As a DM who only got into 5e a few monthes ago, with a group who are newer as well, I've experienced a lot of issues with it and would like to touch on them in this thread. I am also wondering if anyone else has encountered these same problems, how they've dealt with it, or tips in general. Now I don't have an EXTENSIVE knowledge of 5e by any means, or D&D in general, but I would go as far to say I'm a bit past the basics at this point. That being said, in my personal opinion, it's been a pretty big hassle to make sense of a lot of the rules on my own, and I often required the help of many different websites and others. Even core rules of the game seemed like they weren't as well explained as they could've been, and it took a good few weeks of unrelenting page flipping between the PHB, DMG, and MM, site searching, and tweeting/emailing well known DMs to even get a foot in. Simple things they could of done in the PHB, like specifically state somewhere "Subraces keep the traits/benefits of themselves, and of the general race they are part of" instead of just subtley implying it through the example of Bruenor, are absent. There are many nuances with attacks, spells, actions, etc. that are clarified by Jeremy Crawford or another reputable resource, that I just wouldn't have guessed or thought of based on the information provided. For example, all this recent talk about how things without attack rolls don't count as attacks, even if they are damaging to others, so apparently many spells and breath weapons no longer qualify. What are you supposed to call them? The rules and defintions seem to take words that exist in regular english vocabulary, and come up with a seperate definition for them in the context of the game mechanics, but in nowhere does it specifically just say that it does, it is all implied and meant to be guessed at. This has been reflected by the fact I've seen multiple pages of discussions on what basic words like of, for, can, able, etc. mean in the rules, on more threads then I can count on this forum. I'm aware 5e is incredibly more sound, lighter on complications and unecessary numbers and adding, and easier for new players to get into compared to the other editions, and most of the problems and questions I've had were solved and explained to me more extensively or in simpler terms by one or more resources I listed above, but I feel like that shouldn't have to use all those just to play the game. My opinion is that for the amount you pay for the core books alone you should have all you need to just look at a mechanic or rule that impacts a large amount of the game, and have it be easily understandable to the typical buyer. Now don't get me wrong, I'm aware that it is a little unrealistic to expect a game such as this to account for every possible error that might come up during gameplay, as well as some minor printing errors. In addition to this, it is a big part of where the DM comes in to adjucate vagueness and problems during the game when they do come up. But it does make me feel bad when I think of all the people who have purchased this, and are completely unaware that errata, this community, and Jeremy Crawford's clarification tweets even exist. They are under the impression that what they are buying, is a complete product where everything they need to play correctly is right there in it. Now many of you might think "Well again, everything you need to play is in there, it is the DM's job to make rulings on things you do not get, and there isn't really a CORRECT way to play as long as everyone is having fun". To this i say, well alright, but there are people out there where having fun to them means going by the rules. Perhaps this just isn't the game for someone like that, but I do agree it is a little unfair to drop even $40-$50 on just the Player's Handbook when it's not full of correct information. I don't completely share the stance that everything needs to be completely cut and dry, as there have been times where the vagueness and room for interpretation in rules and mechanics have provided several possible answers that would all work relatively same but some lean a little towards "this isn't game breaking but if this was completely specified it would be wrong" albeit funner, so i chose that way to rule for my group. I do feel strongly however, that house rules and interpretations should be set aside for changing pre-existing rules and mechanics that are clear to better fit the group's needs and play styles, and vague rules that can be interpreted different ways without causing large unintentional problems, not to fix errors the game system itself caused, and vague rules that if interpreted wrong, mean negative consequences for play either immediatly or down the line. To me this also provides the problem of a general disconnect with DMs without knowledge of errata and outdated core rule books, and players with knowledge of errata and/or updated rule books, and vice versa. While it may be easy to say "well the DM is in charge, and the group is free to inform him if they notice it or if it starts to affect the game negatively, and the DM is also free to say he disagrees as he again is in charge" I think this could cause a lot of tension with rule lawyering for either party, and the sense that the book they paid $40-$50 is incomplete and full of errors, while the other person got a better version for the same price. It is mostly fine for those who have played past editions before and are used to errata, but from personal experience I can tell you it is disheartening to have the sense that you wasted your money, especially if you have no way to print, or otherwise access other necessary resources. This problem is especially prevalent in the adventure modules to me. While Hoard of the Dragon Queen only required an online supplement (as far as my knowledge) because the Monster Manual was not out yet, how did they expect people to play this who lacked the ability to get online, or to a printer? Now I'm not sure if Rise of Tiamat has a Council Scorecard in the module itself, similar to how the PHB has character sheets in the back of the book one could copy down on a piece of paper, or photocopy (I do not have this one, or any modules out right now, due to horror stories of how you need to completely tailor and scrap certain parts to fit your group, and the fact that I prefer making my own campaigns) but if not I just can't believe it. I did, however, try to get Princes of The Apocalypse, and was completely shocked upon finding out the fact that this one required a 55 page adventure supplement needed to play it, and a seemingly optional player's companion for the Elemental Evil storyline? First off, the adventure supplement should have been included the book. While I might be inclined to forgive HotDQ and RoT, granted they only lack resources and information in them that is provided in the core books (which is still a bit of extortion in my book), there is completely no justification for PoTA. Do they expect us to just make up the stats and effects of all the unique creatures and items for the module if we lack the resources to access it online? That is ridiculous, and genuinely greedy and lazy. Modules are typically meant for new players, allowing them to see how a campaign runs and get used to the rules, and those who do not have much time on their hands. Is it right to completely shakedown and give the biggest hassle to those who have no idea the book even requires a supplement, or what a supplement is, or those who have limited time in the first place and perfer a more easy and casual experience now having to sit by a printer for 55 pages worth of required information unless they want to have to tailor the whole campaign, the thing they bought in the first place to avoid? As far as the optional player's companion, this as well should have been included in the book, or atleast sold in-store/handed out for free upon purchase. We do live in the technological era, where computer and printer access is readily available to many people, but this is just insanity to me, it is after all a table top game . It upsets me the most that the Out of the Abyss module, which is to me the most interesting module they have announced so far, will probablly be a very similar situation. It also worries me that all the current modules have either had a poorly made storyline and encounters or large portions resources missing from them or, like in the case of RoT, both. They alone are incomplete, and a buyer looking for a module to run other then the starter set adventure that requires little to no tailoring if they lack the access to the internet and/or a printer is completely out of luck. This is after the creators stressed the reason for the long delays between the release of each one is due to focusing in on quality, rather then quantity. Now I have had A LOT of fun now that I know what I'm doing (for the most part haha), and so has my group. This isn't the subject of if 5e is worth it or not, to me it really is. But I just wanted to share my story of what I've been through and encountered on the way, with a hint of venting, and to see if you all have had any similar experiences, general thoughts, advice dealing with these issues? Perhaps you disagree? I'm really interested to hear all of your thoughts!
Can you break this up into mutiple posts or paragraphs or something. The wall of text is nearly unreadable, at least I know I won't read it.
+1 to above comment. I was looking for an image in the wall of characters thinking it was ASCII art and not an actual text message.
If you are posting from a phone or tablet this site tends to eat all formatting if you do that - you have to either change text format at the bottom to text only or put in your own html markup.
If I'm posting from my phone I always put in <br/> or <p/> tags to break lines up.
UlgarrRedsplee wrote:
I agree that the game isn't good at explaining itself to newcomers, steeped as it is in tradition.
However, I figured out how to play a more difficult version when I was 8. I DM a game for kids (8-17) and they don't have any difficulty with after the 1st session.
I know we ought to do a better job training up new DMs. It's a subject many of us are taking seriously.
bawylie wrote:
Several thoughts in response to this.
First, and most importantly, don't get too caught up in the "right" rule. For example if it makes sense to you that intentionally causing harm is an attack, it's an attack. As long as you are consistent and base your decision on your best understanding of the rules, that's all that matters. The arguments you see on this site are not typical of a normal game ... people come here to debate as much as to clarify. In actual games the DM makes a call and the game moves on.
The "outdated" rule books issue has been overstated. There are some clarifications but there has been no change to how the rules were intended to work. See my first point on this one. If you've been doing something that's not quite what they meant it's not the end of the world.
If you want a good intro campaign, I'd recommend the starter set. It's better (not great, but better) at explaining what's going on. Most modules aren't really designed to be introductions for new DMs, they're campaigns for people who lack the time to develop their own campaign.
I can't speak much about the HOTDR or other modules, I don't use modules. I will say that it's incredibly difficult to write modules that suit every need.
Long ago they had said that there were going to be informational videos and other introductory tools on the WOTC web site. Sadly that has not happened yet.
There are some videos of people actually playing the game which you might find useful.
I've been playing for a long time so as much as I try to empathize with you ... I just can't. I can't wipe my memory in order to take a fresh look at the rules so if it sounds callous to say "just do it" it's not intentional.
Last, but not least, if you're having fun you're doing it right. If you have specific questions feel free to ask. Just ignore every post after about post number 30 or so because either the issue has been clarified or it's just gamers having endless debate. Much like the who would win a fight between X and Y. 
X would win easily with his two legs and stable stance, while Y is spending all his concentration hopping on his one foot hoping to stay standing.
What! X and Y would never be in a fight, they come from completely different alphabet universes, owned and operated by different companies! I know you are thinking about that crossover edition years ago where the two teamed up for "Mind your P's and Q's" but after the debacle over the licensing rights to Z that's never going to happen again.
UlgarrRedsplee wrote:
First I would like to apologize for the formatting, typically I've only wrote short responses on here, at most a few paragraphs, so I'm a little unfamiliar with how to do it (and yes it is off a phone). So thank you OoftaMeg, I will remember to do that for the future, and thank you ShinQuickMan for making it much easier on the eyes haha. But that is good advice, I live near about three different gaming stores, but I never once have seen anyone casually playing D&D! Maybe it's just not as popular where I am, but the main draw is either Magic: The Gathering, or that Star Wars game. But I don't know, is it worse for past edition players starting 5e since they need to break habits, and relearn parts of the game where they changed rules or mechanics? Or for the unexperienced player who has no idea what a saving throw does?
But you know, Hurin, I was actually pretty tempted to get 4e instead of 5e at first. You can get almost all the core books now, for the price of a single core book of 5e, and it did seem like it was the easiest one to get into. What really stopped me however, was around that time I listened to few podcasts of people playing 5e and it sounded just like a really good story telling game, focused on the narrative over the numbers. I know 4e has a sort of "love it or hate it" divide going for it of players, but most reviews on how it recounted that it acted more like a video game then a role playing game. Now there has been many discussions I've both had with others and read about over the internet, whether it is the game's fault if the player's dont roleplay, or the player's themselves. I'm sure a good DM could pull it off, but I also got the feeling that I probablly couldn't of. I got into Dungeons and Dragons with a focus for the story aspect, and it seemed like 5e gave player's more freedom to act in the way they would like. Instead of giving them hard-wired abilities, it let them get more creative in combat, letting them improvise weapons in the environment and such. The fact this could all be played with "the theater of the mind", instead of having to go out and get a gameboard and miniatures was a bonus as well.
Thank you guys though for your responses! They were pretty insightful, and they did help me out. Perhaps I'm just a little OCD about knowing the rules or making things work when I don't know the original intent. I have friends who look at me sometimes and just be like "Who cares? If you don't get something, or something seems off, make something up!" and I envy that they don't feel weird about doing that. It's a slow process to change my way of thinking on that and be more open to it, but I think I'm starting to do better.
OoftaMeg wrote:
bawylie wrote:
LordTwig wrote:
I'll just echo sentiments already expressed above. It's not the minutiae of a roleplaying game that you and your friends will remember fondly in the years to come. The rules are there to serve the game--not the other way around. I know that's a bold idea to embrace at the entry stage, but it has been the ultimate truth in my own experience. You will inevitably find things that you like about the rules and hate about them. Don't hesitate to discard those that hinder your table's enjoyment of the game. Experience and game savvy will come with time.
UlgarrRedsplee wrote:
Hurin88 wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
bawylie wrote:
I think you don't find documents that 'train up' DM's because you would find no quorum/consensus about how they should be trained.
The greed is in telling everyone they are playing D&D right, because that makes more money than actually releasing training in any particular way or ways.
And everyone loves to hear they are right.
UlgarrRedsplee wrote:
Lets look at your actual complaints....
Subclasses: On p17, under the heading "Subclasses", it explicitly states you get the benefits of the subclass and the base class
Attacks: On p.193 it explicitly states that weapon attacks and spells "with attack rolls" are types of attacks. On p. 194 it defines an attack as having 3 parts, one of which is rolling the attack die. (But even more important, even if you skip this, and assume that Fireball is an "attack"... it has, at most, a minuscule affect on the gameplay.)
PotA: I have no idea what 55 page "adventure supplement" you are talking about. The Campanion is not required, but almost all of it *is* included with the adventure.
PotA: All of the unique monsters and magic items *are* included in the adventure. In Chapter 7, conveniently titled "Monsters and Magic Items"
So while you spent a *lot* of words complaining....these are the only concrete complaints I could parse.... and they are all wrong.
Further, you seem really bent out of shape that they offered a *free* supplement for HotDQ so that you could play it before (or without) buying the Monster Manual. And because it is somehow a burden for people to get something from (cue scary music) ~online~.... How play groups do you think really exist that 1) Got HotDQ before the MM was available, *AND* 2) had no one with internet acces...... really...
And yes, the only way to get the *free* and *not required* EE compainion was from online...... Except the vast majority of it was in the PotA already, and the bit that wasn't was....Free!
I personally found 5E very easy to get into. Just read the basic rules ones, bought the starter set and then just started to play and learning by doing. Certainly a few things weren't fully clear, but then I just ask other DMs to get their opinions and then decide what I think is most fun for my players.
And if you just have a simple question about a rule, you can get an answer here really fast usually.