DM 101: Persuasion can't do that!

Can we discuss this like civilized people?

I've read a lot of new DM questions that come up on social media, and one that seems to really confuse a lot of newbies is the use of the Persuasion skill.

Some of this confusion results from the misunderstanding of skill checks in general, but much of it is related to how powerful Persuasion can be when used. To clarify, let's start with skill checks in general. A skill check is just a special kind of ability check that allows the PC to add their proficiency bonus if they are proficient in that skill. Here are the Rules as Written in regards to ability checks. 

GM 101, Ep 2: Problem Players and the Social Contract

If social media is any indication, newer game masters have a lot of issues with disruptive players in their game. These issues are not difficult to resolve if you and your players understand the what the social contract is and how it applies to in-game and out of game behavior at the table. Here's advice on how you should manage disruptive players at your gaming table.



  0:00   Introduction
  0:55   What is the Social Contract?
  1:11   (moment of dementia)
  1:40   Rule 1 - Don't be a jerk.
  1:54   Don't do these things.
  2:22   D&D is a team sport.
  4:44   Don't be "that guy" (or gal).
  5:50   "It's what my character would do."
  6:52   How to manage the problem player as the DM.
  7:00   Don't "punish" the player. Talk to them.
  7:25   Example of how to approach the problem player.
10:20   Consensual in-game conflict
11:30   The DM also facilitates the social interactions
12:05   Personal anecdote of problem players
14:30   Summary points

Gaming 101: Bullies and Samaritans

Miniature skirmish games often have awesome terrain.

I hate to start a post-con wrap up with this topic, but I think this is singularly important to point out what I witnessed this weekend. Notice I didn't say “discuss” because there is no discussion. What happened was awful behavior and I want everyone to recognize it and put a stop to it when they see it.

While this incident happened in a miniatures game, I've seen this kind of behavior in many different kinds of games, and even once at my own table... so the lesson here is universal.

My wife and I attended a miniatures event this weekend at a well known convention, which should have been incredibly fun, but was hamstrung by events that occurred in the first turn. The set up was this: the players were all monsters and the town was the focus of our destructive behavior. It was a players vs. the environment situation. It was like “Rampage” (the video game) but with giant miniatures and a pseudo-medieval setting.

However, there was a caveat -- PvP was allowed in the game. It wasn’t against the rules to attack another player, but it was obvious (to me at least) that this kind of thing might happen later in the game when chaos was in full swing and the event was winding down.

So, here’s where things went sideways.

GM 101: Ep 1 - The Importance of Session 0

The first episode of my new GM 101 video blog is a companion piece to my earlier article on Session 0, I talk about what "Session 0" is and why it's so important to establish a baseline of expectations for your campaign before it starts, including aspects such as play style, realism, PvP, and character compatibility.

Sorry that the color balance is so far off. I may need to re-shoot, but I hope the content makes up for the video quality.



0:55  What is Session 0 and what does it entail?
1:50  Session 0 establishes the campaign framework and sets player expectations.
3:00  What is the genre? What is the level of realism? Heavy RP or kick-in-the-door combat?
5:00  Establish your genre and play style baseline.
6:50  How incompatible play styles can harm the fun.
7:55  Session 0 involves some compromise.
8:30  Discuss home brew rules so players aren't unpleasantly surprised.
9:40  The dangers of PvP aspects in a game, and how it can be handled at the table.
11:45  Example of how incompatible play style can break up the game.
17:20  Don't make a character incompatible with the group.
19:05  Discuss how the characters know one another and trust each other.
20:50  Next video teaser: the Social Contract

GM 101: Don't Sweat the Meta (too much)

Artist: Jim Holloway (Dragon #88)

So even after 40 years in gaming, I made a huge mistake in DMing last week’s session.

You see, I have this blind spot when it comes to metagaming.

I like the world to be mysterious. I want the characters (and therefore the players) to know only what they should know in the game. I want the mechanics to fade into the background as much as possible, so the “reality” of the situation is pure from a story perspective.

But sometimes I let that desire to have a metagame-free session get in the way of the what's best at the table.

GM 101: What is the social contract?

So in my recent posts about “Railroading” and “Session 0”, I’ve talked a lot about expectations at the table, and how it is important for everyone to want the same (or at least similar) things out of the game to make sure everyone is having fun.  Implied in that statement is an idea that has gone around gaming circles for many years -- the “social contract”.

What is the social contract?

The idea of the social contract is that there is an unspoken agreement at the table that everyone is there to have fun and no one player or GM should act in such a way as to harm the fun of another player.

Basically, as Wil Wheaton put it, “Don’t be a d!ck.”

That’s the summary version, but there is a little more elaboration related to RPGs. We all play D&D (and similar games) as an escape from the day to day stresses. We have enough problems and personal conflict in the real world to have to come to a game only to face the same personal conflicts or stresses we’d like to put aside on a Friday or Saturday night. If it’s not fun, people will quit the game.

GM 101: Why is Session Zero Important?

I often see the question “What is Session Zero?” on social media… or if they haven’t heard of “Session 0” before, one might see a complaint like “I wanted a wilderness-savvy ranger traveling between settlements and exploring the frontier, but everything in our campaign is in this giant capital city. I never get to use my character’s [insert favored class abilities here] and feel less than useful in the game… What can I do?”

[ UPDATE: I also talk a bit more about Session 0 in my video blog here: https://youtu.be/q2cOMVfdJoU ]

Expectations

Session 0 is about setting expectations. It provides a way for the GM to outline what the campaign is about, give a rough sketch of setting details, what races, classes or other options are available (or if any do not exist or have some caveat) and any other details pertinent to to the players prior to character creation.

It also serves as a place to come to an agreement about the game. Remember that D&D and similar RPGs are a shared storytelling experience. It is not wholly up to the GM to dictate everything about the game, unless the players are fine with being passive about the game world particulars.

D&D: Basics of Stealth and Hiding in 5e

Dragon Magazine #88 cover by Jim Holloway

Why is stealth so hard in D&D?

Based on recent social media chatter, it appears GM’s have some confusion when adjudicating stealth and hiding, and players believe their Rogue skills give them Advantage more than the rules as written would suggest. A re-review of the rules as written with a few examples should help.

To break this down a bit, let’s start with the rules as stated in the SRD 5.0 (bold emphasis added).
___________

Stealth

Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard.

Hiding

The GM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check’s total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.

You can’t hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. An invisible creature can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, and it does have to stay quiet.

In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the GM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen.

Passive Perception

When you hide, there’s a chance someone will notice you even if they aren’t searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the GM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature’s passive Wisdom (Perception) score.
__________

So there are a few things that are implied by the above rules that could be stated more clearly, or at least clarified with examples.

D&D: The Slippery Slope of Saying Yes

GAME BALANCE!!!

As expected, the reactions to my last post were quite intense and often fierce... but there was were a few themes among the Rules-As-Written purists that I found intriguing and wished to explore deeper.

Game Balance

There were quite a few people who cited game balance as a major objection, which I found peculiar given the small magnitude of the change being discussed. They cited that this change wasn't "extensively play tested" or "balanced against other racial abilities" or some other silliness about min-maxing. This kind of anxious hand-wringing seemed overwrought for utterly minor change to a racial stat. I mean how much min-maxing can occur with just one point? (and BTW, they are giving up a point of DEX for it).

D&D: Just Say Yes, For F*ck Sake.

And we will call it "this land..."

...Or The Case of the Curiously Intelligent Elf.

On a recent Facebook post, the OP asked a simple question:
“My player wants to play an Elf Wizard and would like +2 INT, +1 DEX for his Elf Racial Bonus instead of +1 INT, +2 DEX. Would you allow that?”

Yes. YES! For F@CK SAKE YES! …and yet in the poll, over 800 people, a staggering 60%+ of respondents answered “I would never allow it.”

What is wrong with you people? I hate when people tell others they are having Bad Wrong Fun, but I’m sorry, in this case, you are doing it wrong (yes, that's a satirical comment in case you missed it).

Here’s the thing. In 5th Edition, a Forest Gnome can get a +2 INT / +1 DEX (and also has Darkvision, etc), so we know that this minor change doesn’t break the game mechanics at all. All non-human races get some combination of +2/+1, and Elves already get a boost to INT and DEX… so it isn’t a stretch at all to just swap their bonuses.

The racial bonuses are completely arbitrary anyway (and even differ significantly from one edition of D&D to the other). Why does an Elf get +2 DEX? Because Mearls and Thompson decided that’s what they thought an Elf was at this one moment of time. Why does the Gnome get the bigger INT bonus? Who the f@ck knows. It’s just a game of “Let’s Pretend”. The Player’s Handbook is not some religious scripture handed down by the gods.

SO WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU TELL HIM NO?

The most important job of a DM is help the players have fun. The players only have power over their characters. The rules on everything else in the world -- setting, genre, NPCs, cities, populace, everything -- is basically in the control of the DM.

By saying "No" to this entirely minor and arbitrary change, you are telling the player “the trivial rules of my game world are more important than your character concept or enjoyment of the game.”

If he enjoys a tiny amount of PC optimization as part of character generation, why not let him have fun with that part of the game? Who cares if he gets to INT 20 at 8th level instead of 12th (assuming he picks no Feats)... It will make no difference to the game at the table. [EDIT: Actually, all PCs can get to INT 20 by level 8 with point buy. The only difference is the player that starts at 17 will also get a Feat. This makes the change have an even smaller impact.]

AD&D Half-orc photo bomb

And racial bonuses are entirely arbitrary and trivial. This isn’t a game breaking request. Elves have always had arcane abilities. As an example, in the original Basic D&D sets, the Elf class was a fighter/magic-user hybrid. So why not just let him play an Elf from some special Elf school of trained Elf wizards... or something. Who the hell cares what the rationale is. Maybe he just doesn't want to play a damn Gnome.

As another example, I had one player decide he wasn't crazy about his Feat selections when he reached 4th level (Human). I said "No problem. Just re-pick whichever ones you want". It made no difference to the game. It made a huge difference in his level of fun.

Take the broomstick out of your posterior and let him swap the ability bonuses.  Just get out of the way and facilitate the fun. That is your most important job. 

PS -- This obviously doesn't apply to AL legal characters since there are very strict chargen rules for Adventurers League. Also, if you comment a rebuttal using some example like giving darkvision to a Human, or some other bulls#!t straw man, I will f@#%ing cut your heart out with a spoon. (Rest in peace, Alan Rickman)

[UPDATE]
I just wanted to note an awesomely on-point comment by Robert Ehrman on Facebook:
"This whole article is just imploring DMs to be the bigger person at the table because a 1 point differential isn't going to be truly relevant to either party and player satisfaction matters. Clearly that point went over like a lead balloon."

Yes. YES! A thousand times YES!

I'll go one step further. As I noted in comments:

This article is not about a stat swap. It's about a philosophy. It's about not being married to rules. It's about facilitating ideas from the players. It's about keeping an open mind to player input because it's not the DM's game. The game belongs to everyone at the table. Saying "yes" to a player is not about giving them some insignificant +1... It's about saying "your ideas are just as important to this game as mine are." You want a sub-race of Elves that are tied more to the Arcane through a connection to the Feywild? Awesome! Let's incorporate that idea. We share this game world together.

Update: I posted an follow-up based on some responses.

D&D: Miniatures on the Cheap

Beaky, the unoffical mascot for
Raging Owlbear was acquired for a cool $5.

One of the more commonly asked questions I see on social media is, "How do I add miniatures to my game inexpensively?"

That's a bit of a loaded question. Miniatures are generally not cheap... but there are ways you can add some pizzazz to your games without completely breaking the bank.

If you know me, or read enough of my blog, you may know I am a bit of a miniatures fiend. What you probably don't know is that I've spent well over $1000 on miniatures alone... probably much more. Between Reaper  Bones Kickstarters, D&D Miniatures and Pathfinder Battles random boxes, and countless lots on Ebay, it all adds up to a sum that I don't actually want to calculate (and I'm not even counting the Dwarven Forge). I've got an absurd amount of miniatures... but I always find more I'd like to get. Let my addiction be a wake-up call for you.

So how can you do it on the cheap?

D&D 5e: A Plethora of Class Options in Unearthed Arcana

Wow, I must have been sleeping under a rock to miss this one!

I knew that the revised Ranger options had come out in the last couple months, but I had no idea Mike Mearls' Unearthed Arcana articles had been putting out new class options nearly every week!

If you have desired more class options for 5e (I hadn't really... until I read some of these!), then you definitely need to check out the recent UA articles.

There's a few "meh" options, but there's also so much cool. I definitely recommend checking out their wild shape suggestions for Druids. The Druid also has a couple of really interesting new circles... and if you hadn't already been awaiting the Ranger updates, you should check it out! There's really a lot to digest in these.

Be aware that these are play test option, so may be somewhat broken in some places. A discussion between the DM and players needs to occur beforehand, so that there are no hard feeling if the DM has to nerf some power.

Artificer (new class) - Alchemist, Gunsmith
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/artificer

Barbarian Paths - Path of the Ancestral Guardian, Path of the Storm Herald, Path of the Zealot
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/barbarian-primal-paths

Bard Colleges - College of Glamour, College of Whispers
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/bard-colleges

Cleric Domains - Forge Domain, Grave Domain, Protection Domain
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/cleric-divine-domains

Druid Circles - Circle of Dreams, Circle of the Shepherd, Circle of Twilight, Wildshape Options (!)
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/druid-circles-and-wild-shape

Fighter Options - Arcane Archer, Knight, Samurai

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/fighter

Monk Traditions - Way of the Kensei, Way of Tranquility

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/monk-monastic-traditions

Paladin Oaths - Oath of Conquest, Oath of Treachery
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/paladin-sacred-oaths

Ranger Revisions - Beast Conclave, Hunter Conclave, Deep Stalker Conclave
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/unearthed-arcana-ranger-revised

More Rangers and Rogues - Horizon Walker, Primeval Gaurdian, Scout
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/ranger-and-rogue

Divine Casters -  Warlock Patron: The Seeker, Arcane Tradition: Theurgy
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/faithful

Upcoming weeks will feature the Mystic, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard.

Tell me what you like about the new class options in the comments. I'm still wading through a number of these PDFs, but this looks a bit like a Player's Handbook 2 in the making. Also, let me know if you or your player have tried any of these new options. I'm interested to hear what may be broken... Leave a comment!

WIP: D&D Primer Annotated Character Sheet

My D&D Primer series continues.

Last time, I attempted to illustrate the rules through a fictionalized example game between two friends. This time, I've taken a crack at annotating the character sheet (inspired by Pathfinder Beginner Box).

It displays best if you have your PDF viewer set to 2-page (side-by-side). There are a couple minor display artifacts I'm still cleaning up.

I'm still working on ideas for adding more "tips" to the sheet. Please share any ideas you may have to improve the sheet in the comments.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By4wksmFuwuSQzdlbk45RGZsTTg/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-wKC8kDw_zn1tpSByUwf2aw

WIP: A D&D Primer for new players and DMs

A couple months ago, the Angry DM posted a rant about how Wizards of the Coast has done a poor job in recent years creating a Starter Set that actually teaches new players and, more importantly, new DMs how to play and run a game.

Although I haven't looked through all the new player materials in recent years, I definitely agree with the Angry DM that the D&D Starter Set fails pretty significantly in this regard. The gist of the Angry DM article is that D&D often still requires someone knowledgeable about D&D to pass that knowledge on to the next wave of DMs and players. This is referred to as the "Older Cousin" sales model... which is a bad sales model because it places the burden of recruitment on existing players and DMs rather than on the introductory product itself.

I posted a similar critique of the Starter Set failing to be a good teacher in a recent article, but I didn't go quite as far as Angry DM. In retrospect, I should have emphasized this failure even more, as that would seem to be the most important goal of a Starter Set.

The Pathfinder Beginner Box does a much better job of explaining the basics of the character sheet and walking through character creation and the basics of running an adventure... However, even the Beginner Box doesn't quite present it in the best possible manner... and we're looking for a primer for D&D 5th Edition, not Pathfinder.

In that vein, I decided to try my hand at an example play session to help illustrate the Basic D&D core mechanics. I'd very much like to get some feedback. Constructive criticism is appreciated, but be gentle.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-q2EqROguspdCD8Jv_Kf9qkvYXCHUzZqyjObJ1IGLV4/edit?usp=sharing

This is very much a work in progress, but I would like to put it out there as a free PDF at some point and need insight on how it can be better. Give it a read and let me know. Thanks!

Dice Inking the Old School Way

You can see the wear on the old die that isn't high impact. 

So I was going through my dice sets the other day in the way we partially-OCD gamers do before starting up a new campaign. Several of my precision dice were not inked or had the ink chipped away, so I needed to find a good product to refill the numbers.

Looking at some of my retirees brought back memories. For those of you not old enough, d20's used to be numbered 0 - 9 twice. You colored half the sides to designate 11 through 20. Eventually they improved the molds enough to print 2 digit numbers in the smaller space, but many of those early dice were considered "cheater" dice because all of the high numbers were on one side. Note the grouping on the white d20.

Nowadays, you only need to color your precision dice for number visibility. [Side Note: Pre-painted dice are not considered "precision" dice because the painting process rounds the corners and can alter the shape of the die. Check out Lou Zocchi explaining the process].

Anyway, getting back to the main issue, my precision dice were hard to read because most of the numbers had lost their ink. I had gone over them a number of times with different pen types, but the ink never lasted long after drying.

Then I saw my daughter coloring with Crayolas the other day and I thought, "Hmm... why not try the old ways." So I stole borrowed her silver crayon and started to go to work on my blue gem d20.

The neon Gel FX color really stands out against the green.

Surprise! It seems sometimes the old ways are better. The faces came out pretty well and I was pleased with how easy the application and clean up was.You don't need to worry about ink drying before moving on to the other half of the die.

While I used silver on the blue d20, I also found some Gel FX Crayons in her 96 color set. I had once read that these bright neon colors are good for contrast on dark d20's and they did not disappoint. The Yellow Gel FX color is a fantastic contrast on the green gem die. Crayola also has some Metallic FX crayons that I think I'll give a try to see if I can get a little more contrast on the blue die. The silver looks good, but it is nowhere as bright as the Gel FX Yellow (you can even easily read the tiny Gamescience "G" on the 1).

Crayola used to sell a separate pack of only Gel FX crayons, but these are apparently no longer available and become extremely hard to find. Ironically, I found a 4-pack in the Target $1 aisle just last week... but I think this was crazy coincidence. The Metallic FX might be your best bet for a bright high-contract crayon color.