OK, I know we are getting new players all the time in AL, but can we please please please make sure that people who are DMing are at least familiar with the rules of the game or are comfortable with being gently reminded of how a rule works in 5e, if different from a previous edition?
I am personally tired of getting on a table and being told that something works differently than what's actually in the book. I am all for DME and making adjustments to make things more fun, but being told that a spy, who does not have blindsight, can take an opportunity attack while in a fog cloud because they can still hear me is rediculous.
</rant>
I can see how a DM would make that mistake, though, given the section on seeing/being seen in combat and attacking creatures you can't see. It spefically says that you can attack creatures that you can hear but can't see.
The opportunity attack requiring you to be able to see the target is a fairly subtle distinction for someone who isn't 100% on the rules. I'd've made the mistake if I hadn't just looked up the rules on it after your post.
I know a few DM who do believe they can change the rules because they are the DM.
Yes in homegame, DM are allowed to change everything, in home game if a DM want paladin to use Wisdom for casting spell instead of Charisma they can change it, no problem.
I do agree, at least the store owner should test his DM to make sure they know at least the basic rules, and warn all their new DM that if their is knowledgeable player (most store owner knows the hard core players coming everyweek who knows every book by heart) at the table they should listen to them.
But player need to remember that sometime in the module, they have rules to goes against the rule in the PHB, so if the DM say no the rule don't apply here, the player should respect the DM and give him the benefit of the doubt, it might be a module special exception.
For example in one of the module, one of the monster use a spell that is NOT available to players, that spell making that NPC immune to all attacks (melee, ranged, magical) so even if the player roll a 20 to attack that NPC he will miss (as a nice DM I tell my player that a magical effect deflected the attack and they believe that no attack will manage to by-pass this barrier) and if one of my player tell me that a 20 always hit, I'll tell him yes he's right, EXCEPT here and I'll show him the paragraphe after the adventure if he doesn't believe me
Couldn't you just tell the DM that he should recheck and let him look up the basic rules?
I constantly look up rules and still forget something here and there. But I dislike houseruling so if a player thinks it should be different I look it up to make sure.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I use three approaches as a DM when dealing with rules questions.
1) I know I'm uncertain about the rule. Wait a sec, folks, while I look this up ...
2) I'm pretty sure I know how the rule works. I've made my ruling, if you can cite the rule by page and location and show it to me RIGHT NOW, that works. Otherwise this situation is resolved, though feel free to let me know if you find clarification later.
3) I definitely know how the rule should be applied in my game. Provide a quick clarification of that to the player. I'll be glad to discuss it further with you after the game.
Primarchx wrote:
I see your point, Undrhill, but let's be realistic -- the admin staff for Adventurers League has, as an explicit goal, to grow AL Organized Play. They can't do that without recruiting new DMs.
And, as someone who has tried recruiting new DMs, I can tell you that the main reason people give for being reluctant to get behind the screen is that they're not as solid on the rules as they feel a DM 'should' be, and that they don't like the idea of being corrected on rules. I can't say I blame anyone for feeling that way.
Re-instituting the 'DM test' that existed in prior Organized Play campaigns would seriously hinder any drive to recruit new DMs by highlighting exactly that point that most people fear about getting behind the screen. If you're a DM and you can provide an entertaining experience to three-to-seven players, then you're doing your job. Rules mastery is all very well, but it's the difference between a good and better-than-good DM, not the difference between someone who can and can't DM.
--
Pauper
This is a program based on volunteers, and we get to participate in for free. If one of your *personal* requirements for enjoyment is having a DM that is at least as rules knowledgeable than you are.... then you have the personal choice to limit who you play with. This may mean you don't get to play as often, but again, that is why it is a personal choice.
I am a rules geek, it is very rare to find a DM that knows the rules better than I do. Oh well... I can either try and correct every little thing they do 'wrong', or just realize that not everyone is willing to waste their lives pooring over rules like I am. IME most DMs are open to discussing rules misunderstandings..... but I am careful to pick and choose what topics are important enough to worry about.
The DM 'should' know the rules fairly well, and preferably better than most of his players. But if you are so knowledgeable that you are way above the 'average'... then *you* are the kink in the system. You are the one throwing the system into disarray. Not saying its wrong to have rules knowledge, but the system is designed for the masses, you need to learn how to work within that.
As a great person once said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." You can have a good game or you can have a perfect game, but you almost never get both.
The very nature of D&D is risk taking. Those risks include getting killed by a monster, a trap or a DM miscue. It's the nature of the beast. As a DM I know the rules as well as most anyone, but I also have the responsibility of being a story teller and an event manager. There's a lot of plates in the air. If a player has a problem with a ruling, as I've said, and can back it up without taking up our limited time, then fine, I can roll with that. But I'm not going to feel particularly guilty if an honest mistake creates a negative circumstance in my game. I see that happen in sports all the time and yet people still love playing and watching sports.
If you want a risk-free, rules-perfect environment, I suggest a computer game with lots of cheat codes.
QwertyAzerty wrote:
What I say to my potential DM recruits is this:
You have made the hard step already by being willing to DM in the first place. Don't worry about your rules knowledge, that will improve with time. Play to your strengths and familiarize yourself with the adventure you are running.
As far as rules go - the only rules you need to have down are the 3 types of D20 roll (Attack, Ability Check and Saving throw), knowing that they are all different (and don't overlap), knowing how advantage/disadvantage works, and finally how critical hits work.
I also ask them to read the ALPG and familiarize themselves with the AL specific rules, especially those relating to code of conduct and DM empowerment. I let them know that they can ask me any questions they like - even in the middle of a game.
The rest - isn't needed to DM but certainly helps. Your players should be familiar with their characters and what they can do. Monsters are self contained as to their main abilities. All that's left is to relax, and have fun. Relaxing into the job is important as being stressed will affect your performance.
I also try to give new DMs a table with at least a few experienced players - who can assist them with their greater rules knowledge.
Primarchx wrote:
Good post, imaginaryfriend. When I say RIGHT NOW, I mean I don't want to waste 10 minutes looking up a rule at the table on a Saturday afternoon. If the players all want to look it up, I'll defer, but mainly I'm trying to make sure all the players' time is honored, since we're on a tight schedule with Expeditions, and we keep on task.
Also the 5e rules are not foolproof and there are definately opposing viewpoints on how certain rules are applied. If someone wants to convince me to take their interpretation, okay, but after the game.
There's a difference between being iffy on some rules that don't come up that often, and getting the fundamentals of the game consistantly wrong. The DM who insists on giving kobolds (or anything else) multiple attacks per round against level 1 characters, who also adds up the to hit bonuses incorrectly (see below), or just pulls it out of his ear entirely (when was the last time you rolled d100 for a saving throw?).
The to hit bonus issue example. The kobold's +4 to hit already includes the equivalent of proficiency bonus, you don't then add the dex/str bonus to the proficiency bonus and then add in the +4 (resulting in a +8 to hit).
That's an example from my first experience with the released rules for D&D 5th Edition. A four hour session which consisted of a single fight (and nothing else). 5 PCs vs 6 kobolds, using detailed miniatures rules that I'm guessing come partially from D&D 4th edition, and partially from the DM. This was my introduction to 5th edition with Hoard of the Dragon Queen AL session.
We leveled after that one fight, with about 300gp reward. I had to watch a youtube play through of that campaign (while reading the books for it that I'd purchased) in order to understand what was actually supposed to happen. If I was a brand new player, never played any RPG before (and not the veteran grognard I am), I would not understand what was wrong and like most of the other players who were brand new, would never have returned.
I suffered through three more sessions like that, hoping it would improve, but it didn't. In fact, it got worse when the DM introduced a DMPC, a race/class combo from earlier editions plus homebrew, and other game worlds, and giving her godlike abilities. I just stopped at that point, and didn't go back to that store for six months.
I'm now DMing Princes of the Apocalypse there, but it's not without it's trials as that DM is playing, along with another older player who plays the same way, and who are royally complaining about the AL rules, and insisting that you cannot play D&D without major house rules and lots of detailed miniatures combat.
I'm getting fed up with the NSFLGS but I fully enjoy the concept and understand why the AL exists, and as some friends will attest to, I've never been this excited about D&D since the late 80s when I more or less moved to other games, but I'm back now and enjoying it despite the localized problems....
I have pretty good rules knowledge, and if I'm 90-100% certain the DM is doing a rule wrong, I will (politely) cite/lookup a rule to clarify, to help everyone know the rules better.
If I am DMing and someone says I'm doing a rule wrong, and I'm not 100% sure, I will ask someone to look it up and let me know, but I will continue and correct if need be.
shaterbane wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
I don't think the problem here is a DM not knowing the rules as well, but a DM refusing to even look them up when his players ask him to.
I may have been lucky with my groups so far, but someone pointing out a rule is different to me happens only like every 20th step and most of the time they are actually correct too, so I never felt it disturbed the flow of the game much.
And houseruling in AL is kind of weird. You can do that for stuff that it not mentioned in the rules at all, but changing things that are black on white stated otherwise? Nah.
I actually have a very good AL DM that isn't always 100% on the rules, but he always listens to what the player wants to do and if he isn't sure, will usually let the player do what he wants and keeps the game moving rather than looking things up. This came up recently when a barbarian with tavern brawler wanted to do two-weapon fighting unarmed because "unarmed strike" is a one-handed weapon... which i believe you can't actually do without the Dual Wield feat because "unarmed strike" is not a light melee weapon.
The situation was a bar fight and the player didn't want to pull out his Great Axe and slaughter all the drunks, and the DM let him Dual Wield rather than spend too much time resolving combat during a planned social encounter. During any fight that really mattered, the barbarian used a two-handed axe and not his fists, so it's not likely to effect any of the "real" combat encounters. The only real challenging part was forcing myself to keep my mouth mostly shut - all I would do is interrupt their fun with my silly rules, so I did my best not to interrupt.
Besides - my DM does voices. Any DM that does voices and good narrative combat is allowed to make a few rules mistakes. When I dm, I have to get all the rules right because every NPC sounds exactly the same and the only monster voices I can do sound like Daffy Duck, and I usually forget to do narrative combat after the first couple turns.
Did the opportunity attack kill you or prevent you from getting a reward you would otherwise earn?
If the answer is no:
RCanine wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
The best way to deal with it is often to speak to the DM and/or player after the game, and let them know what they got wrong.
Of course, sometimes the way I deal with it is just to roll my eyes and ignore the rules mistake, and other times to tell them immediately what the right rule is.
But I don't always make the best choices there. 
My ego gets up if I correct someone and they tell me I'm wrong, and yet I'm right, so I pull out the rulebooks and put the game on hold, which really I shouldn't do unless I'm the DM.
(At least a few times, I've been sure I was right but it turned out I was very wrong, too. It's got less potential for embarrassment if you talk after the game!)
Oraibi wrote:
There's no excuse for a DM who doesn't know the rules of 5e.
If the DM doesn't know the 5e rules, or, worse, knows them and doesn't care, walk away and tell the organiser why you are leaving his store.
BoldItalic wrote:
SterlingRat wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
CahPahkah wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
Okay, from the point of view of an FLGS owner, having all my DMs demonstrate minis and maps (products that I sell) is rather the ideal situation.
AL does not require those elements, but it does not prevent their use either. I can certainly see the store owner saying 'if you want to play here, this is the rules you need to follow'. That's perfectly acceptable under the AL rules.
If that's not a playstyle and ruleset you can get behind, you probably do need a different location.
What, precisely, is the Store Owner doing in violation of the AL rules?
If they are houseruling variations on the core ruleset (Player's Handbook, Online Basic Rules, etc) (and worse, forcing other DMs at the location to use those), then, no, that's not acceptable. The LC and/or/then RC probably ought to be contacted.
If they are instructing AL specific rules to be ignored, again, that's not acceptable for AL play. They aren't the campaign DM. The LC and/or/then RC probably ought to be contacted.
If they are making mistakes that are 'in violation of the rules', that's a completely different matter. If they refuse to change when questioned, you either need a new location, or a new confrontation style. There's absolutely nothing that can be done about that, by anyone.
If you have evidence that they are reporting WPN games that aren't actually happening, that should be reported to Wizards Customer Service, I would think.
If there's a new store opening nearby, I would go to them and see if I could get on their schedule before they even open to schedule regular games, to make sure they're going to participate in Encounters, and to volunteer to help out with Adventurer's League at their location. This would be even more true if you are not satisfied with your current environment.
Pauper wrote:
If your Store Owner is listed as the LC on:
dndadventurersleague.org/sage/index.php?title=Administrators
then you need to contact the RC concerning this behavior.
From a purely business perspective and as a small business owner, if he has the customer base to support 3 weekly AL games and there's no competition for 80 miles, I might consider investing in a store front. Where is this and is there any gaming community beyond D&D? Please tell me I wouldn't have to learn a new language.
Shatterbane - you mentioned that your store owner is your LC. If this is the case the person should be reported to your RC.
Before you do that however, I would first make certain they are your LC and not just the store event coordinator (there is a fair number of people who confuse the two terms).
All campaign staff (except those recently appointed and not yet added to the list) are searchable via the dndadventurersleague.org site. If your store owners name is not on that list, chances are good that they aren't a member of the campaign staff and are not in fact your LC
A link to the list of RCs/LCs (sorted by region) can be found in my sig
shaterbane wrote:
Checked that list, and he is not listed as the LC. He insists that he is however. Nearest listed LC for me is in SLC (2 of them) which is about 120 miles north of me in Utah.
There is a huge player base here, and yes, I have considered starting a store of my own a bit north. We definitely have, at current, enough for two tables, he's claiming more will be ther tonight. I'll believe it when I see it though the way he's alienating the local community and the player base in the area.
Thanks for pointing that list out for me. He was telling me that every store owner who schedules it is a "Local Coordinator". Should have done a bit more research myself, but I've been busy trying to learn the PotA stuff and prepping the game sessions.
Ainulindalion wrote:
Ainulindalion wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
abanathie wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
Thanks, I'll consider asking the LC's then. Personally, I'm about to call it quits with that store for a long list of reasons, and if that's how they really want to do it, fine. I bought D&D 5e, the first I've bought since 2nd edition (I was given 3.5 but never played it, I'd moved to other games), I just really wanted to play 5e in an official capacity and see how the whole organized play thing worked. It's just frustrating that it's being prevented locally. I'm waiting until next week, for example, to see if I can recover my rogue's rapier which flew off the Mulmaster city walls after I rolled a 1 during DDEX2-1. Which is not something that I find enhances the fun. Any more than my wife, who's cleric impaled herself on her sword when she rolled a 1 found that bit fun. So I fully understand the no house rules thing.
End result of that fight, using that table were the 1s club expanding with 2 near fatal self inflicted wounds, and 3 weapons tossed over the wall during the fight (3 hours to do the first mini adventure in DDEX2-1), which I understand has a par play time of about 1 hour. Different DM who has things move a bit faster and we actually get some story.
On occasion (read: rarely) I have made an ad hoc ruling when someone rolls a 1. Most of the time, it is a minor penalty (off balance granting next attacker advantage, drop weapon, fall prone or the like). For dramatic effect I sometimes say that an enemy hits its friend (esp if the party is struggling).
I am not consistent in this and only use such rulings to spice up an otherwise unexciting encounter or as a tool to subtly influence encounter difficulty (if the party is finding it too easy/hard)
I also encourage players to collect scars from any critical hits or KOs they suffer (but don't expect it). I sometimes reward those who take said scars with the occasional advantage on a charisma check (persuasion or intimidate usually).
I don't actually have fumble/crit rules - I just make rulings in the moment if it seems appropriate. Ad hoc adv/disadvantage is my favourite 5e tool.
Kalani wrote:
Sounds like a bad store for AL play. Are there other stores nearby? Is registering with AL as a "gaming club" (and running games at a local bookstore, coffee house, etc) an option for you?
Oraibi wrote:
Oh man, that sounds terrible. I'm sorry the situation is so bad for you.
I suggest you talk to the LC and the RC for your area and see if there's something that can be done. How far is the next town over?
Oraibi wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
shaterbane wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
If you're where I think you are, you might also try the local ward/branch. They may have a meeting room available. And I checked; that organization doesn't have a policy against D&D.
TheBreen wrote:
So, a business licence doesn't cover patrons gathering in an area? Regardless of the purpose of the gathering, I would think that a business with a licence would have those gatherings covered under their license.
Primarchx wrote:
Without rehashing everything, I will just point out that the local house rules do not match any version of D&D I have played; I started in 1980. It sounds like a mash-up of everything the store owner liked in every rule system he has played. (Has your store owner actually cracked the 5e rule books?)
My HotDQ group had to dis-invite a player who kept trying to convert his 5e Fighter into his old 3.5 Fighter, will all the higher-level stat boosts and feats and everything. He got quite offended at the thought that the 5e PHB would explain how to describe his character's abilities. Of course a store owner has more options than just another would-be player - including withdrawal from AL, and making somebody persona non grata at his store.
It sounds like an AL Admin (or somebody with some authority) needs to interview the store owner to determine his willingness to host AL games, as opposed to D&D homebrew games. And a state policeman might be asked to do a seperate interview with the store owner in the event the first interview goes badly.
Undrhil wrote: