Help withe a DM who doesn't follow rules

[caoshunter22]

I'm new to D&D and I'm dealing with a DM who appears to be playing with a lot of house rules. For an example, according to the DM, HP for a level for 1 character is calculated by the character's dice +2d6. As I understand it level 1 HP is determined by the character's dice plus the constitution modifier. Even after bringing this up to the DM and even after he looked things up he said that he'll keep his rule for balancing purposes. Or with spellcasting modifier, the DM said it was just our proficiency and not taking ability modifiers into the equation. Granted I'm new to the game so I could be wrong. If I'm right is there the way to approach the DM to persuade him to follow the rules rather than making up rules from a lack of understanding of the game.

[Whit]

Have him explain his reason for house rules.
Sometimes lvl 1 hit pints are considered low survivabitity rate that it’s increased.

As fir spells. Who knows maybe if he’s new he doesn’t get it yet.

[darknite]

The rules should be a covenant between the DM and the players. If a DM elects to modify or ignore the base rules set, they need to do so with the buy in of the players. If they don't, find another game. You're there to have fun, not be jerked around by a DM who keeps the rules in a state of constant flux and uncertainty.

[Man_Over_Game]

This is a pretty common problem, and as an experienced player, it's very frustrating.

The best thing you can do is talk to the DM on the side for him to explain both what's supposed to happen and what he makes a houserule, and ask if he can make a list of his houserules. If he takes offense to it (thinking that you know better or that you're questioning his judgment), just explain that you're very new, and you want to fully understand what's standard and what has been modified, so you don't mistake one of his houserules as a standard rule (which happens a LOT).

DnD 5E is intentionally easy to modify. It has some strong structure, but a lot of it relies heavily on the DM's common sense rather than what's strictly written.

If your DM is good, and has monsters who are weak to saving throws (to incentivize more tactical decision making rather than attacking each turn), but also wants to increase the starting health of all players to cut down on min-maxing players who always start with 1 level into Fighter/Barbarian, then those decisions make some sense as house rules.

But it's important for him to actually lay them out. If he has no idea what he's doing, then both of you will recognize that after you ask him to create some structure around it. If he knows what he's doing, then he'll already have the houserules fully understood, and there's little reason for concern.

[nickl_2000]

The HP one is wrong, but if the DM wants to give you more HP at level one that isn't unheard of. I would just let that one go.


As for the Spell Modifier, this is a deal breaker. You wouldn't be able to play a caster who causes damage or controls with spells at all. Since the critters in the MM tell you flat out the spell DC, you will be massacred by this and not have a lot of recourse. The best bet would be to show the DM where that is incorrect, especially since the PHB is pretty clear on how Spell Attack Mod and Spell Attack Modifier. Take page 114 for wizards. It very clearly says

Spell save DC = 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Intelligence modifier
Spell attack modifier = your proficiency bonus + your intelligence modifier

All other casters have the exact same thing. If you show the DM this it should change things. If it doesn't, consider a different table, playing a martial character, or DMing yourself.

[Unoriginal]

Your DM is indeed houseruling. But it's his right as a DM, and the only way to stop this from happening is to talk with him and convince him those houserules shouldn't be used because X, Y or Z.

If you can't convince him of this AND those houserules ruin your enjoyment of the game, stop playing with this DM. It is your right as a player, and even not playing is better than spending hours with a game you don't enjoy.

[Demonslayer666]

That's pretty common in my experience. Most DMs have their own rules and tweaks.

The point of the game is to have fun. If you aren't having fun, let him know what would make it better.

I would avoid pointing out their mistakes mid-game. Wait until after the session, and then bring it up politely.

[MilkmanDanimal]

I'll echo what everybody else said. If your DM is trying for a low-magic world, well, yeah, that's one way to make magic less reliable. If you don't like that (and I wouldn't), your options are pretty much either "find new game" or "don't play a spellcaster".

It's going to make magic patently crappy.

[AHF]

I'll echo what everybody else said. If your DM is trying for a low-magic world, well, yeah, that's one way to make magic less reliable. If you don't like that (and I wouldn't), your options are pretty much either "find new game" or "don't play a spellcaster".

It's going to make magic patently crappy.

Wouldn’t go quite that far as lots of good spells wouldn’t be affected (particularly buff spells, summoning spells and healing) but it is a massive penalty that negatively impacts the options available to any caster.

[JNAProductions]

The HP rule makes sense-level 1 characters are FRAGILE, so adding some durability hardly goes amiss. (If your DM insists that's RAW, though, that's a bad sign. If they just say "I know that's not the rules, but I like it better," that's fine.)

The magic change, though... If it's applied to EVERYONE (including NPCs and monsters), then it might be okay. But I'd have a serious talk with your DM about it, and what they're trying to accomplish.

[caoshunter22]

This is a pretty common problem, and as an experienced player, it's very frustrating.

The best thing you can do is talk to the DM on the side for him to explain both what's supposed to happen and what he makes a houserule, and ask if he can make a list of his houserules. If he takes offense to it (thinking that you know better or that you're questioning his judgment), just explain that you're very new, and you want to fully understand what's standard and what has been modified, so you don't mistake one of his houserules as a standard rule (which happens a LOT).

DnD 5E is intentionally easy to modify. It has some strong structure, but a lot of it relies heavily on the DM's common sense rather than what's strictly written.

If your DM is good, and has monsters who are weak to saving throws (to incentivize more tactical decision making rather than attacking each turn), but also wants to increase the starting health of all players to cut down on min-maxing players who always start with 1 level into Fighter/Barbarian, then those decisions make some sense as house rules.

But it's important for him to actually lay them out. If he has no idea what he's doing, then both of you will recognize that after you ask him to create some structure around it. If he knows what he's doing, then he'll already have the houserules fully understood, and there's little reason for concern.

Okay, thank you for the info.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm new to D&D and I'm dealing with a DM who appears to be playing with a lot of house rules. For an example, according to the DM, HP for a level for 1 character is calculated by the character's dice +2d6. As I understand it level 1 HP is determined by the character's dice plus the constitution modifier. Even after bringing this up to the DM and even after he looked things up he said that he'll keep his rule for balancing purposes. Or with spellcasting modifier, the DM said it was just our proficiency and not taking ability modifiers into the equation. Granted I'm new to the game so I could be wrong. If I'm right is there the way to approach the DM to persuade him to follow the rules rather than making up rules from a lack of understanding of the game.

How new a DM is this DM, to both 5e D&D and table-top RPGs in general? Initial hit points being (a roll of, I am assuming) your initial dice based on class, plus 2d6 is hardly the most unacceptable house rule, however it is a little bit odd. The fact that they seemed not to realize it was a house rule is even odder. The spellcasting modifier being attribute-independent is a huge change to how spellcasting works (pretty much indicating don't bother using spells that are resisted, and seriously think about whether you want to be a spellcaster).

I say this not because houseruling is bad, or houseruling by new DMs is bad, As the two-weapon fighting thread currently going on indicates, it isn't like all the rules as they stand facilitate all playstyles and play decisions equally anyways. However, in general house rules, especially those that your players aren't necessarily happy with, should occur for a specific reason. Something more than the DM misremembered or misunderstood and doesn't want to relearn it. Ask your DM the 'Why's' on the rules. Tell them that the one thing you won't stand for is not hearing an explanation (I for one can put up with a lot of DM decisions that I wouldn't make. Not respecting me enough to put down the dice long enough to explain the whys and why-nots is not one of them). And if that flat out makes something you want to do impossible or implausible, try to negotiate. There's nothing wrong with saying, "If you don't like this, this and this consequence of the normal rules, that's fine. But I really wanted to do this, that, and the other thing, and those are hurt by your house rule as well. Can we find another way around this problem?"

[caoshunter22]

How new a DM is this DM, to both 5e D&D and table-top RPGs in general? Initial hit points being (a roll of, I am assuming) your initial dice based on class, plus 2d6 is hardly the most unacceptable house rule, however it is a little bit odd. The fact that they seemed not to realize it was a house rule is even odder. The spellcasting modifier being attribute-independent is a huge change to how spellcasting works (pretty much indicating don't bother using spells that are resisted, and seriously think about whether you want to be a spellcaster).

I say this not because houseruling is bad, or houseruling by new DMs is bad, As the two-weapon fighting thread currently going on indicates, it isn't like all the rules as they stand facilitate all playstyles and play decisions equally anyways. However, in general house rules, especially those that your players aren't necessarily happy with, should occur for a specific reason. Something more than the DM misremembered or misunderstood and doesn't want to relearn it. Ask your DM the 'Why's' on the rules. Tell them that the one thing you won't stand for is not hearing an explanation (I for one can put up with a lot of DM decisions that I wouldn't make. Not respecting me enough to put down the dice long enough to explain the whys and why-nots is not one of them). And if that flat out makes something you want to do impossible or implausible, try to negotiate. There's nothing wrong with saying, "If you don't like this, this and this consequence of the normal rules, that's fine. But I really wanted to do this, that, and the other thing, and those are hurt by your house rule as well. Can we find another way around this problem?"

The DM claimed that this was the first time DMing and has only played a part of one campaign prior to this.

[Man_Over_Game]

How new a DM is this DM, to both 5e D&D and table-top RPGs in general? Initial hit points being (a roll of, I am assuming) your initial dice based on class, plus 2d6 is hardly the most unacceptable house rule, however it is a little bit odd. The fact that they seemed not to realize it was a house rule is even odder. The spellcasting modifier being attribute-independent is a huge change to how spellcasting works (pretty much indicating don't bother using spells that are resisted, and seriously think about whether you want to be a spellcaster).

I say this not because houseruling is bad, or houseruling by new DMs is bad, As the two-weapon fighting thread currently going on indicates, it isn't like all the rules as they stand facilitate all playstyles and play decisions equally anyways. However, in general house rules, especially those that your players aren't necessarily happy with, should occur for a specific reason. Something more than the DM misremembered or misunderstood and doesn't want to relearn it. Ask your DM the 'Why's' on the rules. Tell them that the one thing you won't stand for is not hearing an explanation (I for one can put up with a lot of DM decisions that I wouldn't make. Not respecting me enough to put down the dice long enough to explain the whys and why-nots is not one of them). And if that flat out makes something you want to do impossible or implausible, try to negotiate. There's nothing wrong with saying, "If you don't like this, this and this consequence of the normal rules, that's fine. But I really wanted to do this, that, and the other thing, and those are hurt by your house rule as well. Can we find another way around this problem?"

+1 for Willie D's summary. Very well said.

[Grimmnist]

How new a DM is this DM, to both 5e D&D and table-top RPGs in general? Initial hit points being (a roll of, I am assuming) your initial dice based on class, plus 2d6 is hardly the most unacceptable house rule, however it is a little bit odd. The fact that they seemed not to realize it was a house rule is even odder. The spellcasting modifier being attribute-independent is a huge change to how spellcasting works (pretty much indicating don't bother using spells that are resisted, and seriously think about whether you want to be a spellcaster).

I say this not because houseruling is bad, or houseruling by new DMs is bad, As the two-weapon fighting thread currently going on indicates, it isn't like all the rules as they stand facilitate all playstyles and play decisions equally anyways. However, in general house rules, especially those that your players aren't necessarily happy with, should occur for a specific reason. Something more than the DM misremembered or misunderstood and doesn't want to relearn it. Ask your DM the 'Why's' on the rules. Tell them that the one thing you won't stand for is not hearing an explanation (I for one can put up with a lot of DM decisions that I wouldn't make. Not respecting me enough to put down the dice long enough to explain the whys and why-nots is not one of them). And if that flat out makes something you want to do impossible or implausible, try to negotiate. There's nothing wrong with saying, "If you don't like this, this and this consequence of the normal rules, that's fine. But I really wanted to do this, that, and the other thing, and those are hurt by your house rule as well. Can we find another way around this problem?"

I would second all of this!

I think caoshunter22 was planning on playing a Cleric, unfortunately due to the bizarre spell casting rules a lot of your spells are going to be pretty crap. The support/healing spells will be fine, but any spell that affects an enemy will not be useful. If you want to still play a Cleric under this ruleset (and the ruleset doesn't change) you really don't need to get Wisdom over 14, instead focus Strength first and Constitution second. The other option I would recommend is take one or two levels of cleric (for Healing Word and Bless), then just go fighter the rest of the way so you can do actual damage.

[JNAProductions]

How new a DM is this DM, to both 5e D&D and table-top RPGs in general? Initial hit points being (a roll of, I am assuming) your initial dice based on class, plus 2d6 is hardly the most unacceptable house rule, however it is a little bit odd. The fact that they seemed not to realize it was a house rule is even odder. The spellcasting modifier being attribute-independent is a huge change to how spellcasting works (pretty much indicating don't bother using spells that are resisted, and seriously think about whether you want to be a spellcaster).

I say this not because houseruling is bad, or houseruling by new DMs is bad, As the two-weapon fighting thread currently going on indicates, it isn't like all the rules as they stand facilitate all playstyles and play decisions equally anyways. However, in general house rules, especially those that your players aren't necessarily happy with, should occur for a specific reason. Something more than the DM misremembered or misunderstood and doesn't want to relearn it. Ask your DM the 'Why's' on the rules. Tell them that the one thing you won't stand for is not hearing an explanation (I for one can put up with a lot of DM decisions that I wouldn't make. Not respecting me enough to put down the dice long enough to explain the whys and why-nots is not one of them). And if that flat out makes something you want to do impossible or implausible, try to negotiate. There's nothing wrong with saying, "If you don't like this, this and this consequence of the normal rules, that's fine. But I really wanted to do this, that, and the other thing, and those are hurt by your house rule as well. Can we find another way around this problem?"

I bolded the big bit.

There should always be a reason for a house rule. If there isn't a reason, it shouldn't be in there. If there is a reason, the DM should be able to tell it to you and help you udnerstand what they're trying to accomplish.

[Willie the Duck]

The DM claimed that this was the first time DMing and has only played a part of one campaign prior to this.

Okay, well, I'd suggest suggesting that if you discover that you are not doing something by-the-book, you should probably switch to the way the book does it unless there is a strong overarching reason the change should stay. The calculation of a spellcaster's saving throw DC/spell attack MOD has some pretty darn serious implications to the way people play. That really shouldn't happen just because the DM doesn't know the rules real well.

On the other hand, try to be fairly accommodating and non-judgmental. DMing, especially new DMing is hard to do. And no one likes trying to learn something while people keep finding ways in which you are 'screwing it up,' or the like.

[Grimmnist]

The DM claimed that this was the first time DMing and has only played a part of one campaign prior to this.

In that case you should politely let them know that the spellcasting rules are a gargantuan nerf to any casting class making most of them unusable. Probably use nicer words than me, I'm really just flustered by these houserules at this point.

-Edit: Listen to Willie the Duck he words things better than me lol-

[Man_Over_Game]

And out of nowhere, Rangers are now the best casters in the game.

[Guy Lombard-O]

And out of nowhere, Rangers are now the best casters in the game.

LOL! That's great! :smallbiggrin:

[caoshunter22]

Okay, well, I'd suggest suggesting that if you discover that you are not doing something by-the-book, you should probably switch to the way the book does it unless there is a strong overarching reason the change should stay. The calculation of a spellcaster's saving throw DC/spell attack MOD has some pretty darn serious implications to the way people play. That really shouldn't happen just because the DM doesn't know the rules real well.

On the other hand, try to be fairly accommodating and non-judgmental. DMing, especially new DMing is hard to do. And no one likes trying to learn something while people keep finding ways in which you are 'screwing it up,' or the like.

It's difficult to be non-judgmental when the DM kills of my first character on my very first game.

[KorvinStarmast]

Or with spellcasting modifier, the DM said it was just our proficiency and not taking ability modifiers into the equation. Granted I'm new to the game so I could be wrong. If I'm right is there the way to approach the DM to persuade him to follow the rules rather than making up rules from a lack of understanding of the game.
Did you show him the rules on that, and ask him why he nerfed your spell casters? That's a rather big nerf.
Here's what I'd offer to say:

I want to play D&D 5e. That formula, for spell DC's, is a core game mechanic. I can't enjoy this game if you are going to throw the engine out of the car.
I'll echo this previous point:

The point of the game is to have fun. If you aren't having fun, let him know what would make it better. Playing the PC as built is what you want to make it better.

Wait until after the session, and then bring it up politely.
That too.

If he's a new DM, here is my advice to him as someone who first started to DM in about 1976. Please feel free to share this during an out of game conversation.


You have to know how the game works, properly, before you start to improvise. When you start out, go plain vanilla until you learn how the thing works (and how it doesn't work).
The additional HP isn't fatal; it helps level 1 PC's survive.

[Man_Over_Game]

It's difficult to be non-judgmental when the DM kills of my first character on my very first game.

Hey, sometimes, God screws up. I'm looking at you, Platypus.

It's a learning curve to DM, but there's a good rule that applies to almost anything in life: There is never a thing as too much communication.

[nickl_2000]

There is never a thing as too much communication.

You have never met my aunt or heard her conspiracy theories or her overly informative stories about her medical conditions

[Doug Lampert]

The DM claimed that this was the first time DMing and has only played a part of one campaign prior to this.

My guess would be that the DM running his previous campaign used those house rules, and he never realized that they were house-rules.

I'd have no objection to those rules myself. Casters will still be fine, their spell selection just changes some and they only use attack spells that target a weak save. Take a cleric or sword bard or buffing sorcerer or something similar if you want to play a caster and don't want to worry about your attack spells being crap. A Paladin or Ranger will hardly care at all. Melee types are strengthened by the HP change, so at low levels the party as a whole will probably be as good or better than expected by the system (weapons do more damage anyway at low levels, so the main damage dealers are on a straight plus, and healing and buffing and summoning are all at full strength from the casters).

Presumably his previous game was aiming for low-magic, and possibly low level play, and if his only previous experience was with these house-rules then he may well be better off running with them.

Unfortunately, if he doesn't know they're house rules, then he can't give you a full list, which is a potential minefield for the game.

If you are having fun, then stay in the game. If not, then talk to the DM some more about what he's doing and why.

[caoshunter22]

I would second all of this!

I think caoshunter22 was planning on playing a Cleric, unfortunately due to the bizarre spell casting rules a lot of your spells are going to be pretty crap. The support/healing spells will be fine, but any spell that affects an enemy will not be useful. If you want to still play a Cleric under this ruleset (and the ruleset doesn't change) you really don't need to get Wisdom over 14, instead focus Strength first and Constitution second. The other option I would recommend is take one or two levels of cleric (for Healing Word and Bless), then just go fighter the rest of the way so you can do actual damage.

So My character is a cleric following the life domain and if did put levels into fighter would I be able to take an Archetype?

[stoutstien]

Sounds like new DM jitters. Let him settle in for a few weeks and the sticker shock of alot of spells will level out and most likely will remove the casting changes

[JeenLeen]

So My character is a cleric following the life domain and if did put levels into fighter would I be able to take an Archetype?

In short, yes.
Longer: you advance as a fighter independent of your level as a cleric.* So once you reach your third level of the Fighter class, regardless of your character level, you pick an Archetype. Likewise for all other things you advance as you advance as Fighter.

*caveat: cantrips are often based on character level, not class level, so this can differ, if your cantrip has something that changes based on level. Also, overall spellcasting for cleric could change if you go the spellcasting fighter archetype, as per the Multiclassing section of the Player's Handbook.
You also don't get all the proficiencies a level 1 fighter would get. Note the Multiclassing section to see what you get.
But, generally, they're independent.

[Willie the Duck]

It's difficult to be non-judgmental when the DM kills of my first character on my very first game.

I remember you mentioning that. Friendly fire from an ally NPC, if I recall. Okay, he's screwing up. Just, hands down, making mistakes. My only point is that a new DM will do that. He can't just 'be better at this' by wanting it harder (although diligent respect of your feelings is important), he has to learn by practice.


So My character is a cleric following the life domain and if did put levels into fighter would I be able to take an Archetype?

Clerics pick their archtype at level 1. Fighters do so at level 3. If you wanted to do the 1-2 level start as cleric and then go into fighter, you could have both archetypes by 4 or 5.

[caoshunter22]

I remember you mentioning that. Friendly fire from an ally NPC, if I recall. Okay, he's screwing up. Just, hands down, making mistakes. My only point is that a new DM will do that. He can't just 'be better at this' by wanting it harder (although diligent respect of your feelings is important), he has to learn by practice.



Clerics pick their archtype at level 1. Fighters do so at level 3. If you wanted to do the 1-2 level start as cleric and then go into fighter, you could have both archetypes by 4 or 5.

Hopefully, some practice and me or someone who he will listen to will help him become a better DM.

[KorvinStarmast]

Hopefully, some practice and me or someone who he will listen to will help him become a better DM. Every spell NPC DC in the book, and every save in the book, was built with the 8+prof+bonus in mind. Has he gone in and red penciled the DC of every spell cast by a monster in the book?
I doubt it. Bring that gross error to his attention.

My advice to any new DM:

If you are too lazy to read the basics of how the game works, and know what they are, then stop being a DM, go back and get the basics down, and then start being a DM again.
Being a DM takes a little effort. It's worth it, but it is a requirement.

[Grimmnist]

Hopefully, some practice and me or someone who he will listen to will help him become a better DM.

Best of luck, remember that change takes time so be careful not to overwhelm the DM with change requests all at once. To start I'd recommend just asking for a written list of the houserules, hopefully this causes the DM to think through their houserules maybe even fixes many of the mechanical problems.

This might be obvious but remember to ask him to give you the written rules not tell him. I'd probably say "As a new player it has been difficult for me to learn both the D&D core rules and your houserules at the same time, would you be able to make a written list of your house rules? That would really help me learn the mechanics and make better decisions in game."

[caoshunter22]

Every spell NPC DC in the book, and every save in the book, was built with the 8+prof+bonus in mind. Has he gone in and red penciled the DC of every spell cast by a monster in the book?
I doubt it. Bring that gross error to his attention.

My advice to any new DM:

If you are too lazy to read the basics of how the game works, and know what they are, then stop being a DM, go back and get the basics down, and then start being a DM again.
Being a DM takes a little effort. It's worth it, but it is a requirement.

I'm not 100% sure if he has red-penciled the DC from every spell cast. I have brought up some of the things that I've read and what people have told me on this forum. I've also talked to there people in the group and they told me they brought other issues to his attention. So it's not the best way to be introduced to the game.

[caoshunter22]

Best of luck, remember that change takes time so be careful not to overwhelm the DM with change requests all at once. To start I'd recommend just asking for a written list of the houserules, hopefully this causes the DM to think through their houserules maybe even fixes many of the mechanical problems.

This might be obvious but remember to ask him to give you the written rules not tell him. I'd probably say "As a new player it has been difficult for me to learn both the D&D core rules and your houserules at the same time, would you be able to make a written list of your house rules? That would really help me learn the mechanics and make better decisions in game."

I've asked(not that eloquently) and hopefully, he responds with an email or text message listing out the house rules he's made.

[AHF]

I'm not 100% sure if he has red-penciled the DC from every spell cast. I have brought up some of the things that I've read and what people have told me on this forum. I've also talked to there people in the group and they told me they brought other issues to his attention. So it's not the best way to be introduced to the game.

Being the DM is not always a fun and rewarding thing so kudos to him for agreeing to fill those shoes that many players have no interest in filling.

That said, I might try to gather the people in the group together and try to approach him in a positive way and ask that he implement spell casting as described in the player's handbook. It really changes spellcasting dramatically and there is no just no good reason for it. The creatures in the Monster Manual and all published content are already balanced around the system as written. There is no big benefit unlike the potential argument about survivability for 1st level characters justifying extra starting HP.

I would argue that:


It provides meaning to the caster's primary stat (otherwise something like INT doesn't mean much) where it should be the character's primary focus.
It allows for use of spells that trigger saving throws as designed - as mentioned above, the MM is written with this system in mind.
It puts spell attacks on par with weapon attacks. Why allow a DEX fighter to get DEX + PRO but allow a spellcaster to only get PRO as a bonus when attacking? That makes no sense. For attack cantrips, these are already suboptimal compared to melee classes as they generally do not get a damage bonus tied to your stat. This unnecessarily makes these obsolete.
By nerfing the spellcasting chasis, it strongly puts a bias towards certain mechanics and multiclassing to make up for the lack of viability of attack and save spells.


With more than just you putting this out there with a theme of "we really appreciate what you are doing and collectively think this will make the game more fun for all of us while not upsetting the campaign you are running", perhaps he will be more open to suggestion than if it is just you after your first ever session.

[caoshunter22]

Being the DM is not always a fun and rewarding thing so kudos to him for agreeing to fill those shoes that many players have no interest in filling.

That said, I might try to gather the people in the group together and try to approach him in a positive way and ask that he implement spell casting as described in the player's handbook. It really changes spellcasting dramatically and there is no just no good reason for it. The creatures in the Monster Manual and all published content are already balanced around the system as written. There is no big benefit unlike the potential argument about survivability for 1st level characters justifying extra starting HP.

I would argue that:


It provides meaning to the caster's primary stat (otherwise something like INT doesn't mean much) where it should be the character's primary focus.
It allows for use of spells that trigger saving throws as designed - as mentioned above, the MM is written with this system in mind.
It puts spell attacks on par with weapon attacks. Why allow a DEX fighter to get DEX + PRO but allow a spellcaster to only get PRO as a bonus when attacking? That makes no sense. For attack cantrips, these are already suboptimal compared to melee classes as they generally do not get a damage bonus tied to your stat. This unnecessarily makes these obsolete.
By nerfing the spellcasting chasis, it strongly puts a bias towards certain mechanics and multiclassing to make up for the lack of viability of attack and save spells.


With more than just you putting this out there with a theme of "we really appreciate what you are doing and collectively think this will make the game more fun for all of us while not upsetting the campaign you are running", perhaps he will be more open to suggestion than if it is just you after your first ever session.

My intent was to get help to figure out how to help him become a good DM. I probably come off really negative to and making it seem like I want him to fail which isn't the case. It's something I definitely need to work on in general. However being new to the game and being overwhelmed with rules I have to learn from the PHB and the rules he's making up I've been getting very frustrated. So with very little communication between me and the DM, I'm left wondering are the rules he made up intentional or did he make them up because he doesn't understand the rules of the game.

[Keravath]

Just a couple of comments ...

He is a new DM ... so ideally the players need to give him some leeway. However, quite often new DMs have "new DM syndrome"

1) What the DM says must always be correct. So they feel they can't make mistakes and fix them without losing face.

2)It is THEIR game so what they say goes. (This is actually so far from the truth it is laughable because there is no game without the players AND no game without the DM ... so every game is a cooperative exercise. As a result, a DM needs to keep this in mind).

3) Sometimes DMs feel that they need to customize the rules just to leave their mark on it. However, these changes are usually gut reactions based on biased observations and without extensive play testing. The D&D base game HAS been extensively playtested and is reasonably balanced in most aspects ... many DMs tweak things they don't like or feel are OP or not realistic but in many cases this is done based on extensive experience ... a new DM really should avoid house rules until they have played/run a campaign or two.


Anyway, if this is their first time DMing AND they have only played a few sessions previously then most of the mistakes are probably not house rules but either straight up errors in understanding the rules (which they might be too embarrassed to admit) or carry overs from another game that may have included its own house rules.

The best way forward with a new DM is for the players and DM to work their way forward cooperatively trying to follow the rules as written as a starting point. Avoid house rules. Every player and the DM should check tables, spell references, calculations of AC, to hit modifiers and spell DC so that they understand where they come from and why ... see if the DM is open to everyone helping with the table cooperatively implementing the rules and help the DM to make the decisions on how the NPC/monsters behave or interact as well as set up the adventure.


P.S. On the topic of whether house rules are needed ... almost all my D&D these days is Adventurers League which usually runs a close as possible to Rules As Written. In general, everyone has a good time. There is more variation in power levels due to player capability as much as character design. Basically, the game can be played very well without house rules ... so I'd personally suggest leaving rules tweaks until much later in your D&D career (whether that is increasing level 1 hit points or changing spell DCs ... the newbie DM described in this case just doesn't have the experience to implement balanced house rules effectively ... assuming that they haven't played previous versions of the game).

[Lunali]

My approach is generally to make sure the DM is aware of the rules and the fact that they are house ruling it. If they still prefer to go with their version, that's entirely reasonable.

[Grimmnist]

2)It is THEIR game so what they say goes. (This is actually so far from the truth it is laughable because there is no game without the players AND no game without the DM ... so every game is a cooperative exercise. As a result, a DM needs to keep this in mind).


So many great points, but this one especially resonated with me. As a DM I have had sessions where the party doesn't do a single thing I prepped because their ideas of what to do next were better than mine. It makes my job really easy when the players can make their own entertainment!

[caoshunter22]

So many great points, but this one especially resonated with me. As a DM I have had sessions where the party doesn't do a single thing I prepped because their ideas of what to do next were better than mine. It makes my job really easy when the players can make their own entertainment!

Well heard back from my DM and he made up the rules as placeholders until he read up more on the rules. He just wanted to start playing D&D with the group as soon as possible.

[Grimmnist]

Well heard back from my DM and he made up the rules as placeholders until he read up more on the rules. He just wanted to start playing D&D with the group as soon as possible.

That's actually really good news! He should hopefully improve as the campaign goes on.

[Galithar]

Well heard back from my DM and he made up the rules as placeholders until he read up more on the rules. He just wanted to start playing D&D with the group as soon as possible.

An understandable but dangerous precedent he's playing with there. It's okay to do that, but as soon as a player said "Hey, in the book it says XYZ" then I would adapt to the book rules. I'm A HUGE Homebrewer and house ruler, but my biggest personal rule is still "when in doubt follow the book".

I rushed the starting of my current campaign I'm DMing, and while my issues are different I'm constantly looking for ways to fill in gaps and plug holes until I can fill them in later. Only difference is for me it's world lore and not rules. (Though I've adjusted some rules that my players both like and dislike. And I've adjusted some for them that they like, but I don't. It's just gotta be fun for everyone)

Anyways, at least you know where he's coming from and can maybe talk to him about helping adjudicate some of the rules to be more by the book when you've read up on something he hasn't?
Tell to him about it first before doing anything in session to get his buy in, and then if he agrees when a 'bad' (AKA not by the book) call or rule is brought up you can just politely ask "Is that a house rule? The book says X"
If he's not okay with you doing this in session, deal with the ruling until after the session and then do basically the same thing.

[ad_hoc]

Well heard back from my DM and he made up the rules as placeholders until he read up more on the rules. He just wanted to start playing D&D with the group as soon as possible.

He may be approaching the game from an antagonistic DM vs players point of view.

It's perfectly okay (and even preferable to reduce workload) for the players to help out with the rules. Anything related to the character the player can be in charge of. The DM doesn't need to know any of the rules governing PCs to DM. Let the players take on that responsibility.