identify which character options will lead to balance issues down the road, and how to circumvent them. As such, I don't recommend it for a first-time group.

3) 4e is much more balanced, but it is fairly complex. If your group has played something like it before and liked it, then it might be the system for them, but know what you're getting into. You will need battle maps, but you can buy large laminated grid sheets and use dry-erase markers to draw them. Easy peasy.

4) 5e is easily the most beginner-friendly version of D&D. It's brand new, so it doesn't have 3e's splatbook problem, and it's really simple, so it doesn't have 4e's complexity problem. If you already have the starter set, I would highly recommend running the introductory adventure, but there are only 5 characters included so at least one player will have to make their own. You can get the basic rules from the D&D website at no cost. They're a quick read and they lay out the system in a simple, accessible way. This will let your group dip its toes into the water without paying any money up front. :smallbiggrin: If your group likes what they see, you can go from there. The Player's Handbook offers a greatly expanded breadth of character options for those who want them, and the Monster Manual is, well, the Monster Manual. A DM's best friend. :smallamused: 5e is much better balanced than 3e, and it doesn't require battle maps the way 4e does. I highly recommend it.

Hope this helps.

Lord Torath
2014-10-14, 01:40 PM
Also, please see this thread: So You Wanna Be A DM: A Potentially Helpful Guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?76474-So-You-Wanna-Be-A-DM-A-Potentially-Helpful-Guide-%28Reposted-and-Updated%29). Best of luck to you!

Galen
2014-10-14, 02:16 PM
So, you want to be a first time DM, and you have too many players, or at least player-candidates? One word for you: prescreening.

When I started my current campaign, I also had 7 player-candidates. And I couldn't say no to anyone, nor could I say yes to everyone. So I prescreened. Gently and politely, I sent pointers some web resources to my players before the first meeting, asking them to read up on the basic ruleset, some classes, possibly even pick a class. Basically outsourced some of the DM char-building work on them before the game. Not a significant burden, mind you. Only a total flake would find this to be too hard.

Guess what happened? Two players, suddenly and miraculously, found they have better things to do with their lives than make D&D characters. I guess the idea of being in a D&D game appealed to them in theory, but in practice they are the type of people who, oooh, never have time for anything.

And voila, just like that we were down to 5 dedicated players. Campaign started, and we haven't looked back.

Nahro
2014-10-15, 02:30 AM
When I started DMing, I had a group of 4 people, which grew to 6-7 (dont remember exactly) and then fell apart.

Sure a large Group is no deal breaker - but it is slowing things down - especially in Combat, and if you have some impatient players this can create boredom, which then leads to people not indulged in the game AND this can spread.
It might also be difficult to balance the amount of attention everybody gets -after all you want to make your character shine, and the DM has to provide situations to do so.

But you are aware of this, and I think your idea of splitting them into 2 Groups - that later on meet is not that bad of an idea. Everybody gets a chance to roleplay and see if they like it, and before the "real" group gets together you can sort out the people that dont really want to play / or are disruptive.

For the system: Everybody said it allready - take what you know, you said you played 2 Games allready, so take the system from that games.

For periphery: A battlegrid does help at least in DnD 3.5, and I heard aswell that 4e heavily relys on that as well, for Cheap use a Chess board, if you want something with a little bit more flair:

- Dungeon Tiles: Usually Cheap, and can be found on amazon, some of them worked really well for me
- Fantasy Boardgames: you can just snatch Figures and boards from fantasy themed Boardgames, even if there are not DnD, it might be a bit more expensive but you get some playingboards and figures that might fit the mood (I reccomend Descent - its also a really good and simple RPG Boardgame)
- Print out a Battlegrid - easy and quick, just print out a Battlegrid on your own and use that
- Buy a write-on erasable battelgrid: afaik they are not that expensive, and you can just draw Battlesituations on the fly

Hope I could help a little bit at least

Vitruviansquid
2014-10-15, 02:50 AM
As for which edition you should use, 4e is way way way too slow for that many players. On the (possibly) bright side, however, many people who want to try RPG's will end up realizing the hobby isn't really for them or they're really not up to the scheduling commitment, so you're probably going to have some players drop out. I know there's marking in DnD 4e... but that doesn't really make it anything at all like an MMO, at least where learning the game is concerned. 5e is probably a better bet than 3.5 because 3.5 is no longer being published and 5e seems to me a lot more streamlined and newbie-friendly than 3.5.

I also strongly suggest that you do not play DnD with so many people who are strangers to you or strangers to each other. Roleplaying is, to a lot of people, an inherently embarrassing thing to do. "Even in this day and age?" you say? Yes. You either want to play RPG's with people who are already in the RPG scene, or with people who are all familiar and comfortable with each other. When you RP with so many people who you don't know, not only will people be less likely to enjoy the game because it'll be a more intimidating atmosphere, but you might also end up with the normal cattiness that can arise from introducing one group of friends to another group of friends (of course, this time it'll be exponentially worse because you have multiple groups of people who don't know each other).

Am I bitter? Of course not. :smallannoyed:

Madfellow
2014-10-15, 08:33 AM
I also strongly suggest that you do not play DnD with so many people who are strangers to you or strangers to each other. Roleplaying is, to a lot of people, an inherently embarrassing thing to do. "Even in this day and age?" you say? Yes. You either want to play RPG's with people who are already in the RPG scene, or with people who are all familiar and comfortable with each other. When you RP with so many people who you don't know, not only will people be less likely to enjoy the game because it'll be a more intimidating atmosphere, but you might also end up with the normal cattiness that can arise from introducing one group of friends to another group of friends (of course, this time it'll be exponentially worse because you have multiple groups of people who don't know each other).


While it can be awkward at first, I've found that it usually doesn't take very long for people to start to come out of their shells, so to speak. If people are sitting around a table with character sheets and dice, it's usually because they want to roleplay, and sooner or later, with a little prompting, they'll start to do so.

One thing that makes it easier for me at least is that all of my characters are basically me, but just a little more badass. :smalltongue: At that point it's not so much roleplay as it is just playing.

JeenLeen
2014-10-15, 09:50 AM
Edit: basic thing I suggest: be honest that you are a new DM and this a new group, so there's a learning curve. State the goal to have fun, and you might have to fix/learn some of the rules as you go.



Can I tell him that a party of 6-7 is really too much too handle for a game of DnD or am I just overconcerned?


I think it would be too many. For 3.5 at least, a party of 4-5 is the norm. With more players, it can bog things down as conversations and especially combat can take a long time. Some players may get bored or disinterested, leading to others getting annoyed (especially in combat.) I think it should be fine -- and hopefully your friends will understand -- if you say you want to keep it to just people you know reasonably well. I feel more comfortable playing and DMing with people I know, and if you are friends, you are probably more able to talk through any conflict that may arise from disagreements about the game.

However, folk here have given good advice to handle a larger group. I don't think it would fix all the problems, but it might. Depends on your players. I do recommend banning things like animal companions, mounts, familiars (if used for more than RP and/or scouting), and other 'pets' (including summons and undead) if you have a large party. Combat will be slow enough already.

Since you think some won't stay interested, I think you all would have more fun if they don't come in the first place. Perhaps a pre-screening or Session 0, as others have suggested, would help. (And I definitely second Session 0, regardless of number of players. Also, limit splatbooks. You are all new players; that is an acceptable reason to limit it.)

If you start at level 1, maybe institute that dying is actually being knocked out, maybe until you hit level 3? I prefer games starting at level 3, but starting at level 1 is simpler.



Im not even sure yet which edition I'm gonna pick. Options are DnD 3.0, 4 or 5.

I've got the 3.0 edition Player handbook, DM guide and monster manual, but because 3.5 and pathfinder are things that exist, 3.0 must be unbalanced / not fun somehow, plus I think this might be the most complex edition of those I'm considering?


Whatever you're more familiar with. I like having a hard-copy of the book while playing, but you should at least have access to a PDF or free online source (3.5 and Pathfinder have good, free, and legal websites listing much information). D&D 3.5: http://www.d20srd.org/ Pathfinder: http://paizo.com/prd/


From online commentaries I get the impression that this edition is most focussed on story telling and would therefor be easiest to run with beginners and without maps + minis?

I think some sort of maps and figures to represent PCs and monsters helps. My group just used graph paper and pieces from RISK, though, so don't feel like you need to go out and buy things. Find something you have and use it. (Although if you have something fancier, it certainly could help.)

Exediron
2014-10-16, 12:01 AM
I strongly urge that first-time players start at level one. Don't complicate their decisions unnecessarily.

No - start'em at level 0 like in the old days, with 1 hp and no abilities. Make them earn first level! :smallwink:


So, you want to be a first time DM, and you have too many players, or at least player-candidates? One word for you: prescreening...

Interesting idea; never tried it, but it seems solid.

My selected tidbits of advice are:

a) The first session will basically consist of character creation, and if you're lucky, introduction. Be prepared to help people out with making their characters.
b) For the first two or three sessions the main hurdle to overcome is making sure the game actually happens. Once people are invested in the game it'll be much easier to get them to agree to times to have it, but before that a lot of people are prone to getting busy or just not showing up for whatever reason. A consistent, agreed-upon ahead of time schedule (every other Sunday, for example) is better than deciding each time as they come. Never leave one session without knowing when the next will occur; that means it won't.
c) Don't be afraid to alter your encounters, traps or puzzles halfway through if you realize you've over-estimated the party.
d) Someone will want to do something freakish and off the wall. Be prepared.
e) For sessions over about 3 hours, plan on a break for food. Pizza is your friend.

Good luck, and try to stay relaxed! DMing is very rewarding when it goes well, but can be pretty stressful. Try to work yourself up to becoming hyper-invested in it.

draken50
2014-10-16, 11:26 AM
Okay...

6 to 7 players... new players.
I will admit that I prefer to run for 5 as an absolute maximum, as it fits my GMing style best. If I'm running new players I try to keep it to 3 or 4. Why? Because new players take a lot more time, and have a lot more questions, and need to reference to books way more often. Particularly if you are the only one purchasing any of the books. Having one 3.5 phb for 6 players... that way lies madness.

You can absolutely set a limit to your number of players. If you are the GM you can and in many cases, must set the boundaries of what you are willing to do.

What edition to run.What edition do you have the most interest in running? That's the only question. You would be the purveyor of the game, players can join or not. If you already have a starter set and module for 5th that might be a good way to go. I have some complaints about 5th, but it seems to have streamlined a lot of unnecessary complications from 3.5