Advice for communicating frustrations to a novice DM?

[Squark]

So, I had a bit of a frustrating night yesterday. This was the second meeting of my college's d&d club, and I'm afraid I'm rather frustrated with my DM. I'm looking for advice on how to communicate my frustrations to the DM without any hurt feelings or causing a public fuss. I'm still not 100% sure how to present all this, but I guess I'll start by listing some general frustations

1) During a card game between 2 other players and what we could all see was an important member of the local cult/mafia, said Cult-mob boss offers some information as his stake... in exchange for everything my character (who's not even playing the card game) owns. I... was just kind of flabbergasted here, as well as rather upset that the other PCs didn't shoot it down. The card game ended up being for different stakes entirely, with 2 of the parties lives on the line as more cult-mob members filed in and grabbed two of the party. Since we were playing with a physical deck of cards and the DM admitted to having some skill in sleight of hand, I'm pretty sure he rigged the outcome so we'd win, but it was still rather frustrating.

2) I'm struggling a bit to get a sense for what's going on in the world. The married couple who gave our party shelter last session had apparently slain multiple dragons and even a god, but the aforementioned mob-cult has apparently managed to take over the entire area, and the mob boss we were playing cards with threatened to have their house burned down when one player let slip who our hosts were. I have no idea how credible that threat is. If it is credible, though, we're 1st level characters trying to evade the notice of an organization that can threaten retired godkillers. Having to operate on that assumption, it feels like the DM has gained carte blanche to railroad us.

Perhaps my biggest frustration, though, came when we finally got into combat after two sessions. We've wandered back into the weird netherworld we started in, and are exploring. The party has finally decided to assert some agency and stand and fight a small group of zombies. Unfortunately, a couple things became very clear here;

First, it became painfully clear the DM isn't well versed in the rules. While a novice can be forgiven for not knowing exactly how two weapon fighting works when the brand new player asks, I think everyone at the table was stunned to realize he thought attack rolls where opposed checks. I'm still not clear if he was adding the enemy AC, or just rolling a blank D20 compared to our attack roll. And he also more or less ignored damage rolls and just decided what happened- The paladin who rolled a critical hit just had the results described to him without even being asked for a damage roll. He was also kind of shocked when my wizard cast a fire bolt on his (more-or-less a zombie), and decided it was now on fire, which would mean it would take damage each round, but also deal damage to us if it tried to grapple or something. I... don't mind rules light systems, but I want to know what rules everyone is playing by. If the DM is just winging it, why did I bother reading the player's handbook or even writing down anything on my character sheet.

Second, and the bigger issue for me, at the end of the round, the DM's personal variation on the Grim Reaper appears and imediately OHKOs all the not-zombies. Massive anti-climax aside, Reaper then starts making vague threats before giving one character a coin that seems to more or less serve the same role as a Pirate's Black Spot. Said player idly jokes about throwing the coin at the Reaper... and since the player didn't specifically say "Out of Character," the DM decides that what happens. We're saved from angering a god by a few unseen dice rolls that led to the whole thing being written off as said player being a clutz and tripping, but the whole thing took up so much time and was just... unsatisfying.


What separates this from just another "Bad DM, leave and move on" story, like the ones I hear about on these boards, is that the guy really does seem to want to improve. He's persistent about wanting feedback to make the game better. At this point, I think his game just isn't what I want and I'm probably going to ask to move to another table, but I do want to give him feedback without making him feel attacked or anything. Any advice?

[Nhorianscum]

Write down what you liked, what you disliked, and have other members of the group do the same. Then have an open honest conversation with your DM over this.

It's not a huge deal.

I'd advise LMoP as an introductory adventure for the DM so that he can feel out 5e before writing... poorly done fanfiction. (Sorry I cannot defend the plot). The DM seems like a bit of a kid and is doing kid things. If this is all he wants to do and the rest of the table is into it... thank him for his time and move on.

That said... the card game shows a flair for the dramatic and was probably the highlight of the session for some. I have a hard time finding fault in this.

[Bjarkmundur]

One of my closest friends is a DM like this. His dyslexia and imagination makes him perfect at these kinds of games, and many people enjoy them. I played one session and decided I'd support him, but never play under him again.

I don't know if I'd want to change his game, since it does have a really god beer and pretzels meets looney tunes meets devil may cry feel to it. If I were to address his style of play it send him some of Patrick H Wells or Nando v Movies links which talk about how the first and most important act of a story is designed to set the norm. If the world's rules are never set clearly, the viewers won't feel the impact of an upset status quo in the second act. It also means a player might feel restricted, since when the rules of the world aren't consistent, how is he ever supposed to be proactive? If the same action can lead to many different results a player will never be able to choose his next action to take towards his goal.

His style is his own, but learning that levels 1-3 are the levels for introducing the campaign, not breaking it a part. I usually have the first three levels dealing with strictly mundane stuff, just so that players get comfortable with their characters, their abilities, and how the world around them actually functions. After that, I normally introduce a big event that upsets the whole thing. When I do this I'm usually met with a reaction of "oh ****" , since it has already been established that the event is an anomaly and not a common problem.

Imagine Waterdeep if there were fourteen stones of Golorr, eight dragon vaults and fireballs happened every ten-day. None of the adventure hooks would work since the players see them as every day happenstances.

[Keravath]

I'd suggest writing down your comments, things you thought were good, things that were a problem (like the seeming confusion on how the rules work, the lack of rolling damage, the DM narrating what happens even if the player actions don't necessarily justify it) then take your sheet and have a quiet, private chat with the DM and discuss the points. Make sure that you are NOT attacking him or making it personal. Just emphasize that these are some things he may want to consider.

However, I would also add that it is a good idea to NOT include gods, NOT include retired god-killers or ultra powerful NPCs in central roles. They can be a good source of information in some cases, but the DM has to include the rationale for why these ultra powerful NPCs aren't involved in the plot. If they are so much better, why aren't they handling the situation? The DM needs to explain these things in the game even if he has some idea in his head as to why they might not be involved.

Anyway, the biggest issue I seemed to notice, besides not know the rules, is the somewhat railroaded feel of the adventure. The players should always be able to choose to follow the planned plot or not. If they don't follow plot A then plot B, C, D, E, or F ... will come into play. Perhaps some of the other plots tie back into A, perhaps not. If you want the players to feel immersed in the world then there has to be events happening at the same time, all over the world, the one thing the characters are doing isn't the only thing. This kind of game gives a much more immersed real world feeling while a single plot line on rails will eventually feel like a straight jacket, especially when characters are forced to do something they logically wouldn't in order to conform to the plot in the DMs head. Of course, some buy in from the players is required. They aren't expected to want to sit around drinking beer all day and not adventure ... what is the point? ... but they should be able to decide what to do rather than having only one course of action.

If the DM is new, Lost Mines of Phandelver, as someone else mentioned, is a decent first module to run for character levels 1-5.

[Composer99]

So, I had a bit of a frustrating night yesterday. This was the second meeting of my college's d&d club, and I'm afraid I'm rather frustrated with my DM. I'm looking for advice on how to communicate my frustrations to the DM without any hurt feelings or causing a public fuss. I'm still not 100% sure how to present all this, but I guess I'll start by listing some general frustations

I'm going to make some suggestions after each point you bring up.


1) During a card game between 2 other players and what we could all see was an important member of the local cult/mafia, said Cult-mob boss offers some information as his stake... in exchange for everything my character (who's not even playing the card game) owns. I... was just kind of flabbergasted here, as well as rather upset that the other PCs didn't shoot it down. The card game ended up being for different stakes entirely, with 2 of the parties lives on the line as more cult-mob members filed in and grabbed two of the party. Since we were playing with a physical deck of cards and the DM admitted to having some skill in sleight of hand, I'm pretty sure he rigged the outcome so we'd win, but it was still rather frustrating.

The idea of actually playing a card game to resolve a card game in-game is great! However, the execution, not so much. If your character wasn't playing, their stuff wasn't the NPC's to demand or the other PC's to offer, at least not without your permission. I mean, the mob boss could use threats of force in-character to compel adding your character's stuff to the pot, and that would be fine as long as you were fine with it, but it's the sort of thing that needs player buy-in.

Advice to new DM: Get player buy-in for stuff. There are a lot of things you can do with player buy-in that will be off-putting or even cause offence if you don't.


2) I'm struggling a bit to get a sense for what's going on in the world. The married couple who gave our party shelter last session had apparently slain multiple dragons and even a god, but the aforementioned mob-cult has apparently managed to take over the entire area, and the mob boss we were playing cards with threatened to have their house burned down when one player let slip who our hosts were. I have no idea how credible that threat is. If it is credible, though, we're 1st level characters trying to evade the notice of an organization that can threaten retired godkillers. Having to operate on that assumption, it feels like the DM has gained carte blanche to railroad us.

Advice to new DM: Avoid extraordinary NPCs early on in your career. They're hard to manage properly until you've got some experience. And even then they have to be used judiciously, because if they're floating around, why aren't they doing the heroing? Also a good reason to avoid having, say, Elminster cameos in your Forgotten Realms games.


Perhaps my biggest frustration, though, came when we finally got into combat after two sessions. We've wandered back into the weird netherworld we started in, and are exploring. The party has finally decided to assert some agency and stand and fight a small group of zombies. Unfortunately, a couple things became very clear here;

First, it became painfully clear the DM isn't well versed in the rules. While a novice can be forgiven for not knowing exactly how two weapon fighting works when the brand new player asks, I think everyone at the table was stunned to realize he thought attack rolls where opposed checks. I'm still not clear if he was adding the enemy AC, or just rolling a blank D20 compared to our attack roll. And he also more or less ignored damage rolls and just decided what happened- The paladin who rolled a critical hit just had the results described to him without even being asked for a damage roll. He was also kind of shocked when my wizard cast a fire bolt on his (more-or-less a zombie), and decided it was now on fire, which would mean it would take damage each round, but also deal damage to us if it tried to grapple or something. I... don't mind rules light systems, but I want to know what rules everyone is playing by. If the DM is just winging it, why did I bother reading the player's handbook or even writing down anything on my character sheet.

If this is 5e, the combat chapter in the PHB is... eight pages long? There's not a lot of content there. IMO DMs should make a point of knowing the combat rules reasonably well. Until they've fought a few combats, they might need to refer to them, but they should know how attacking works off by heart, if nothing else.

Advice to new DM: Learn the combat rules, and stick to them, especially early on.


Second, and the bigger issue for me, at the end of the round, the DM's personal variation on the Grim Reaper appears and imediately OHKOs all the not-zombies. Massive anti-climax aside, Reaper then starts making vague threats before giving one character a coin that seems to more or less serve the same role as a Pirate's Black Spot. Said player idly jokes about throwing the coin at the Reaper... and since the player didn't specifically say "Out of Character," the DM decides that what happens. We're saved from angering a god by a few unseen dice rolls that led to the whole thing being written off as said player being a clutz and tripping, but the whole thing took up so much time and was just... unsatisfying.

IMO there's nothing wrong with linear plot lines, such as might be found in published adventures, just as long as:
(1) The PCs' success or failure depends on their own efforts - their tactics, their decisions, their choices, their die rolls.
(2) There is flexibility for the PCs to at least choose different approaches to accomplish their objectives, up to a point. Maybe the PCs can choose negotiation, stealth, or fighting. In some situations (final boss fight of Tomb of Annihilation or Rise of Tiamat, say), there might just be one reasonable option, but that's okay as long as that's not how it works from beginning to end. And, indeed, in both adventures the PCs have some latitude when deciding how to go about accomplishing the overarching linear plot.

This situation with the DM's Grim Reaper clearly violates principle #1 - you and your fellow PCs did not succeed or fail against the zombies based on your own efforts. If the DM erred and made the combat too dangerous, because the enemies were too numerous, you and the others always had the choice of running away (I presume).

Advice to new DM: Even in a linear plot line, you don't have to railroad. Just let the PCs succeed or fail on their own merits and make sure they have the freedom to try to accomplish the linear chain of objectives in their own way, even if it is unlikely to succeed or doomed to fail because of inherent circumstances or NPC personalities.


What separates this from just another "Bad DM, leave and move on" story, like the ones I hear about on these boards, is that the guy really does seem to want to improve. He's persistent about wanting feedback to make the game better. At this point, I think his game just isn't what I want and I'm probably going to ask to move to another table, but I do want to give him feedback without making him feel attacked or anything. Any advice?

Final advice to new DM: Run a simple published module a few times before getting into the nitty-gritty of your own setting. Between Lost Mines of Phandelver, the adventure in the Essentials kit, and the adventure in the Stranger Things starter set, there are some good picks to choose from. Get used to DMing before going into the deep end.

[Zhorn]

If they are happy with their style; all the more power to them to continue with it. I wouldn't want to slap them with a "Bad-Wrong-Fun" for running their own system, but I still think those types of things need to be agreed upon in session zero so the players are aware of what they are to expect.

They don't have to play by 5e's rules if they don't want to, but if it's supposed to be a 5e game then that's another matter.
If their intent is to run 5e, steer them towards a module to start with (Lost mines of Phanderlver and Dragon of Icespire Peak I cannot praise enough for beginners).
Or lead by example, DM a short campaign with them as a player, demonstrate pacing, structure, flow of combat and story, with post game discussions about what the takeaways from those sessions are.
The world needs more DMs, so i wouldn't want to take the reins away from someone who is keen, but if they are willing to learn, then they'll benefit from someone willing to teach.

[Squark]

Thanks for the advice. I've gotten in touch with the DM. Hopefully we can work this out without hurt feelings.

[ImproperJustice]

At least you are going the route of open adult communication.
I bet you can work some things out together.

Some rules familiarity goes a long way:

Also, it sounds luke there is some real effort to tell a good story, but they are afraid of allowing too much player agency.

I would be curious what he might think of a game like Dungeon World which is very collaborative and has all tge rules very clearly defined.

[Reynaert]

The way you describe this DM running the game sounds like a different (preferrably simpler and more freeform) rules system would be a much better fit, TBH.

I would suggest looking at something like FateCore.

[Tawmis]

What separates this from just another "Bad DM, leave and move on" story, like the ones I hear about on these boards, is that the guy really does seem to want to improve. He's persistent about wanting feedback to make the game better.


Going to start here and say, ideally, every DM should always ask for feedback for making the game better. Any DM who doesn't is missing an opportunity to improve the game for his players. And if they don't think they need to improve, or at least ask for feedback, they're wrong.

That said...



1) During a card game between 2 other players and what we could all see was an important member of the local cult/mafia, said Cult-mob boss offers some information as his stake... in exchange for everything my character (who's not even playing the card game) owns. I... was just kind of flabbergasted here, as well as rather upset that the other PCs didn't shoot it down. The card game ended up being for different stakes entirely, with 2 of the parties lives on the line as more cult-mob members filed in and grabbed two of the party. Since we were playing with a physical deck of cards and the DM admitted to having some skill in sleight of hand, I'm pretty sure he rigged the outcome so we'd win, but it was still rather frustrating.


Was your character in the vicinity? If so, it's not too out of the blue to think, a mob boss spots someone they don't recognize, not in the card game; and says something to try to get them into the card game, to deal their hand (so to speak), so they issue a challenge to pull in the stranger and see what they're made of. It's the best way a cocky villain might use to see his foes he doesn't recognize walking around his base...



2) I'm struggling a bit to get a sense for what's going on in the world. The married couple who gave our party shelter last session had apparently slain multiple dragons and even a god, but the aforementioned mob-cult has apparently managed to take over the entire area, and the mob boss we were playing cards with threatened to have their house burned down when one player let slip who our hosts were. I have no idea how credible that threat is. If it is credible, though, we're 1st level characters trying to evade the notice of an organization that can threaten retired godkillers. Having to operate on that assumption, it feels like the DM has gained carte blanche to railroad us.


Sounds like the DM needs to taper things down a bit. Having Level 1 characters hanging around with Dragon Slayers and God Slayers seems a bit much; and makes the players (sometimes, not always) feel inadequate... because what is a Level 1 character going to do that a (retired) God/Dragon Killer can't?



First, it became painfully clear the DM isn't well versed in the rules. While a novice can be forgiven for not knowing exactly how two weapon fighting works when the brand new player asks, I think everyone at the table was stunned to realize he thought attack rolls where opposed checks. I'm still not clear if he was adding the enemy AC, or just rolling a blank D20 compared to our attack roll. And he also more or less ignored damage rolls and just decided what happened- The paladin who rolled a critical hit just had the results described to him without even being asked for a damage roll. He was also kind of shocked when my wizard cast a fire bolt on his (more-or-less a zombie), and decided it was now on fire, which would mean it would take damage each round, but also deal damage to us if it tried to grapple or something. I... don't mind rules light systems, but I want to know what rules everyone is playing by. If the DM is just winging it, why did I bother reading the player's handbook or even writing down anything on my character sheet.


This would be the perfect chance, to note, what you believe you observed (politely) and explain how it works (politely) according to the rules, and then ask for an explanation of "House Rules" before the game, so that everyone has the same understanding.



Second, and the bigger issue for me, at the end of the round, the DM's personal variation on the Grim Reaper appears and imediately OHKOs all the not-zombies. Massive anti-climax aside, Reaper then starts making vague threats before giving one character a coin that seems to more or less serve the same role as a Pirate's Black Spot. Said player idly jokes about throwing the coin at the Reaper... and since the player didn't specifically say "Out of Character," the DM decides that what happens. We're saved from angering a god by a few unseen dice rolls that led to the whole thing being written off as said player being a clutz and tripping, but the whole thing took up so much time and was just... unsatisfying.


Goes back to the DM needing to kicking it down several notches.

Definitely take the time and explain, "Here's what I liked. Here's what I observed. Here's what I think could be improved."