Teaching someone D&D

[weenie]

There's a friend of mine who expressed interest in learning to play d&d. I think she would make a fine addition to our gaming group, so of course, I said yes. But now I'm kinda stumped on where to start. Should I help her make a character, and then run her through an adventure? Should I build the character for her? Should I include her directly into our gaming group?

In short, I'm looking for a way for her to get a grasp on the general feeling of a standard d&d adventure, but at the same time teach her the fundamental mechanics of the system. She has no experience in tabletop rpgs whatsoever, and we're playing 3.5

[FelixG]

In the past when i helped people learn the game i go through character step by step with them, it imperative that you don't just hand them the book and say Go! Neither should you roll up the character because then they become dependent on you for making character (i have seen this happen before)

Sit, explain what each bit is, talk over her character concept with her and help her discover what fits that best, also i would start with purely core as so many choices could be overwhelming!

Then after the character creation is done i would run a pre-made adventure, get a few friends who are familiar with the game to join up, make sure they know its a training session, about that she may need help and not to talk over her. Some people are timid at the table their first game so getting the newbie into the flow of things is important.

Do this a few times with different adventures, maybe the same character or new ones if she wants to try a wide range, after a few sessions of training she will probably be ready to enter a group standard

[jmbrown]

I suggest starting at level one or as close to level one as possible. If not, then sit down and create a character with her going from level one to whatever level you're playing level by level and don't skip a step. Build the character for her but ask her what she wants and point out the options that are best, describing them, and explaining why they're good.

The actual roleplaying aspect is simple. Introduce her to the game table and say "pretend this character is you and react to what I say to the best of you (and your character's) ability." The difficulty will come through subtle nuances in the rules like when to roll skill checks or combat. Take each aspect slowly and don't be afraid to drop hints. Say "You should roll one of your skills to do this" or "you should move here and attack this guy."

It's all about going step-by-step and not overwhelming the player from the very beginning. After a handful of sessions they should get it.

[Irreverent Fool]

See if the rest of the group would be comfortable with a core-only game. The multitude of options available in 3.5 and the amount of optimization more experienced players might possess can be very intimidating to new players.

Our group has found that running a short core-only story arc of 4-5 adventures starting from level 1-3 or so and getting up to 5-7 is helpful in getting a newer player into the spirit and learning the system. This can run into problems if the new player gets attached to her character and the new party, but this can be dealt with by having the other characters become NPCs while the new player moves on with her character, or any number of other ways.

I would suggest against a pre-generated character unless you are short on time or are running some sort of introduction. Mechanics are part of the game and you will be taking something important away if you simply construct the character.

[BobVosh]

In the past when i helped people learn the game i go through character step by step with them, it imperative that you don't just hand them the book and say Go!

Thats how I got introduced. I ended up with a monk. Guess how that ended?

Also the DM was one of those "all new characters start at 1, no exceptions." So a 3.0 lvl 1 monk within a party of level 12-14s...I ended up dead. Under a dragon. Second character didn't last much longer (necromancer)

I recommend helping them make a rogue or a fighter. Fairly simply, fairly static numbers, and nothing really to throw a curve ball at them. I find the rogue is generally the best as it has a very specific out of combat mechanical use (find traps), a fairly standard in combat role (flank, SA), and enough skills they can do a lot with it. Worked pretty well with each new comer I have taught.

[FelixG]

Thats how I got introduced. I ended up with a monk. Guess how that ended?

-snip-

If your DM hadnt been a jerk it probobly would have gone just dandy :P

Under no circumstances should a level 1 be tossed in with level 12s and be told to just go for it lol

Thus why i said put her into a separate game for a few adventures to let her get things under her belt before she runs with the big dawgs

Though, my advise was meant to be taken as a whole, published adventures at level 1 work fine with monks, and its just to learn the system and get the creative ideas going, once the newbie understands things you can introduce them to things like the unarmed sword sage for monks in place of...well monks!

[DwarvenExodus]

Also the DM was one of those "all new characters start at 1, no exceptions." So a 3.0 lvl 1 monk within a party of level 12-14s...I ended up dead. Under a dragon. Second character didn't last much longer (necromancer)

Wait, why were you a different level from the rest of the party? That just makes the game worse for everyone. Also, the DM should have built the encounter with you just as likely to survive as the others. I still don't understand why he would force you to be a different level, but he could at least design his game with that in mind. It is just lazy to force a limitation, not justify it, and penalize you for said limitation. In short, Bad DM, Bad.

[BobVosh]

It was just a very second ed mentality. At least most AD&D games I played I came in at 1, maybe 2.

I have more bizarre, fun stories about that DM than any other though.

It was our first foray with 3.0 mechanics...those high level characters were beasts despite very sub optimal choices. We thought you added the chart for progression rather than replace. It has all those '+'s. So a level 2 monk has +5 saves across the board, not +3. I could have been a very effective monk once I got to 12 in that DM's game. XD

Imagine the damage dice by that time. 5D6+4D8+4D10+Str.

So yes, thats something to make sure you tell the new person: how the charts work.

[Tyndmyr]

Bust out the books, show her some of the races and classes, and ask her what she likes. No need to go splatbook crazy at this point, as it can be overwhelming, but make sure she knows there's plenty of options available.

Explain in brief what each class tends to do, and help her pick feats and starting gear. It's a lot easier starting at low levels, so if you have a low leveled campaign, just include her right off. For high levels, consider running a low leveled one shot first.

My group always starts new players at whatever the lowest current person's xp is. Starting from level 1 can be a fun challenge for an experienced player, but it's a rough way to start off a newbie.

[Amphetryon]

Bust out the books, show her some of the races and classes, and ask her what she likes. No need to go splatbook crazy at this point, as it can be overwhelming, but make sure she knows there's plenty of options available.

Explain in brief what each class tends to do, and help her pick feats and starting gear. It's a lot easier starting at low levels, so if you have a low leveled campaign, just include her right off. For high levels, consider running a low leveled one shot first.

As an alternative suggestion, my usual method for teaching interested newbies how to play D&D is to start by asking them to tell me about the character in their head. If Robin's imagined character is a knight in shining armor, I might then talk with Robin about Fighter, Knight, Paladin, and Crusader, to help flesh out the image with the mechanics that most closely emulate the concept. If Chris wants to play a necromancer, we might look at the Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, and Dread Necromancer classes to figure out which one is the best fit for what Chris wants to do.

I'm not a big fan of the "training wheels" mentality that says that some classes are too complicated to play when first learning D&D; to my mind, this means all of us who started playing 3.0 and 3.5 on the day each was released either consider ourselves savants (I'm not) or played a game with only Rogues and Fighters until we "learned the system" (I didn't, and would have found it harder to learn with so much left out).

[742]

it all depends on the person. to an eight year old i suggested starting with fighter ranger or rogue, with ranger being the best because it introduces you to everything gradually (lots of skill points so you can kinda specialize, bonus feats followers, spellcasting eventually and sturdy enough to survive any bumbling that may occur). to an engineer? "spellcasters have a little more bookkeeping inbetween fights and wizards have a *lot* more; warrior type characters have less. also dont play a monk theyre broken and we arent working with the book that fixes that yet"

[Otodetu]

I'm not a big fan of the "training wheels" mentality that says that some classes are too complicated to play when first learning D&D; to my mind, this means all of us who started playing 3.0 and 3.5 on the day each was released either consider ourselves savants (I'm not) or played a game with only Rogues and Fighters until we "learned the system" (I didn't, and would have found it harder to learn with so much left out).

I agree, my first character was a sorcerer, and it was a blast, if I had been shoe-horned into the role of fighter of rogue I'm pretty sure I would have been rather bored.

[big teej]

I have a teaching module ^_^

it comes with a complete* set of dice, a mat, and a 6 adventure minicampaign, several premade sheets (redgar, lidda etc) a lil booklet for the campaign that tells you everything you could possibly need to know as a DM. it also contains tokens for doors, treasure, monsters etc.

for people who know how to play? it would likely be boring and greatly monontonous.... yea I can't spell that. anyways, for people just learning, it would (imho) be an excellent introduction to dnding

even veterans can benefit from this module actually. I played with my friend one on one (I was DMing he was a solo barbarian) and I was surprised at how many 'givens' he forgot, such as looting the bodies.

but I digress
if at all possible, go with something like that, (heck the first 'adventure' was a 2 room dungeon crawl!

/ramble

* I say 'complete' in the sense that it contains a d20, d12, d10, d8, d6 and d4 but to me, no dice set is even remotely complete unless you have gazillions of dice

but I really like dice......

[Nidogg]

Give Her the ph for a day or two, and let her draw her own conclusions, tell her to skip over the really rules heavy bits (skills, advanced combat, the exact way of casting and disrupting spells ect) and let her play what she wants to. It is a role playing game, after all, If she wants to be a centaur barbarian, cool, help her along a bit but she must learn for her self, that way its easier to remember.

[mobdrazhar]

i recommend to show them just core and let them pick a race and class from there. Don't push them towards anything in perticular but if, even if it's not an optimal combination. show them which races work best with thier chosen class but tell them that in the end the chose is thiers.

Also got step by step through the whole character creation process and level them to same level as the lowest level party member. but put them at minimum XP for that level

[LibraryOgre]

I'd ask them what kind of character they want to play, and start by creating their character for them (i.e. before the game), and run them through some simple adventures, either alone or with a couple other people who are willing to deal with a newbie (i.e. will provide information, not grief). Once they've played a couple times, they'll have a better idea of who they want to play in the long term, and a better handle on the game.

[sambo.]

my $0.02....

we ALL went through this process in some form or another when we first started playing.

start off by asking them what basic kind of character archetype they wish to play (big sword wielding fighter, sneaky rogue, nature worshipper (druid) etc, etc).

then, i'd (de)generate with them, a character at Average Party Level-1.

keep that first toon as simple as you can.

if they really want to play a caster type, i'd strongly suggest Sorcerer over Wizard for a nubbeleh and i'd be pretty free about letting them swap out spells for a little while.

[tcrudisi]

There's a friend of mine who expressed interest in learning to play d&d. I think she would make a fine addition to our gaming group, so of course, I said yes. But now I'm kinda stumped on where to start. Should I help her make a character, and then run her through an adventure? Should I build the character for her? Should I include her directly into our gaming group?

In short, I'm looking for a way for her to get a grasp on the general feeling of a standard d&d adventure, but at the same time teach her the fundamental mechanics of the system. She has no experience in tabletop rpgs whatsoever, and we're playing 3.5

I would start by asking her to name her favorite superhero or fantasy character (Merlin, Legolas, the Green Lantern, etc). Then, I would say, "Okay, I'll create you a character that's similar to that character. Of course, it won't BE that character, it will be your own character, free to make whatever decisions you want, for good or bad. But it will have similar powers." And then I would hand them the best creation of that character that I could make.

Alternatively, hand her a Fighter and just make sure that it doesn't get overwhelmed by the other players power level.

[Jack Zander]

You should teach her the same way you learned, whatever way that was.

I learned through the basic intro box, and it worked fairly well to get me interested enough to start learning the rules through sheer reading of the PHB.

[Lady Moreta]

As someone who is still relatively new to the game and bad with numbers, may I suggest that if your friend isn't fantastic at mental maths, don't give them a fighter.

I have a fighter who I play in a filler game when our usual DM just can't run the usual game. I'm fond of her, but great skies I hate power attacks. I suck at maths, and have trouble adding/subtracting in my head. The first time we ran into trouble, it was suggested that I do a power attack, and then the mechanics of the feat had to be explained to me... and in the end, I made my husband do the math for me (his fault for suggesting it). Now, I've gotten the hang of the use of the power attack, but whenever she does it, I make someone else add the numbers for me.

If your friend is good with numbers, then it won't really matter, but if she's not - you might want to at least make sure she's aware of what's involved so she can decide if she's willing to try - or perhaps save it for a later game

[big teej]

As someone who is still relatively new to the game and bad with numbers, may I suggest that if your friend isn't fantastic at mental maths, don't give them a fighter.

I have a fighter who I play in a filler game when our usual DM just can't run the usual game. I'm fond of her, but great skies I hate power attacks. I suck at maths, and have trouble adding/subtracting in my head. The first time we ran into trouble, it was suggested that I do a power attack, and then the mechanics of the feat had to be explained to me... and in the end, I made my husband do the math for me (his fault for suggesting it). Now, I've gotten the hang of the use of the power attack, but whenever she does it, I make someone else add the numbers for me.

If your friend is good with numbers, then it won't really matter, but if she's not - you might want to at least make sure she's aware of what's involved so she can decide if she's willing to try - or perhaps save it for a later game

I completely sympathize, I learned as a barbarian...

rage, power attack, magic axe, flanking

my attack rolls sounded like this
"uhm lets see.... I rolled a 5 + 4 + 1 + 1 + 1+ 1 .... do I hit yet?"

[Lady Moreta]

I completely sympathize, I learned as a barbarian...

rage, power attack, magic axe, flanking

my attack rolls sounded like this
"uhm lets see.... I rolled a 5 + 4 + 1 + 1 + 1+ 1 .... do I hit yet?"

Exactly!

To be fair, these were pre-generated characters (that we had permission to mess with as much as we liked). Which I suppose is another point in favour of the don't-create-the-character-for-her message. I created my main character (mostly) on my own, with help from my husband, and she is much easier to play.

[big teej]

I love that barbarian, he's a planeswalker now

and I got a kick out of the low numbers I could hit on. so for me at least, it balanced out.

Cog Skulltaker, the Man who cannot die... wait, that's the phantom....

uh...

Cog Skulltaker, worshipping Khorne one dismembered corpse at a time....

yea I like that.

[Lady Moreta]

I've gotten the hang of using power attack, I just can't do the numbers in my head.

Still, I'm fond of her, and she's quite different from my usual character (bard/cloaked dancer). I want to buy her a vicious attack dog