Help for new DM

[Rift_Wolf]

I'm thinking of starting to run games as a new DM, however I don't really like set campaigns; I fancy playing my own home-brewed campaign, my current DM has warned me off this idea because it's tougher than running a set campaign if someone decides to do something 'off the wall' (Inventive use of magic item, fighting the plot, power-gaming, etc.) but I find it easier to imagine what to do in such situations than when playing a set campaign. I was looking for help with a few bits.
1) In my game setting, necromancy is illegal and enchantment is highly suspect. Anyone who openly practices necromancy or some of the crueler enchantment spells (Geas and Feeblemind, for example) is likely to be hung wherever they go. Is it unfair to say 'In my game, necromancy is a banned school and enchantment would be very restricted'? I'd be willing to work with players who wanted 'contraband' spells (Though knowing animate dead or other such iconically necromancer spells would have them running from mobs a lot) as something they had to keep as a secret from authorities, etc.

2) While I don't want to stop players building inventive characters, I don't want level-dips or wanton prestige classes. One solution I thought of was to keep prestige classes to books I own, and restrict classes to those that could feasibly appear in my world. The main problem with this would be arguments about not allowing a class for fluff reasons. Would this be unfair? I've seen threads that have gone along the lines of;
Player 1: My DM won't allow ToB
Player 2: Play a completely SRD CoDzilla or Batman to break his game and teach him a lesson.
I don't want player v DM power-struggles. Some conversations with some gamers have suggested there's a 'do things to aggrevate the DM' element sometimes (Like play a druid who keeps summoning huge creatures, purely because they know the DM doesn't have enough huge counters), which I want to avoid. I've seen on other threads giving people an intro to what sort of game I'll be running (A mix of role and roll-playing, mid-power, mid-magic, etc), however it'd be tough as I probably couldn't tell just by looking at their character sheet if a player is breaking the game. Unless they played a duskblade.

3) Home-rules. If I inform players beforehand, would it be okay to use variant rules such as a 1 being a -10 and a 20 being a 30 rather than auto-hit/miss? Apparently our current DM had a problem with an overpowered player who bought off his level adjustment (A goliath grappler), and then with level adjustments altogether (A gnoll fighter), but should this put me off allowing races with a level adjustment? I also had the idea of making the sorceror class more favourable by giving it powers as an intermediate dragon bloodline, which fits fluff-wise. Is this going to be making sorcerors too powerful? Any help for home-rules?

4) Am I totally mad wanting to run a homebrew as a new DM? Is it incredibly difficult?

[TheCountAlucard]

Welcome to the other side of the DM screen, Rift_Wolf! I recommend reading this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76474). It's a very helpful guide for fledgling DMs.


Is it unfair to say 'In my game, necromancy is a banned school and enchantment would be very restricted'? It's not unfair, especially if you let the players know beforehand. In fact, always take the time to talk rules with your players. If you don't tell them beforehand that their characters might get hanged for necromancy, they're going to be a lot more upset. Always set your players straight before play begins.


I don't want level-dips or wanton prestige classes. Few DMs do. It's annoying and breaks verisimilitude.


One solution I thought of was to keep prestige classes to books I own, and restrict classes to those that could feasibly appear in my world. That's what I do. Heck, I restrict any class/rules to books I own. If anyone should understand the rules being used, it's the DM.


Home-rules. If I inform players beforehand, would it be okay to use variant rules such as a 1 being a -10 and a 20 being a 30 rather than auto-hit/miss? This shouldn't be a problem. Remember the premise of Rule 0, that the DM is the one who ultimately makes and interprets the rules.


4) Am I totally mad wanting to run a homebrew as a new DM? Is it incredibly difficult? That's how I started out, anyway. Didn't seem that hard.

Good luck to you, Rift_Wolf!

[Tequila Sunrise]

my current DM has warned me off this idea because it's tougher than running a set campaign if someone decides to do something 'off the wall' (Inventive use of magic item, fighting the plot, power-gaming, etc.)
None of those things change with campaign setting, so your current DM isn't making any sense at all. Your DM might just be a canon afficionado, so he's trying to convince you to use a published setting so he doesn't have to leave his comfort zone. Maybe not; in any case I've always DMed homebrews and never had issues.


1) In my game setting, necromancy is illegal and enchantment is highly suspect. Anyone who openly practices necromancy or some of the crueler enchantment spells (Geas and Feeblemind, for example) is likely to be hung wherever they go. Is it unfair to say 'In my game, necromancy is a banned school and enchantment would be very restricted'? I'd be willing to work with players who wanted 'contraband' spells (Though knowing animate dead or other such iconically necromancer spells would have them running from mobs a lot) as something they had to keep as a secret from authorities, etc.
It is perfectly fair for in-world authorities to outlaw certain spells. In the case of Animate Dead, it should generally be assumed that such spells are outlawed no matter the campaign setting; it is an evil spell after all.


I don't want player v DM power-struggles. Some conversations with some gamers have suggested there's a 'do things to aggrevate the DM' element sometimes (Like play a druid who keeps summoning huge creatures, purely because they know the DM doesn't have enough huge counters), which I want to avoid. I've seen on other threads giving people an intro to what sort of game I'll be running (A mix of role and roll-playing, mid-power, mid-magic, etc), however it'd be tough as I probably couldn't tell just by looking at their character sheet if a player is breaking the game. Unless they played a duskblade.
The best way to deal with problem players is to just kick them out. Posters on the boards who suggest antagonizing DMs "to teach them a lesson", and the players willing to do so, are morons. What so many players often forget is that any class, feat, spell or whatever that comes from a book other than the Core 3 is by definition a house rule. As such, you are under no obligation to allow non-core character options.

If a player complains about something in your game in a mature manner, you should definately take it into consideration. But that doesn't mean you should put up with whiny geeks with an over developed sense of entitlement.


3) Home-rules. If I inform players beforehand, would it be okay to use variant rules such as a 1 being a -10 and a 20 being a 30 rather than auto-hit/miss? Apparently our current DM had a problem with an overpowered player who bought off his level adjustment (A goliath grappler), and then with level adjustments altogether (A gnoll fighter), but should this put me off allowing races with a level adjustment? I also had the idea of making the sorceror class more favourable by giving it powers as an intermediate dragon bloodline, which fits fluff-wise. Is this going to be making sorcerors too powerful? Any help for home-rules?
House rules are always okay so long as you tell your players beforehand. Personally I don't think LA races are problematic, but LA buyoff definately is. I strongly recommend disallowing that particular house rule.


4) Am I totally mad wanting to run a homebrew as a new DM? Is it incredibly difficult?
Not at all; the DM's comfort with the rules and fluff of the game take precedent over the players', so if homebrew is more comfortable for you just do it.

TS

[Wraith_Lord]

I know this topic's a bit old but thought I'd throw in my 2 cents...

Personally, I'd say that outlawing necromancy or another similar element of your homebrew world would do nothing other than add flavour to the mix and frankly make it more believable (I can't think of a world in which neutral or good authorities would not outlaw raising an unholy army of the undead to obey your every whim...

... of course, I also agree it's definitely something to tell your players beforehand - of course just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's something they can't do... After all, you'd only be outlawed for animating a pack of slathering zombies to to murder everyone in sight and so provide you with more fuel for your infernal experiments if there are survivors... :smallwink:

As for me, I think the established campaigns are phenomenal but I personally hate being constrained by someone else's imagination (hence why I prefer being DM I guess!) and so I always use homebrew worlds for my campaign settings.

Besides, just because you set your campaign in a homebrew setting for the most part doesn't necessarily mean that you can't let them planeshift into downtown Waterdeep if you all fancy a change.

[Keld Denar]

Your thoughts on Necromancy and Enchantment aren't exactly unique.

In Greyhawk City, getting caught practicing Enchantments that allow coersion or influence over another person within the city result in a swift and immediate whack with the ban hammer. Sleep is fine, charm person gets you a 1-way ticket to Exileville.

In the Kingdom of Furyondy (also in the Greyhawk setting), almost EVERY necromany spell is banned, by order of his Righteousness, King Belvor IV. Even utility necromancy such as Speak with Dead is banned. They also have a mandate called "The dead shall not rule" that states if you are ever brought back from the dead via raise dead or similar magic, you can not claim any entitlement, which should have either been passed to an heir or returned to the Crown. Any existing titles remain as honorary notation only.

See? Not an uncommon idea. If you take a gander through a good portion of fantasy literature, you'll find that such ideas are not exactly foreign. Tell your players about it ahead of time. It adds a nice roleplaying element for the character to have to either research the spells himself or make a shady deal (blackmail material) with someone to get them, and then the character should take GREAT discression with their use, knowing the consquent lynching is only a wave of the fingers and a few words away.

[valadil]

It sounds like you have the right attitude about GMing. We need more non adversarial GMs out there.

As far as the homebrewed world goes, I felt the same way as you and then I ran a game. I found three problems with worldbuilding. It's a lot of work. It's a lot of work to publish your world to your players. It's even more work to make them absorb the world you've written. Players should have a wealth of history to choose from when building a character, and even if you successfully create an interesting and intricate history your players may not be in a position to use it. In the end it didn't matter what shape my continents were. What mattered were the plots and NPCs. Since then I've used prefabricated campaign settings and been rather happy doing so.

I don't mean to discourage worldbuilding. This is just why I don't do it any more. If you stick with it though I highly recommend building your world long before you start the game. I don't believe in planning ahead too far with the campaign itself since that often leads to a railroad, but the world should be complete before you invite players to the game.

I like the idea of banning necro and enchantment. I especially like that it's a cultural ban rather than a mechanical one. Make sure that it's clear that certain texts and material components are contraband too.

[Dannoth]

1) Restrictng Classes/Spell Schools - All for that twist. I've been known to play a non-caster Campaign. They go well so long as you:

A) Have a reason - 100 years a ago a terrible Lich nearly destroyed civilization. Since that time the darker maics have been out lawed.

B) Enforce it - Knights on Griffons or a Group of Powerful Wizards who hunt the aforementioned dark casters.

2) Restricting Prestige classes - Yes ... do it. If you are new to DMing you need to do this for yourself as much as the players. If you do not understand a class you will give the person using that class a very poor gaming experience.

3) Sorcs are amazing ... they are just combat oriented. You do not need to buff them, however you can allow them the prestige class Dragonkind. If you are concerned about a Sorc's versatility may I suggest starting him with a wand or a Rod (passed down from his great grand pappy of course) to tip the scale in his favor.

4) Home rules - Yes. I use 1 = -10 and 20 = 30. There is nothing wrong with that system.

[Azerian Kelimon]

Also, a little something, what is the power level you want your campaign at?

If it's low power, you took a right step with banning necro, and having difficult enchantment access. The big cheese is there for casters, but if you make them gain their spells with duskbalde speed, they'll be at a power level similar to classical meleers like unoptimized barbs and pallys, theoretically.

If it's medium power, there's one thing you've got to correct, RAPIDO. And it is banning ToB. ToB is STRONG, but is certainly not even CLOSE to the power of a CoDzilla. FYI, ToB is one of the lynchpins of "perfect D&D", a D&D game with a group of similarly powerful characters that will handle most encounters with ease, but not without work. The group is a Factotum, Binder, Favored soul, and ToBBer of your choice. Without ToB, melee takes a BIG hit unless your players are dedicated optimizers.

If it's high power, just allow full splatbook abuse.

Edit: +1 to using the "no authits or misses" variant. It's just so much more BELIEVABLE and nicer on the players.

[FlyMolo]

Go ahead and run a homebrew campaign. Especially in PbP, you can just make stuff up as you go along. Have an idea of what your world is doing, though.

I mean, DMing isn't really as hard as it's made out to be. DMing really well is hard. Beer n Pretzels Dnd is easy to DM, and best of all, can be lots of fun. Have a few books on hand that you can tap if you need to. The MMs would be a good start, plus maybe a short campaign that you can incorporate. There's lots here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030530b). Try em. If nothing else, you can take the load off your creative shoulders by throwing a canned subplot at them.

[Count Chumleigh]

Rift_Wolf, your proposed house-rules and ideas about DM-ing are entirely reasonable enough, but I cannot help but comment on


In my game setting, necromancy is illegal and enchantment is highly suspect. Anyone who openly practices necromancy or some of the crueler enchantment spells (Geas and Feeblemind, for example) is likely to be hung wherever they go.

The actual word is "hanged." If anyone who openly practices necromancy is likely to be hung wherever he goes, you're going to have a lot of male necromancers running around.

Cheers,
--Count Chumleigh