New DM, Not-so-new Players

[Vidrina]

Hey guys!

So I've been sitting in on my friend's recent sessions, and it was beginning to seem like their DM was running out of both creative steam and patience for the players, and the players seemed to be getting frustrated with the DM. I've been doing a lot of research on the side as they play, and was designing my own campaign in the process.

I was asking the DM for advice, as well as the players for some insight on what they wanted in a campaign, and somehow accidentally wound up being volunteered for the DM position. I've maybe played one D&D session, but they're both encouraging and discouraging at the same time. The players are getting sick of the old DM and want a change of pace, but they all have been playing for months together and have more experience than me, and I'm afraid of them pulling the "we're more experienced than you" card. I'm open to advice, being new and all, but I still do have my own ideas of how specific things should be run that the old DM may disagree with.

Any advice on how to be my own DM while not causing excessive conflict? How do I learn the ropes while also pretending like I know what I'm doing? General new DM advice is welcome too, but I think I have a decent grasp of the DM's role. I just need to figure out a way to satisfy both myself and my players without the old DM trying to take back over or arguing with me about rules.

I have a lot of personal experience in forum RPs and LARP, both running sessions/plots and participating in them... Does that even translate over to D&D?

We're a group of about 7, playing 5e, for the curious.

[jaydubs]

There are a few DMing guides out there, though I don't have a single one in particular to recommend. Read over at least one of them.

Some advice on your situation in particular:

1. Trying to pretend you have a better grasp of the rules than you do is a fool's errand. Don't. Instead, acknowledge that you're newer than they are, but set guidelines about when and for how long rules can be discussed. For instance, you have final say on all rules in session. You realize those won't always be correct. But for pacing and time reasons, once you say a decision has been made, the discussion is over. They can bring up their concerns again after the game.

2. Additionally (or alternatively), pick someone you trust to manage some of the rules stuff for you. There's often 1 or 2 players with a firm grasp of the system, who you can assign as a quick reference. Retain the right for final decision, but it can ease the burden having someone to refer to on rules questions. Once you have a few games under your belt, this will probably stop being necessary. For instance, something like "what's the range on a longbow?" requires no interpretation and can easily be deferred to someone else with a rulebook on hand. Other examples include: How much does a warhorse cost? How much damage does a lance do? What does second wind do? Etc.

3. Make a list of any houserules you have in effect, and make sure your players have a copy.

4. Read up on a few examples of bad DMing. Make sure you don't fall into the obvious traps (that might not be so obvious when you're doing them). Like - railroading, taking a player vs DM attitude, running a Mary Sue DMPC, or dealing with out-of-character problems with in-character solutions.

[draken50]

Well I tend to go with a couple main things.

First is:
You are the GM the game is going to be run based on your understanding of it. I tend to be pretty hard and fast with this an make my decisions clear. I don't care if players were accustomed to particular house-rules ect. The GM's game means their interpretation of the rules. Now I do not mind discussion of rule sets I may not be totally familiar with, but if I say you can't use the spell Create Water in someones lungs they're going to live with that decision, and no I don't care that you built your character entirely to create water in peoples lungs. Additionally, I have in the past made the wrong choice I tend to err on the side of providing more power/options to my players and have had to "nerf" things, I always have that discussion at the beginning of the next session not the next time the "nerfed" thing is used. Also a good way to avoid argument with players over any sort of exploited rule decision ect. is to explain that they can live with the change, or have it used against them.

Second is:
Your game is only fun if the players feel like they have control in it. If you want to avoid contact work to avoid "controlling" your players, whether it's by forcing them down particular paths via "plot" (imprisoned,enslaved, ordered by whomever) through mechanics (this spell doesn't exist, unreasonably high DCs, rule changes) or just... being the GM ("I don't think your character would do that","Actually the shopkeeper is a level 20 wizard","A deity intervenes in your actions."). The best thing I learned as a GM was to create interesting goals/challenges instead of stories and develop modular/movable and sometimes adjustable encounters. Give reasonable consequences for player actions, good and bad. Use logic that makes sense. Loose GMs will let a level 1 monk kick down a large tree and that's cool, but most players I've met seem to prefer a gming style that says "I don't care what you roll, you aren't knocking that tree over with kicks." While also allowing any character to grab a tool and saw/cut/pull the thing down if it makes sense.

I also don't have the rogue roll to hit a stationary object with an ax,without proficiency, and thereby also avoid the stupid arguments about trees being living, having a discernible anatomy and how sneak attack should count as a result, blah blah rules ect.

[dream]

Tips for GMs from a player's perspective. (http://www.roleplayingtips.com/tips-for-gms-from-a-players-perspective/)

That site has tons of additional tips for running & playing TTRPGs. I'd suggest:
1. If it's your first time running an adventure, using a published adventure isn't a bad idea. D&D 5th has a few already out.

2. Tell your group "I'm new at this, so don't expect me to be great right out the box." Takes the pressure off of you and hopefully keeps your players from being impatient or rules-lawyers.

3. Set expectations about what you as GM and they as players want from the gaming experience. The same page tool (https://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/the-same-page-tool/) will help with this crucial step.

4. Know the rules or at least the rules your group will be using most often. The less you have to consult the books during a session, the better. If you're really not certain about a rule, make a ruling & move on. You can consult the rule later when the players aren't waiting for what comes next.

5. Relax! TTRPGs are all about fun and that should be your focus.

Hope this helps:smallsmile:

[jedipotter]

1.Try and keep things simple. Don't use anything you don't know about or are not sure about.

2.Stick to the rules as written. Don't do any houserules.

3.Don't do any custom stuff. This is a huge mistake of new DMs: they just put outright crazy stuff in the game and don't define it well. So just don't do it. Good by the book or at least just tweak by the book.

4.If you plan to do something, read up on it. Maybe even find a forum to ask questions if you have any.

5.Make notes and cheat sheets.

[Knaight]

The absolute key here is that you let the players know that you're new, and get them to actively help. It's way easier to GM for proactive players who are trying to keep things moving along than it is for just about everyone else, and if the players are experienced then they can pull that off. They can also choose to do things like try to deliberately derail things (and I mean metagaming to try and wreck the game here, not just doing something unexpected) - if you just ask the players to try and go for the first one, most will. If you try to bluff having more knowledge than you do and take a more adversarial approach, option 2 starts looking inviting.

[Vidrina]

Thanks for the advice guys.

First session went pretty smoothly, with only a few kinks in combat (I forgot to roll initiative for the creatures the party was fighting, and one of the characters wanted to try a grapple), but aside from that, the old DM helped my make a few rulings that we fixed up after the session, and he sort of helped me along in general - he was much less controlling than he seemed earlier on.

Another little issue we had was the giving of exp after the session. The players were used to gaining full exp from combat (i.e., they fought two bandits with 1/8 challenge ratings each, so going by the dm manual, this encounter gave about 75 exp, and they're used to gaining all 75 exp per character.) and I'm making them divide the exp among themselves. Am I doing it wrong? It seems like they're going to take a long time to level up... Is that how it's supposed to be?

[Arkhaic]

@Vidrina That's really more up to group preferences than anything else. I prefer to vastly speed level-ups for the first few levels, at the very least until the point where a lucky crit might kill anyone.




I also don't have the rogue roll to hit a stationary object with an ax,without proficiency, and thereby also avoid the stupid arguments about trees being living, having a discernible anatomy and how sneak attack should count as a result, blah blah rules ect.

Whoever talks about that is trying to pull a fast one on you if they actually know the rules (or have read the text of their own class features)—it's wrong and called out in the rules 5 different times:


Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature.

Anything with no Charisma score is an object, not a creature.

Note that regular plants, such as one finds growing in gardens and fields, lack Wisdom and Charisma scores (see Nonabilities) and are not creatures, but objects, even though they are alive.

Not subject to critical hits

A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks

[gom jabbarwocky]

.... I'm making them divide the exp among themselves. Am I doing it wrong? It seems like they're going to take a long time to level up... Is that how it's supposed to be?

This might be an edition-dependent thing, but if I recall correctly, you're doing it right. This is why sometimes solo encounters can be considered very desirable, because you don't have to split the XP with those parasites the other PCs.

However, Arkhaic is also correct in that, frankly, who cares what the book says, it's your game and you can dole out XP however you want. It's not unusual to do things differently, especially if, like many others, you want the PCs to get through the first few levels relatively quickly.

[draken50]

Whoever talks about that is trying to pull a fast one on you if they actually know the rules (or have read the text of their own class features)—it's wrong and called out in the rules 5 different times:

It was more of a,"I don't run into rules arguments as much because I don't use them for every little thing" kind of example, but yes. You are absolutely right.

[Knaight]

Another little issue we had was the giving of exp after the session. The players were used to gaining full exp from combat (i.e., they fought two bandits with 1/8 challenge ratings each, so going by the dm manual, this encounter gave about 75 exp, and they're used to gaining all 75 exp per character.) and I'm making them divide the exp among themselves. Am I doing it wrong? It seems like they're going to take a long time to level up... Is that how it's supposed to be?

This is correct, unless there's some esoteric game which has initiative, 1/8 challenge ratings, a DM manual, and experience on that order which does something differently. As for how long it takes, the game generally assumes that you'll see larger groups. If there had been 10 bandits with the 1/8 challenge rating, the experience is notable.

With that said, it's not an uncommon house rule to scrap experience entirely and just level every few sessions.

[Thrudd]

Another little issue we had was the giving of exp after the session. The players were used to gaining full exp from combat (i.e., they fought two bandits with 1/8 challenge ratings each, so going by the dm manual, this encounter gave about 75 exp, and they're used to gaining all 75 exp per character.) and I'm making them divide the exp among themselves. Am I doing it wrong? It seems like they're going to take a long time to level up... Is that how it's supposed to be?

Yes, that's how it's supposed to be. In 5e, the first few levels go really fast, and then it slows down. Another thing to note, is that the method of awarding xp really should be transparent to the players. Throughout the session, you keep track of the challenges they overcome and the xp awards for each. At the end, you divide it up and tell them each how much xp they've earned. The specifics of where each point came from is not something they need to know. This is because the book is a guideline, you are completely justified in awarding more or less xp if you want to. The players should not be holding the dmg or the monster manual up to you and saying "we're supposed to get this much xp for that monster!". That is something they shouldn't be looking at, those are the DM's books only, to use or modify however you see fit.

[Beta Centauri]

Don't worry about the rules at all. If a player tells you they're doing something, let them. If they tell you something doesn't work, go with that, and ask them what would work to achieve what you're going for. If this removes the challenge for them, ask them how they'd like to be challenged.

As far as creativity goes, tap into the players for ideas. People engage more and remember better things they had a hand in creating, so bring them on-board, during play. Need an NPC name? Ask the players. They're not going to remember the one the GM gives them anyway. Need a location? Give the basic idea for it, and ask the players what else is noteworthy about it. Not sure why the bad guys are doing what they're doing? Ask the players.

[Bob of Mage]

Another little issue we had was the giving of exp after the session. The players were used to gaining full exp from combat (i.e., they fought two bandits with 1/8 challenge ratings each, so going by the dm manual, this encounter gave about 75 exp, and they're used to gaining all 75 exp per character.) and I'm making them divide the exp among themselves. Am I doing it wrong? It seems like they're going to take a long time to level up... Is that how it's supposed to be?

This is where houserules enter the picture. If there's one thing that's hazy as hell, it's giving out exp. Do you give exp based on the actions of each party member(guy who failed his will save and hid in a closet covered in pee during the fight gets nothing)? Do you give it out to the group evenly (helps stop parties from trying to game as much exp for themselves and thus always be near the action)? Do you follow the book to the letter for exp gain rate (always follow the preset number of challages per level)? Do you give exp for doing important or smart stuff (saving the kingdom by getting the dragon that's threating it to instead become an ally after showing it the threat of the nearby undead army, is worth more exp than just killing the dragon)? Do you just ingore exp and advance the party when you feel they are ready (so when the plot allows downtime and you feel ready, instead of suddenly the wizard learns two new spells while being knocked out cold in a fight in a hole in the ground)?

Just so you know I do have a bit of bias.....