Running for a small group of (inexperienced) roleplayers - any tips?

[richardj]

I introduced some friends to roleplaying recently and two of them are interested in continuing. I'd like to run D&D 5e for them but, having only run a few games before (mostly pre-written adventures with what seems to be the expected group size - i.e. 4 or 5), I'm not sure how I would make sure the game runs smoothly (by which I mean balanced combat encounters, not too much difficulty navigating dungeons/following adventure structures).

Some more experienced friends have suggested adding one or two NPCs to the party, controlled by me but taking a background role for the most part (and possibly being controlled by the players during combat). This seems like a good idea to me, is there anything I should watch out for? Or any other tips or ideas?

Seeing as how they're inexperienced roleplayers, they probably won't try to 'balance' their two-character party (if they continue to use their characters from the introductory adventure, it'll be a rogue and a warlock). So, they won't have healing capabilities for example. Does that mean I should give them more opportunities to get potions and such?

[Yora]

While giving them NPC help might seem like a good idea first, it really only teaches them to play... well, let's call it "wrong". You will teach them habits that are very different from what you want them to learn in the long run. I think it's much wiser to show them the real deal of what they can expect in the long run right from the start.

What I think is best to avoid is to have the players learn rules of which they don't have any idea yet what they are for. It easily can end up with a big heap of information that doesn't mean anything to them yet. So I would really go with as simple a system of rules as possible. I believe 5th edition is comperatively simple in regard to other modern games. For the start, play it without any of the optional extras. For now you don't want them to know all the possible options but to grasp the basic principle. So play without feats. Are skills optional? Then play without those too. Race, class, and six abilities is enough for the start. Not having skills has the advantage that players don't have to fix their characters' abilities before they know what they do. Make things simple Dexterity checks or Intelligence checks.

Another good thing is to start with adventures that are light on combat. Combat requires the most rules to understand yet at the same time is the thing that everyone instantly understands as a concept. You don't need to teach players that they can swing a sword against a monster and it will die when it runs out of hit points. What new players need to learn is that they can explore, look at anything they want, and do anything they can think of with stuff that they find. They need to learn that they can talk to anyone and can take the conversation in any direction and that doing so can bring them real progress in their goals.

Also, start with simple scenarios. Don't start right with a massive world that they need to go saving immediately. Start with a simple ruin or cave that can be explored and in which they find interesting creatures, people, and magical wonders. That's more than eough to become familiar with all the principles of an RPG.

[richardj]

Yeah, in my limited experience 5e is very simple to learn. I used it for their introductory adventure (investigating a haunted fishing village, scooby-doo style) which they enjoyed and understood the rules well enough.
I've recently bought the 5e book 'tales from the Yawning Portal', which includes a series of unlinked smaller adventures. I was thinking of running the lowest-level one, the Sunless Citadel, which features an interesting dungeon inhabited by goblins and kobolds. To take your advice, if I cut back on the number of combat encounters (ie cut down on the number of enemies in the dungeon) and leave it to just the two of them, does that sound like a good idea? Thanks for the reply.

[Nupo]

if I cut back on the number of combat encounters (ie cut down on the number of enemies in the dungeon) and leave it to just the two of them, does that sound like a good idea?It should work just fine. And don't worry, if it all goes wrong and you end up with a total party kill, (all two of them) they can have fun creating new characters. I'm not being sarcastic here, most players like creating characters. Yea, they don't like it much when one dies, but it does give them the opportunity to create a new one.

[Shinn]

When I run for inexperienced players, I usually start the scenario in some fair or tavern ; and for each player, I show a part of the rules by a mini-game.
For example, I had a game with a Barbarian, a Bard, a Sorcerer and a Rogue :
- I teached light combat rules and saving throws by playing a brawl fight with the Barbarian,
- The Rogue threw darts, and thus learned Ability Checks,
- The Bard and the Sorcerer learned a bit of roleplaying and Skill Checks by having a social trial (the first one to woo someone won).
Of course, each one saw the other's example, and learned quite easily.

Then, for encouraging them to roleplaying and describing, I usually make my quest-giver NPC ask "Why should I get you, and not someone else ? Show me what you're worth" and wait for their ideas to make their characters shine ; everything is accepted without any dices or checks, as long as it's not clearly overpowered.
For example, with the previous array of characters, the Barbarian smashed huge rocks with a single swing of its mace and the Sorcerer called a lightning on a tree : I didn't make any checks and granted it, as it was their moment to shine, almost telling them "Now you understand that if you describe your character, they feel suddenly very heroic and impressive, which is good ; you can continue like that and they'll be a real hero".

I second the idea of cutting down the combat encounters, as it may be overwhelming at first ; however if your players are rooting for fight, don't hesitate to grant their wish by using the other half of combat encounters !

[richardj]

Thanks for the replies, folks, I'll bear all the advice in mind.

What I'm most concerned about, though, is that it's a -small- group. The only published adventures I've read/ran are all designed for more PCs than two - the reason I brought up their inexperience is to make it clear that, unlike experienced roleplayers, they won't be consciously or unconsciously making a more rounded party, skill-wise - they're just playing characters they think sound cool (which I'm 100% in support of. IMO as a player it sucks making a character to fill a gap).