I have noticed that a lot of DMs appear confused as to their expectations, and the powers granted to them as an Adventurer's League DM. While the Adventurer's league Player's Guide does cover this, many people are still understandably confused when it comes to the Rules for Dungeon Masters (ALPG p9) and Tips for Dungeon Masters (ALPG p11-12) sections.
Fortunately, the good folks who run the Adventurer's league have put together a series of FAQs which help clarify some of the confusion. Sadly, the best article which addresses this is very difficult to find unless you use the search function and know what you are looking for.
The following article was originally posted on the dndadventurersleague.org website, but is difficult to find.
I recommend all AL DMs read this article and familiarize yourself with its contents.
It will help clarify the expectations placed upon you, and make your job easier.
If at all possible, could I ask that this thread be stickied.
Disclaimer: This article is reposted from the dndadventurersleague.org website. Link to the original source is in the title above. I claim no credit for this article, and have reposted it unedited, in its entiretly for the purpose of reaching the maximum target audience possible. Kalani
In a previous article Arthur talked about playing by a common set of rules for the league, for players, and briefly mentioned DM rules. This article goes more indepth on the subject of DM rules and DM Empowerment. – Ed.
DMs Must Follow the Rules as Set Forth in the Player’s Handbook and thePlayer’s Guide and to Generally Run Adventures as Written
DMs are expected to follow all of the rules in the Player’s Handbook and Player’s Guidewhen running games. Since the Player’s Guide permits characters to use all of the material in the D&D basic rules and Player’s Handbook, except for rolling ability scores and hit points and imposing certain alignment restrictions, and restricts characters to those rules, DMs cannot impose any additional restrictions or permit characters to use any additional rules.
This requirement is consistent with the rules set forth in the Dungeon Masters Guide, which states on page five:
The Player’s Handbook contains the main rules you need to play the game.
…
To referee the rules, you need to know them. You don’t need to memorize this book or the Player’s Handbook, but you should have a clear idea of their contents so that, when a situation requires a ruling, you know where to find the proper reference.
Similarly, DMs are expected generally to run D&D Adventurers League adventures as written. DMs who create their own rules and who depart from the text of adventures significantly destroy the common experience of the game and the portability of characters.
In a home game, a DM can freely depart from the rules and the text of an adventure without destroying the experience for their players. However, in organized play, players find it unfair when their characters cannot do what other characters did. They get angry and complain when their DM imposes restrictions that do not limit other characters or when their DM makes them face risks that other characters in the same situation did not face. They also get angry and complain when they hear other DMs gave other players and characters opportunities and wealth that are not generally available to everyone. Therefore, in the D&D Adventurers League, DMs are required to follow the rules and generally to run adventures as they are written.
Nonetheless, DMs have a great deal of latitude in how they run games. On page five, the Dungeon Masters Guide states:
The rules don’t account for every possible situation that might arise during a typical D&D session….How you determine the outcome [of such situations] is up to you.
Where there are no rules, or where the rules leave something unclear, it is up to the DM to decide how to handle a situation. Page fifteen of the Player’s Guide places responsibility for such decisions on the DM, stating:
[Dungeon Masters] are responsible for making adjudications . . . while running the game. A DM’s ruling at the table is considered final for the purpose of that play session.
For example, a player may want his or her character to swing from a chandelier during a combat, casting a spell as the character does so. The Player’s Handbook does not have a clear rule for that situation. The DM could rule it is not possible, call for a Strength (athletics) check to hang onto the chandelier, call for a Dexterity (acrobatics) check to swing from it, and/or rule that the character has disadvantage on the spell attack (or the foe has advantage on its saving throw) due to the motion of the chandelier during the casting.
The current D&D rules intentionally do not cover every situation. When the situation is not covered by a specific rule, or when the rules leave a gray area, whatever the DM says is final. DMs are free to consult their players, other DMs, and the Wizards community forums at community.wizards.com/forums/132291 for guidance on the D&D rules, but are not bound by such guidance.
However, where the rules do cover a situation and there is no gray area, the DM cannot vary from them. For example, the Player’s Handbook clearly indicates when players can take feats. Similarly, the Player’s Guide clearly indicates that players cannot roll character ability scores and hit points. DMs running D&D Adventurers League games cannot change or ignore those rules.
Although We Play the Same Adventures,
DMs Are Empowered to Make Certain Changes
DMs also have some latitude in how they run the League’s adventures. Generally, DMs should run the adventures as written to ensure that players campaign-wide face the same challenges and earn the same rewards. Wizards and the campaign staff carefully draft and playtest the adventures to make sure they are relatively balanced, that they fit the campaign, and that they introduce and handle elements that appear throughout the storyline season. DMs who change, omit, and add encounters disturb that balance, in addition to destroying the common play experience.
Nevertheless, the text of an adventure does not cover every possible contingency. A player might want his character to seek out a non-player character (“NPC”) from an earlier adventure. A group might inadvertently bypass an encounter and the associated rewards. DMs can make minor changes to adventures to account for such circumstances, role-playing the encounter with the NPC if time allows and reworking the missed encounter and inserting it into the adventure at another point so the players have an opportunity to face the challenge and earn the rewards.
The Player’s Guide speaks extensively to the power of DMs to alter adventures in this way. On page eleven, it reminds DMs to “Make decisions and adjudications that enhance the fun of the adventure when possible.” That does not mean DMs should ignore the rules or the text of the adventure, but rather that they should make decisions where there are no rules or where the text of the adventure offers no guidance, in ways that make the adventure fun for everyone.
On page 12, the Player’s Guide enumerates some things DMs are empowered to do in these circumstances:
-
You are empowered to make adjustments to the adventure and make decisions about how the group interacts with the world of this adventure. This is especially important and applicable outside of combat, but feel free to adjust the adventure for groups that are having too easy or too hard of a time.
- Don’t make the adventure too easy or too difficult for a group. Never being challenged makes for a boring game, and being overwhelmed makes for a frustrating game. Gauge the experience of the players (not the characters) with the game, try to feel out (or ask) what they like in a game, and attempt to give each of them the experience they’re after when they play D&D. Give everyone a chance to shine.
- Be mindful of pacing, and keep the game session moving along appropriately. Watch for stalling, since play loses momentum when this happens. At the same time, make sure that the players don’t finish too early; provide them with a full play experience. Try to be aware of running long or short. Adjust the pacing accordingly.
-
Give the players appropriate hints so they can make informed choices about how to proceed. Players should be given clues and hints when appropriate so they can tackle puzzles, combat, and interactions without getting frustrated over lack of information. This helps to encourage immersion in the adventure and gives players “little victories” for figuring out good choices from clues.
Note that Player’s Guide does not empower a DM to ignore any rules. Similarly, while the Guide does go on to say “being the DM isn’t about following the adventure’s text word-for-word,” it does not empower DMs to just ignore the adventure or even substantively depart from the adventure.
Instead, the Player’s Guide gives DMs the power they need to adjust adventures to keep the challenge level appropriate to the group that is playing and to keep the adventure moving and fun. In conclusion, to give DMs some guidance in determining when it is appropriate to modify an adventure, here are some examples of things DMs may do and some things they must not do.
Dos and Don’ts of Modifying Adventures
- Adding and Subtracting Foes: Do add or subtract foes of the same type from a combat to keep the challenge level appropriate to the group. Don’t add foes of a different type or switch out combat encounters entirely. Different types of foes have different abilities that can make combats much harder or much easier than substituting one foe for another of the same challenge rating may otherwise indicate. D&D Expeditions explicitly states which monsters can be added or subtracted for each encounter, however, D&D Encounters/Casual Games are a bit looser and rely on the DM to modify the encounters per the guidelines in the Dungeon Master’s Guide on encounter building.
- Changing the Intended Difficulty of a Combat: Do try to keep combats at the intended level of difficulty when modifying them; make sure combats written to be easy for the group remain easy and combats written to be difficult remain difficult. Making an early easy combat too difficult uses party resources, turning later difficult combats into bloodbaths. Similarly, making an early hard combat too easy preserves resources, making later combats too easy.
- Adding Encounters: Be very careful when adding encounters. Most adventures are written to be played in a certain amount of time. If you add encounters, you run the risk that the players will not have time to finish the actual adventure. Add only those encounters that the characters actually trigger, such as being confronted by the town guard after they break the law or speaking to an NPC whose assistance the characters seek. When you add encounters, be very conscious of the time. Play them out only if there is time; narrate past them if there is not.
- Cutting-off Encounters: Similarly, be very careful when cutting-off encounters. If you are pressed for time, such as when a convention slot is ending or a store is closing, you can waive the last few rounds of a combat that the characters will obviously win or narrate through an encounter. However, doing so deprives the players of the chance to play the game by deciding what their characters do and by roleplaying their characters. It can also deprive them of the feeling of success that follows a combat or the opportunity to interact with an NPC. To avoid taking the game out of the players’ hands that way, don’t cut encounters short or narrate through them unless you must.
- Eliminating Encounters: Don’t eliminate encounters. As a DM, you don’t know what later events the designer and the campaign staff are setting up by introducing an NPC, a foe, a location, or an object in an adventure. The material you eliminate could be very important later in the campaign.
- Modifying Encounters: For the same reasons, avoid modifying encounters. However, do modify them to account for the characters’ actions. If the characters befriend someone, make an enemy, or come up with a creative solution, reflecting that fact in the encounter gives the players a sense of accomplishment. As noted above, if players somehow inadvertently miss an encounter or a reward, you may modify the adventure to insert the encounter or reward later in a way that makes sense in context. Such a change is often a good way to get an adventure that has gone far off track back in the intended direction.
- Subtracting Rewards: Do reduce awards if circumstances warrant doing so. If a character does something that would anger his or her faction, you may choose not to award renown that the character otherwise would have earned. Similarly, if characters take actions in an adventure that would result in them spending time in jail or on the lam, reduce or eliminate downtime awarded to reflect that fact. Be careful in reducing wealth and magic items, as tempers can run high when that happens. However, if circumstances warrant, NPCs can withhold rewards, and the authorities can fine characters.
- Adding Rewards: Don’t add any rewards to adventures, and don’t award rewards that the characters did not earn. The level of experience, wealth, magic items, renown, and downtime in the campaign, and the particular magic items available have been intentionally set by the designer and the campaign staff. You cannot change them. Moreover, characters must earn their wealth and advancement. If a character steals from an NPC or otherwise obtains extra wealth, reduce wealth found in other parts of the adventure so characters don’t receive more wealth than the adventure permits. Similarly, if an adventure is subject to limits on experience rewards, such as D&D Encounters and D&D Expeditions, make sure you don’t award experience in excess of the applicable limit.
Good article, but it is still unclear about adressing missing information in an adventure or things that break DMG rules without explicitly saying that this is what they intend to do. Is the GM empowered to fill in for missing item or character statistics, for instance.
Cyberqat wrote:
Well, that's pretty awful and draconic.
You want to leave the GM in question any latitude to give extra reward, WOTC? Like you could even list a range in the module? "From zero, up to 200 gold, at your discrepancy" or whatever amount of gold.
Otherwise the AL is just a control freak GM, controlling many other GM's and through them, players.
I'll just start my own AL, with hookers and blackjack...
If you give the sword a purpose, you are changing the magic item.
If you assign the sword stats, you are changing the magic item.
If you assign the sword a personality, you are changing the magic item.
There is no rule that every item in every adventure has to follow what is described in the DMG. One of the Expedition adventures gave out a cloak that was different than the DMG description. The AL admins issued an errata on that, but until then the cloak did what the cloak said, the table DM has no authority to change the cloak to match the DMG description.
Now, DMs are allowed to create personalities, so I would expect a DM to give the sword a personality for *their* table. But they cannot assign a permanent personality.
I asked Jeremy Crawford about Hazirawn's stats on Twitter. I'll let you know if he replies.
Raddu76 wrote:
Noon wrote:
Whethre its reaosnable or not... its dead wrong.
This is the response from my regional coordinator. Not only does it say the DM should make up stats for Hazirawn, it in general reinforces the DM as final arbiter and decision maker when it comes to rules. As 30 year RPG gaming veteran, this makes sense to me as anything else just opens the game up to counter-productive rules lawyering on the parts of the players.
P.S. I don't think the AL rules address poker tables and hookers at an AL session. So that too, is up to your GM ;)
=============================================================================================================
DMDave: HotDQ was written before the rules on sentient magic items was completed. As you have noted, there are no stats for Charisma. The AL has not directly addressed this issue, but they have issued the more general answer for what to do about ambiguities in the rules, found here:http://dndadventurersleague.org/sage/index.php....
Bottom line, there is a lot of leeway granted to a DM when there is no clear ruling on a question. The best suggestion I found for Hazirawn is the first response to this post: http://community.wizards.com/.../dd.../threads/4167766
Essentially, the DM who awards Hazirawn should document how they feel it should be used (fill in the missing pieces, like abilities, senses, ideals, bonds and flaws). Write all this down on a DM's note that the player can keep with their character. When playing with a new DM, the player should offer the note, and the new DM is free to take the advice and use it as-is, or may choose to alter it.
That's kind of option (2) in your original question, but further fleshed out to cover roleplay features as well.
This ofcourse DOES bring up the question of how do you handle somethign like Hazirawn if it coems into your game under a significantly differnt GM ruling, like it has no stats and thus cannot fight for control.
In my case I would give the player two options:
(A) Leave it behind at my table
(B) I'll roll secret temporary stats that apply while you are playing it in my game.
I would be careful when swinging the "Dead Wrong" assertion.
Its great your Regional Coordinator gave you an answer, and even better that it is one you like. But what makes you think he has the knowledge or authority to make such decisions?
He is one of 7 volunteers in the US that has agreed to help promote and organize AL games. In the list of responsibilities provided on the website, it does *not* include making rule or policy decisions for all of the AL. Did he contact the other RC? Did he contact the people *running* AL? Did he contact WotC? Or is this just his personal opinion....??
Further, two of the AL admins are regular posters here, and yet somehow they don't 'know' what your RC apparenlty takes as fact. In this *very thread* Robert Alducci could have said the same thing (*IF* that were actually the AL stance), but he didn't . He specifically said he would bounce the issue up to WotC.
So now... why should be believe that your RC is a more authoritive source than one of the AL admins. (Not to mention Skerrit not chiming in... and he is the *head* admin)
Keep in mind, the DM will *have* to adjudicate some things so the item works at *his table*. But that is not the same as assigning stats etc to the sword. Any permanent designation is changing the magic item.
Um.... I don't know who DMDave is... but he apparently lives in the North East, and the NE RC is named Cindy Moore, so I somehow doubt he is your Regional Coordinator.
He may be a local coordinator.... or for your store... or something....
Enevhar_Aldarion wrote:
RCanine wrote:
As far as reducing awards go, here is the official stance on the matter.
DM and DM empowerment (dndadventurersleague.org)
- Subtracting Rewards: Do reduce awards if circumstances warrant doing so. If a character does something that would anger his or her faction, you may choose not to award renown that the character otherwise would have earned. Similarly, if characters take actions in an adventure that would result in them spending time in jail or on the lam, reduce or eliminate downtime awarded to reflect that fact. Be careful in reducing wealth and magic items, as tempers can run high when that happens. However, if circumstances warrant, NPCs can withhold rewards, and the authorities can fine characters.
RCanine, seems to me the fudging is against AL rules, so that's certainly not a supportive example of AL.
And in regards to fights, that's not examples of players changing an outcome. It's clear modules expect you to get through the fight that is between A and B, so you can get to B. Whether they walk through, stealth through, fight through, whatever - it all just ends in going to B, regardless. And this is where your feature may be what I describe as a bug - all the players do is add some colour and quips. That's not playing - it's occasional audience participation.
Kalani,
Your whole suggestion of giving variable rewards will just result in the bolded text occuring more frequently.
No I don't think everyone plays it exactly the same - but the idea is to have a common play experience. Therefore certain details are hard coded. Dms can alter Conversations, tactics, etc. but they cannot alter the substance of the adventure such as introducing new monsters, encounters, treasure etc. minor npcs are fine though.
For a start I've run AL modules that have hidden treasure - that's going to make the play experience uncommon as one group misses out on a treasure and another finds it.
Instead of a dice determining if you get another 50 GP, it'd be a GM deciding it - yet for some reason (and amazingly given this isn't a hobby about boardgames) you think that's a disruptive influence?
My initial idea is that they could have modules would grant a GM a budget of gold he could hand out if it suits what happens in play.
The budget limit would be harded coded as much.
It'd be silly to say 'because it's not hard coded in modules now, it can never be in any future ones'. That's not the module being hardwired.
RCanine wrote:
Noon wrote:
My feeling is that we shouldn't be telling thoughtful, articulate DMs that AL isn't a 'good fit' for them; we should be finding ways to encourage such DMs to continue running AL games and even find ways to have them pass on their understanding and knowledge to new DMs. That's how you improve and expand the program in a lasting, durable way.
--
Pauper
Noon wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Sometimes you just have to do whats fun. I recently was testing a possible encounter with a sleep-like effect that you get a save against (no Hp limit like the spell has). The save is quite low, but somehow all five players failed. That should be a TPK; first fight of the mod. Not really fun. Instead, as the players went around saying what they rolled, I lowered the save DC so two characters were awake and we could keep playing (and then made a note to adjust the final version so there was a way to prevent such a save or TPK situation should I decide to use that encounter).
Oraibi wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Every campaign starts out railroaded. If it didn't, you'd have four or five random PCs drinking ale in a tavern and making lewd gestures at the bar maid and no hint of a reason for them to do anything else.
The beginning of HotDQ has the characters going into the town because they have to. Sure, they could be a cowardly sort and go the other way, but that's not how a campaign works.
RCanine wrote:
Mind you, I don't disagree with your statements if we were talking about a home game. But there is an inherent amount of railroading and vague motivations that comes along with organized play. I don't think it can actually be completely avoided, but I also think it is a feature and not a bug. (In other words, the qualities inherent in OP are supposed to be there, and it's not something that's unintentional and undesirable.)
I'll also point out that I was refering to fudging as a judge to avoid a TPK 20 minutes into game due to the table some how hitting astronomical odds bad roll, not saying I think giving out monty hall levels of treasure and destroying a shared campaign economy is fun so I want to do it. It's that kind of logic that is why we can't have nice things.
Noon wrote:
RCanine wrote:
... wait, what does DME mean?
Oraibi wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Oraibi wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
TheBreen wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
RCanine wrote:
So just because a DM is able to do certain things, that doesn't always mean they SHOULD do them. I favor a conservative approach to DM authority which seeks to err on the side of caution.
When it comes to monsters, we are encouraged to add/remove monsters of the same type - that's it.
If however, an encounter is going south due to an overestimation of party strength, we can always halve the HPs of the remaining monsters, or reduce their AB and AC by a few points in order to make the combat less challenging. This should only be done however in a situation where it doesn't make sense for the creature(s) to flee and/or take prisoners, and for non-important battles only. Who wants to die to a horde of goblins just because the DM made an error when setting up the encounter and put a few too many critters on the table.
RCanine wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Pauper wrote:
That post confuses the heck outta me Mind_Flayer_Monk.
I run the adventure as written. I dont see this as me doing a diservice to the players at all, but doing what the Scenario and AL in general asks me to do.
Tyranthraxus wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Having read through this thread, and seeing as how no one's taken the bait,I feel obliged to say this.
You know what? Forget the blackjack. And forget the AL!
(It really has been an interesting thread)
Pauper wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Pauper wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
TheBreen wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Aribeth wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
...is a perfect example of a three-round adventure, even if having to break the adventure up twice during the encounter is a bit of a pain.
Wait, whattaya mean there's more to the mod after Encounter One?
Pauper wrote:
Good article on dndadventurersleague.org today about just this very topic, which includes a number of ways to 'tweak' an adventure (including a published AL adventure) using DM empowerment to make it more fun:
- Use your players' written background elements to add personal interest to the story.
For instance, rather than three nameless half-orcs in the ambush, have one of them be a member of the gang that's hunting the rogue. You can even include a note that implies the half-orc was tipped to the rogue's location by one of the story villains -- that adds a personal touch to the adventure.
- Embellish the written description of areas to tell the kind of story you want to tell.
The example given changes a mundane warehouse into a spooky potential crime scene. Nicely done.
- Personalize!
Prefer that the half-orc use handaxes rather than scimitars? Go for it -- so long as the in-game stats stay the same.
- Side quests are your friend.
Have a party that's less motivated by greed than by doing good deeds? Then have a few of the NPCs they interact with describe items that are already placed in the villains' treasure horde, so that the players aren't selling the items for gold, but receiving a well-deserved reward for returning the items!
it's a good article, and a great starting answer to the question, "What am I allowed to do under DME?"
http://dndadventurersleague.org/2015/02/breaking-the-confines-of-the-page-how-you-can-make-a-premade-game-world-your-own/
--
Pauper
I found that sections of that article directly contradicted previous articles, and the official AL FAQs In particular the following:
- Maybe you want to reward the players with a particular item you add in as a reward......
- ........and the heirloom is now a magical “something” worth far more than just 15 gp.
Kalani wrote:
Fair enough, although you can see how it might be misinterpreted by those who do not read the rules/guidelines as closely as you or I. This is especially true given how ambiguously worded the "Tips for the Dungeon Master" section of the ALPG is - especially for those DMs who have not read the DM empowerment article or the AL FAQ (which I assume a large number of more casual DMs are oblivious of).
In light of the above, this article may appear supportive of allowing DMs to add/increase/modify treasure awards. Given how treasure-anaemic HOTDQ is, I could see many DMs rightfully desire to increase the treasure awards in order to keep their players happy (I know I wish I could).
Ah the DME debate. The more things change... the more things stay the same..
I am glad the debate is there because it is never something to be taken lightly as it can seriously mess with peoples fun, as is evident by some responses. I do however feel obliged to add that to my knowledge few, if any, of the LFR epics (or specials or BI's) including 4-2 were written with the expectation that they would or should be run as written (i.e. following the letter). It was certainly possible, but generally not considered the optimal experience. Just FYI, I am sure its unlikely to change anyones mind 
RCanine wrote: