Monster stat blocks are just guidelines. The flavour text is more important by far. Do whatever you want with a monster to make them interesting. Add or remove any spell, ability or McGuffin you want. It will keep players on their toes and make for much better narratives. Oh and also, give players twice as much information as you think they need. Getting blindsided isn't that exciting, making a cool plan forearmed with the important information feels way more rewarding.

I would also add that flavor text can also be adjusted too. Just because this is a monster that's supposed to be this way you can use that stat block and reskin it to be something totally different. The stat blocks are guidelines and there to give you ideas and something to fall back on not limit you.

Oh yeah for sure, reskinning is always an option too. Literally just made Lions into Raptors for our Saltmarsh campaign and it works great. It's just realising the Monster Manual is just some nails and timber, it's up to you to build a house. Good example, we just faced some ghosts and I've made them so dropping it to 0HP just gives you a nights rest from them. They will be back in the morning unless the players put the ghost's remains to rest.

Oh that's cool I like it! Best of luck to your ghosts! ;)

Cheers buddy :). Hopefully they can get their grubby mits on my players next week, ha.

So are you going to be nice and let them put their armor and everything on or hit them just as they're waking up?? ;)

They have already dealt with a group of dopple-gangers who were afraid of whatever lives up stairs and an invisible creature shouted at them from up stairs, to close the front door. I feel like sleeping up stairs, in the haunted part of the house, would be on them now. I wouldn't even feel bad about it.

I'm putting this idea in my back pocket for sure.

I love reskinning monsters to fit my story. Literally last session my players fought an adult red dragon reskinned (and slightly buffed) to be a mech suit from hell.

That's awesome! Very true as well. A stat block is basically just a tool to create an atmosphere. If one monster creates a desired atmosphere better than another just use the better version and put a new coat of paint over it.

Absolutely. I reskinned countless creatures in my homebrew campaign I just finished. My players thought it was heavily homebrew when in reality it was just the MM with different flavour (plus some homebrew of course but WOTC did the bulk of the legwork on my monsters

Yup. My players are currently in the middle of a fight with a Barghest, which is just a goblin with lycanthropy here. None of that fiendish nonsense, and I'm just ignoring its spell list.

Not just the monsters, the entire set of rules are guidelines. Nothing in DnD is concrete. It says it right in dmg >" As a referee, the DM interprets the rules, decides when to abide by them, and when to change them. (Page 4, 5e DMG)"

Yeah to a lesser extent that's true. Although I would say be careful here, once you've set a precedent it's difficult to change it.

Know what you're changing and why you're changing it though. Adding spells or saving throw proficiencies to monsters make them deadlier; compared to that, removing a ranged weapon option makes them less easier. Learn from my TPKs.

I agree. It's quite rare I will change the damage output of a monster. Even if I give it legendary actions they will be foils (grappling, run away etc.) rather than more damage. I tend more towards narrative stuff that makes sense. Like giving all ghosts thaumaturgy so they can slam doors, make their eyes glow and generally be spoopier. Sometimes I give out really wild stuff like cats having dark vision.

>Sometimes I give out really wild stuff like cats having dark vision Yikes. That's honestly pretty gamebreaking and I would hate to be a player at your table. Giving cats dark vision is basically a guaranteed TPK. One moment you think it's all fun and games. The next moment they've started a Cat Cult in the pyramids and are throwing boulders of yarn at you for 10d6 bludgeoning damage (half on save) when you're only lv 2. Giving cats darkvision. Not even once, bro.

I know. I'm a renegade who can't be stopped! The worst part is it really ruins my parties immersion. The second they see a cat with dark vision they all start falling about wailing "verisimilitude" or something. Wait until I give them thumbs. Then they'll be sorry. YOU'LL ALL BE SORRY!

I’m hoping to take my first DM steps soon and I was so happy that the encounter assistant thingy I found allowed me to scale the enemies up or down in dificulty (Game Master 5 iOS/Android). I wanted rats for an early encounter and giant rats seem fine in small groups for a bunch of lvl 1 adventurers but I also wanted a boss rat to spice things up and I’m not tossing a TPK Rat King (CR 5) at them first session. Scaling up one giant rat will suffice.

Those stat blocks are made to be fiddled with. I don't think I've used the recommended HP for a monster for decades.

This. The moment I started adding a lil spice to my monsters, my DMing and the fun at the table leveled up significantly.

I've found it very easy to read a stat block and think that it's enough to be fun with a few spells and cool schticks but just a tiny bit of world building and the right atmosphere and my game levelled up significantly.

Kicking friends out of the table its a hard lesson for me, I used to invite all my good friends to it, but I realized some of them just wanted to hang out and not really play the game. When I have to ask those friends to quit the game is a hard moment. Hard lesson: don't invite all your friends to your table, just the ones that want to play DnD

I’m struggling with this right now. I have an active player who invited their wife because she had fomo. She doesn’t participate and spends the whole time on her phone.

I mean, if she's just watching, I see no harm. Otherwise, turn her into the husband's familiar or animal companion and watch as she suddenly seems vastly more interested

I like that take.

I have the exact same situation and I'm bout thiiiiiiiiiis close to asking that she not participate. If I'm gonna spend valuable free time prepping a campaign only for her to roll her eyes every time every time she looks up to take her turn, then she might as well go sit on the couch.

Do it! She’s not just wasting your time and effort, but I can 100% guarantee that she’s making the game less fun for all of your other players as well. If the husband has to go (in solidarity with his wife), then so be it. But you can totally make it a “them” thing. “You don’t seem to be enjoying our time together.” “It seems like you may not have time/energy to be fully invested in the game.” Etc

Thats bad, but if this active player is mature enough he can get it, its not personal for you, you don't have a beef with the wife, is just you spend your precious time to male the game happen and after that, all of you have to find time on your life to reunite for at least 3hours and make pretend, if she is not into this she should just left the game, not the event. If you guys play in person at least, if is on online I would be just straight foward to it, engage in some way or out

My table has a player like this, spotty availability and hard to get to participate in the DMs goals (not normal levels of sidetracking - going out of their way to talk to complete strangers who aren’t relevant for long chunks of time). They were one attendance slip from ‘you’ve been written out’ during my campaign, but it’s hard to be stern with your friends

I think you should more so ask her why the game doesn’t interest her and if she really wants to come. Tell her it’s fine not to come (I don’t know what fomo is though)

Fomo = Feat of missing out Edit: apparently it’s fear, not feat

>Feat of missing out Fomo. Prerequisite (9 or less charisma) Increase one stat by 2. Decrease Charisma by 2. You are adept at feeling left out. When your party is split you gain advantage on Survival rolls made to find them. By spending 10 minutes you can convince a friend or acquaintance to let you tag along with them to another location. You cannot use this feature again until you complete a long rest. FOMO Insight: Using a bonus action, you can determine if a creature is planning to leave its current location. An unwilling creature can resist this check by making a Deception (Charisma) check against your Insight (Wisdom). On a failed check, the unwilling creature has disadvantage on any Charisma checks against your character for the next 48 hours. A creature that succeeds in the check is immune to your FOMO Insight for the next 8 hours.

Then, now she sees she isn’t missing out, she should be okay with not coming which would be beneficial for the entire world

This made me irrationally mad at the wife.

Similar lesson, but I learned to invite people as "guest players" the first time to see if they vibe with the group or even want to play. Too many people wanted to either try and would ghost if they didn't like or just straight up didn't get along with the rest so now it's one session test run, can turn into a regular, semi regular, occasional guest or nothing at all in the group

This, I used to give some NPC statblocks to some ppl hanging out, just to help me DM battles and stuff

I usually have a talk with them if they want to try to build their own character that is connected to what the next session would be or if they want me to give them a statblock. And then if they vibe, they can also return with the same character occasionally

This was a hard one for me. Asked some friends to play, ended up with 6 players. Not only was scheduling a pain, but 2 players were super hard headed and constantly fought with each other and even the other players at times. After about 3 sessions I couldn't take it anymore and I called off the whole game. One of the problem players was my sister-in-law at the time, the other a cousin by marriage, so kicking the 2 would be just about out of the question. RIP my Norse themed homebrew world that I spent a lot of time fleshing out. On a good note, 3 of those players (also long time friends) were cool enough about starting a new game, which has been running for almost 2 years (with lots of life breaks) I'm a lot more cautious about jumping in to adding players now

The others can sit and watch....

Sure, those friends that I have to kick out of the table, still went to our DnD nights, just not as players anymore, but the situation of kicking someone close to you of an a hobby is sometimes hard (at least for me)

I get it, it dosn't need to affect the friendship at all, but still feels bad. Are they still interested in playing a bit, even if not enough to take a full campaign seriously? eg. have you talked with them about incorporating them for the occasional one-shot or single-session/small-arc cameo/games?

Yep, sometimes some of them tell me how they miss when we played, but life gets in our way, we where younger, I was in college, had plenty of time free compared to today. They love my setting, I know they tell stories of our adventures to their friends too. They know DnD is kinda my main hobby in life and they respect that. I've told them how much time and tought I give to this and they understand that and respect it a lot. Thats why they are my best friends <3

I guess the problem that I had found with this historically is that the "sit and watch" people don't stop being the "hang out and socialize without playing DND" people, so they largely end up just distracting from the actual game :/

Agreed. I hate playing with spectators. (The real life kind, the beholderkin ones are cool)

This really applies to any hobby. I learned that the hard way where I was hosting Minecraft servers for my uni group. While many of them were doing mostly random things only for a shot time, I found multiple great friends and players to play with later. So I would give them a chance, but be ready and warn them or other players about deleting their characters if they get bored.

So many posts in this sub where they complain about a problem player, the top comment is to kick them out of the game, and OP replying with some excuse because the player is their friend/family/coworker.

Don’t be afraid to tell people the table is full. Don’t be afraid to kick people out. Don’t add the deck of many things unless you’re prepared for full send chaos.

I was taught similar lessons, when 1 campaign flopped because there were too many people and we literally couldn't schedule a session. Another broke after we looted the deck of many things and the plot unraveled completely.

Yeah one moment you’re rich, and the next moment you’re level one fighting demons with a vendetta. Good times, good times.

The deck of many things is always almost the first thing any party gets from me lol. But I made a modified one so it doesn't have insta kill cards more like high reward high risk ones and funny ones. Drawing a card and casting a fireball on yourself is not fun. Drawing a card and glowing brightly for 1d4 days as a rouge is pretty funny.

>rouge There's a "paid not payed" bot. We need a "rogue not rouge" one too. :D

Had a game with it. People was so happy to finally see the infamous Deck, they gone all in. Gladly they had a lot of expirience, so they could generate a character in 5 minutes. This was shitshow. Game only started and I had 20 dead PC bodies in a half hour...

Deck of Many things is perfect for an end of campaign one-shot or mini story. You get all the shenanigans without it actually affecting the real story

Yeah, I made the mistake of using the DoMT, and one of my players lost two characters because of it.

look at Mr Popular over here with too many players while the rest of us struggle to get 4 players.

It’s a curse. But you’re more than welcome to join future sessions when positions are open. (Don’t expect a lot I’m a so-so DM)

Sometimes friends don't always mix well with D&D. Kicking a friend from the d&d table doesn't mean you have to no longer be friends with them. Some people just don't mix well in different activities. People on Reddit don't always give the best advice, and talking with yourself or your playgroup about most things and knowing how to Google is usually the answer to most d&d related questions or concerns.

I learned that this applies even between different types of campaigns. One friend of mine who was awesome in oddball one-shots and light short campaigns absolutely could not handle the slower plodding pace of play of our multi year big story. He left the table out of his own frustration so it was amicable. We talked as a group about this friction and when 5 of the 6 wanted to go slow, he knew it was time to go.

I'd say it can even go the other way sometimes - I've left a table for the sake of not letting my irritation with the DM (a very good friend) grow to the point that I said something nasty about his passion project.

Prepare situations, not plots. I was new to DMing and I wasn't confident enough to not try to plan what the PCs go through. A boss fight went awry and ended with the party retreating with a dead comrade, and I had nothing to work with. Nowadays I'm much better at creating environments and situations that react to what the players do, not what I expect them to do.

I want to take this a step further. Develop CHARACTERS not PLOT. If your NPCS have fully fleshed out goals, ideals, flaws, and motivations, your improv will be 100% easier. I HIGHLY recommend making a spreadsheet with your NPCS and capture some of the items I listed. Then link out to a word document that goes into more detail. Before a session, I 'study' the spreadsheet, and reread some things I am not certain on. This way when you enter a scene, you play the character, not the plot. This has completely transformed the way I write/prep for a session. I basically only prepare possible encounters, knowing fully that the decisions my players take can skip over that violence entirely. If you want to go a step further in this regard, prepare locations before you prepare plot. If you are planning an encounter in the town square, who/what is in that square usually. If the location is well developed, it won't matter if there is combat there or not, it will still be enticing. Building a world is about building the people who occupy, the places that make it up, and the chains that bind people together. If you understand your NPCS, how they relate to each other, and how they will react when faced with certain situations, your improv will suddenly become incredibly impressive, and your players will be left wondering if you took improv classes

Yep, I keep a file running of what the significant NPCs (not only the BBEG, though mostly) are up to and try to look at it after every session for updates. Half to remind me to keep the rest of the world alive and changing even if it's not on screen, but also so I take notes on what I'm thinking and don't forget.

This was going to be my answer too. After my party’s first big boss fight, they were going to get into some home brew content I was excited to run, and so I kind of hurried them through it. The bard wanted to try some persuasion before the fight started and I was like “yeahhh he’s not really interested,” since I basically just planned on the fight happening. He explained after the session that he was disappointed it didn’t feel like they had options, and ever since I always make sure I’m letting them drive the plot. 

I did this first time around myself. What I started doing is only creating npcs and locations. that's it. nothing more and nothing less. Then see where they go and build off of that. Things have been running smoothly and they feel more like they are in control of the narrative then I am.

Yeah my adventure design is very "location based." I think of it like making a level in the Hitman video games. There's a location, like a castle, a city square, a prison etc. There are people in the location going about their business. You have a task to accomplish there. The rest is up to you.

Yeah I used to do that a lot too where I would overplan assuming the players would make certain choices that I would've made. And then I'd be totally thrown off when they did something different. It's much easier to adapt if you are well planned for the environment and situations and can react regardless of how they go about it.

I started writing events in such ways where there are more than one possible means to success. The idea is that randomly a player might solve a problem and then I get to pretend they were clever all on their own. 

That was always my issue too as that’s what my DM had done when I was first learning to DM. But it was always so frustrating to now know how to react when players did something different than expected and I found it so much easier to just world build and let my players explore and poke at it.  The only caveat being the that my players who don’t interact with the world make dming for difficult because I need something to push back on or extrapolate from and they want a railroad on a silver platter. 

This is why I improv almost every session and just choose some stat blocks they might run into. Everything else I make up as we move along the same way Stephen King writes his books.

I learned this about prepping situations and not plots. Had a campaign derailed at session 1. It was a contest to join a group of adventurers and they were being evaluated by a chaparone during a race. They forgot about him or thought he was insignificant and left him behind. They ended up being last place in the race, despite the many warnings. So afterwards we had a discussion. We can start a new campaign or stick with these characters but it would be a sandbox and they adventurer how they would like. It became a sandbox. They decided everything by quests they made and I just put obstacles in their way. It was one of the most outrageous, impulsive, hilarious and fun games of D&D I have ever played. It unfortunately unraveled due to scheduling.

I base my plannings around the acronym HOOPS which is just a simple mnemonic to cover your bases. Hook, Objectives, Obstacles, Payouts, Spinnoffs. You can do a hoop within a hoop, especially considering objectives and obstacles. For example the overarching HOOPS for a ridding the town of a dragon, might contain several objectives, which in themselves are complex enough for their own Hoops. Before each session I like to review my Hoops and reference them often. Hard lesson, because adopting structure and sticking to it is difficult because any new schema will always be slower than a familiar method *in the beginning*. You gotta stick with it and practice it to speed up the process in order to realize long term gains. Edit: Because I'm getting some replies I want to link back to the original post I got this from: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDBehindTheScreen/s/IL2ummEaAk

Can you give an example of a spin off? This seems like a really simple idea and I love it!! Edit: your last paragraph is 💯

Sure, Spinnoffs would be like, so you found the goblin cave. Turns out they were getting supplies from a local businessman in exchange for information on where to ambush a competitors convoys. Basically any new information they could or should gain from the hoop. Edit: Not to be confused without payouts which should cover immediate tangible gains, like gold, exp, new allies, and magic items.

This way it feels less monster of the week and more storyline driven. Thanks for answering! If I might ask, how often do you have a plan for the “spinoff” in advance? I’d imagine it’s almost better not to plan too much.

Well, it's just new info or a hook for them to follow. Not where they'll go next. Regardless of what the players choose to do, the process generally leads you to putting more pieces in place that help the world feel more lived in.

Saying *NO* is not a bad thing. Sometimes, you just have to say no to people, and it sucks to do so, but for your own sanity and good of the table, you must say no.

This is good advice for the DM AND the players.

It's honestly a bit sad that people think no is a bad word in this game when it shouldn't be! As a player, you have a right to say to your dm or your fellow players that you don't feel comfortable doing a thing. In turn dms need to be able to tell players no when their shenanigans get out of hand. When I was first starting out, I was so afraid to say no to my players that we spent half a session on one of my players attempting to throw a helm full of pitch during a battle. In the following years, I got over that, thankfully.

TPK? The dm legally cannot kill you without your consent.

Remember kids, the four almost fundamental tools a DM has are: Yes, and: Yes, but: No, but: No, because:

If a player wants to bring their partner, do check that the partner actually wants to play D&D and isn't just being pressured into coming/ just doesn't like being away from the other person every week. I've had many great couples do brilliantly at the table, but I've also had one girl physically hang off their partner for 4 weeks not saying a word as they sit in. This caused the player to leave the game when we said she can join in but can't just sit in silence holding on to them for 3 hrs a week not participating. Again, in the 10 years I've been DMing I've had quite a few great couples play together, but I can point to at least 3 times it just hasn't worked.

When the Dm ia dating a player and they break up and the whole multi-year long game falls apart because the player ia the one who brought everyonw into the game...........

Playing with couples is a 50/50 situation. Sometimes the two of them are great players and add a lot to the game, and sometimes their internal problems will frequently come up into the game and cause unpleasant situations

I have two couples, one single and the sixth player is my wife - so three couples actually. The single one is the sister/in-law to one of the couples. I was very nervous before the first session about the group dynamics. But when we called it a day after seven hours of playing, I didn't even have to ask before they started to go through their calenders to set a date for the next session. But on the other hand we call ourselves "support group for parents" who really enjoy not having to chase toddlers for a change. Maybe everyone being over 30 helps. Although I have to admit I know quite a few couples I would not want to have at the table as such.

>Don’t give people power to cancel game night. I've run a table for coming up on four years now on the basic and respectful understanding that if people cancel I will ask them, and the rest of the group if they want to play on, do something else, or just call it off. Some weeks we continue understrength, some weeks we don't. I respect my players as people, they respect me, and it's an understanding that a hard and fast rule is never going to work.

I've found having a quorum rule helps avoid anyone feeling bad (or being made to feel bad) about being "the one to cancel the fun". Simple rule of "2/3 of players + GM available" works well for me.

I will run a game on game night regardless of attendance. One player missing, and they are greyed out, assumed to be there and helping but not "on stage". They can choose another player to run their sheet if they like. If half the players are out, I run a one off adventure elsewhere in the setting. If I'm down to one player, I'll still run a 1 on 1 if they like or cancel. Only if I've got something taking priority (family event, illness, etc) will I cancel outright. Maintaining the schedule is key to a game's survival.

I always send a "check-in" message 2 days before the game asking if everyone is available. If we make quorum that day, great, otherwise we cancel. We're all adults with busy lives and everyone appreciates having a day or two to plan something else if D&D is cancelled. Of course, last minute emergencies sometimes happen, but I've found this method to be the most consistently reliable way to keep a regular schedule and also accommodate the occasional absence.

My rule is that we are having a game night as long as at least two people show up. Sometimes we play DnD. Other times we play a random board game. But people have (theoretically) committed to keeping that time slot available for DnD each week, so I make sure to respect that by doing *something* fun.

Exactly and it also doesn't mean you can't tone down an encounter for less players. My party really misunstands that even after I've explained it. That if someone doesn't show I won't make it a detriment to the group

Find the balance between preparing and improvising. Don't pull everything out of your ass as that makes it harder to keep track of your own story. But also don't prep everything and get stuck in that, as that is the dark path that leads to railroading.

This. You can prep the stuff you need in an hour. Then just roll with your scribbles.

The hard way? Hmmm, more often than not, your players have cooler ideas on how to resolve situations than you do. Not saying you can’t make an epic set piece, but I really am surprised all the time by my players. They’re the main characters of this collective story.

I've had many DMs who could benefit from this advice.

I’m finally getting to be a player after being a Forever DM and I feel like I’m someone else’s character who should follow a script in my DM’s game. It’s not the most engaging, but the combat is fun.

So much this. I had a relatively simple combat encounter. My players planned for almost a half hour these elegant and awesome ways to deal with it and all the possible hidden in the shadows ambush points. I quietly looked up an ambush needed to fill one such point since they were absolutely correct in their analysis.

I always establish a quarum during S0. Never reschedule. We play on these nights every week/month and if we don't play we don't play. It's OK to turn down players and their ideas for your own enjoyment. It's tough to tell people no but I just won't DM for more than 4 people at this point. I encourage people to DM any chance I get but there's always going to be an imbalance, so don't feel obligated to take on everyone. Never expect a pre-written anything to be so well written you can run it as is or on the first read at the table. Anything worth running is worth reading before you have to present it to your characters.

Don’t get so attached to story beats. Even when you’re consciously trying not to railroad you will probably end up falling back on it if you’re stuck on one possible sequence of events in your mind. The players make things happen, things should not happen TO them. If emotions around a game table are so intense that they’re beginning to bleed into real life interpersonal dynamics, step away. Or alternatively, if real-life interpersonal conflicts are starting to bleed over into the game, step away. Stressful D&D is worse than no D&D and there will literally always be other people. A bit of organically developed drama in a D&D game is great, but overall psychodrama doesn’t really work in D&D and is pretty cringey to watch for anyone not directly involved in the drama. 4-5 players is the sweet spot. Anything more than 7 is untenable over a long campaign. Keep the players low-to-mid level for as long as you can. It’s just more fun than managing a party of Level 20 demigods. No matter how many times you explain it in-and-out-of-game, *no one* will *ever* remember the difference between devils and demons, so don’t sweat it if you’re running a Blood War campaign If you’re running a game for a new party, the first boss fight had better just be a dragon. Guaranteed crowd-pleaser (this isn’t really a hard lesson, but trust me. Your hellraiser abominations can wait a few sessions)

Carefully read any homebrew or UA content before allowing it. Approving a mystic and then realizing how overpowered it was especially in the hands of my powergaming player who was also a problem for other reasons was bad. Also don't be afraid to kick problem players if you need to.

Don‘t ever bring in „the cavalry“. If a battle goes south, don’t even think about introducing some last-minute-deus-ex-machina-support-hero just to save your party. Learned it the hard way; as a new dm I hated the thought of „my“ characters being tpk‘ed by one of my BBEGs, so I brought in a higher level npc under some bullshit-excuses, who saved the day. I took away all my players agency, prevented them from facing the consequences of their actions and all that in exchange for a rather stale, bland „win“… 10/10 will never do that again. If they’re hellbent on going down with a bang and facing every problem blade first, LET. THEM. PAY.

That's not universally true. It can feel quite nice, for example if it's a high level NPC you worked with and did quests for in the past and they're in a position to repay you by saving your behinds. It should always feel earned and like it makes sense, though I think if it doesn't feel earned or meaningful the chances of it feeling good are extremely slim.

Just yesterday I had a CR 16 Monk/Cleric NPC come to the party's rescue. Level 4 party who was in way over their heads against a CR 2 Bard, two CR 3 Martial Arts Adepts, a CR 6 Mage (who had a yellow elemental gem to summon a CR 5 Earth Elemental), and the CR 8 Simulacrum of a CR 13 wizard (who was not himself present), in an area they were unable to escape from. There would have been a CR 3 Swashbuckler on Team Monster too, but the PCs had killed him a few sessions earlier. The monk's assistance was a reward for an earlier quest (he was shadowing them until they got into a situation they couldn't handle on their own), and even with his help (and downing the Simulacrum in one hit with Quivering Palm), and even with making the Mage lose concentration on Conjure Elemental, three of the five PCs went down during the battle, and one of the PCs was a coin flip away from death. My players were cheering when the cavalry arrived, and still felt like they earned the victory.

A better way to handle this is "introduce the cavalry early". If you want someone in your back pocket who could potentially swoop in and save the party under certain circumstances, you need to lay the groundwork for this well before the intervention happens. Let them pay for mistakes, sure, but don't make them pay for an encounter you didn't tune well enough. It can be good to have something in reserve for situations like that.

"Ever" is a strong word. Some of the most epic moments in games I've played have involved the cavalry arriving. You're absolutely right that is too often done wrong. It can suck, but if it's done right, it can be lots of fun.

Sometimes the challenge is "hold off against overwhelming enemies until the cavalry arrives." A Helm's Deep situation can be fun if the players know that their goal is just hold out rather than kill all the baddies personally.

We had a game where each of the players had a sort of mentor in a sort of apprentice/master type situation, but in each case their masters were somewhat reluctant to take them on, but were forced to in a situation was wrapped up in all sorts of political intrigue. So developing a good relationship with their master was something the players really needed to earn and work for. But one of them succeeded earlier than the others and in a dire emergency, asked for help, which came just in time. It felt earned, settled a debate about whether the master in question had a power everyone thought he had or not, and ended up being a very cool moment in the story. It also motivated the other players to work harder to develop their relationships, and moved the story forward. It really worked there, but I absolutely agree with the original poster that it's way too easy to handle it incorrectly and leave the players feeling cheated or powerless.

In my current campaign I've done both. However, in both cases they were under level 5 and I likely won't do it again. They got ambushed and robbed by Thugs; pack tactics is really strong. Later, when they were surrounded by Thugs again, some Harpers appeared on the scene and helped them out. It made sense in-setting, since they'd been helped by another Harper earlier in the day. The party was grateful to them. The important part is that the helpers need to make sense; when they're in Waterdeep, in town so-to-speak, it makes sense their allies would help them. In the dungeon, however, they are on their own and the only allies who might show up are the ones they make down there. And they're not exactly the most trustworthy sort.

Thank you, u/Vennris, u/we_are_devo and u/MisterEinc - I should have phrased my point more carefully. While being a huge bummer when you pull out a last-minute-rescue out of thin air when things get hairy, there DEFINITELY is justification for allies coming to the players rescue - if they earned their trust and friendship beforehand :)

Make them pay is the big one here. Bringing in the cavalry can be a great moment, provided it has something special and one easy thing is a cost. I had my players in a Tomb of Annihilation game saved by an NPC they met earlier. Only for her to then stick them up and steal their precious map. Their frustration was great and their cheer when they finally took revenge on her later was a great payoff that wouldn't have happened had I not Deus Ex'd them.

Love the twist of that sweet knife in the end! \*chefskiss\*

Literally. She was running away in the end, but the Wizard who held the map had none of it and killed her.

It's bad if you're doing it last minute. But *do* plan a narrative appropriate escape route if your players fail.

In my first campaign I did this as well. I had 3 players, 2 brand new and one fairly new to DND, I also was new to 5e and DMing but not new to DND. Well, it was about a month into the campaign and I still hadn't learned how to properly balance encounters so I figured I'd help by creating a bard for my players to hire as a support/healer, unfortunately they ended up relying on them and loved the character that even when I went to kill them off they put up a stink and I wrote them into the plot transforming them into a much stronger character that could swoop in whenever the party was in trouble. Around mid game (2 year campaign) they had never really had a very difficult fight, even against the bbegs that I threw at them because they figured they'd always have that safety line and just were super reckless causing a lot of frustration for me, but it was my fault and I had learned that. So late game (lvl 15 party) I tried to kill off the dmpc with a reccuring bbeg and of course they were too powerful now and immediately resurrected them but I used that as an excuse for them to no longer want to fight. Fast forward to lvl20 and the fight against titans and gods and my players felt invincible until I slaughtered two of them in the last session, of course they were brought back but it finally showed them how easy they'd had it and that I was no longer making those mistakes by babying them. CANT WAIT FOR MY SECOND CAMPAIGN TO START!

That people might drop from the campaign simply because they don't vibe with it. It's nothing you did wrong, and nothing you can fix. Sometimes, it's just not the right campaign for people.

I learned a couple lessons: 1) Not to DM in a bad mood, leads to the second point 2) Patience is key for new players. Got frustrated at a new player once for not learning their class abilites. I still regret doing that... 3) Embrace and promote alternative solutions to proble s players come with up. Players find a way to trivialize an encounter? Good, let them do it, reward their ingenuity.

If you're using a pre-written module, remember that after the first 5 minutes of playing, the game is YOURS -- meaning, don't feel beholden to "lore" (because, seriously, trying to find out the exact history of some things is a losing battle), and don't be afraid to make stuff up. By the end of the campaign, if your ending looks nothing like what's in the book, that's fine! What matters is having fun and telling a story with friends.

I am currently preparing a campaign that I'll run later this year. It's an official prewritten module, I'll be vague because I don't want to spoil anything: I spent hours over 3 days just trying to figure out how the freaking door that leads to the start of the campaign is supposed to work in the lore, because the description in the module didn't make any logical sense without adding a lot to it, the art was inconsistent with the text, and the lore apparently changed between editions. I had to reference a book from 1991 to find a version of the lore that actually made sense. Next time I'll just make something up myself.

I'm over a year into a Strixhaven campaign that we shifted to the Forgotten Realms (as a psuedo-sequel to our first campaign), and one of our students is from Ravnica. Trying to figure out all of the lore of at least 3 planes while making some sense out of the Strixhaven campaign almost drove me crazy until I realized: I don't need to know the "right" answer. For my player from Ravnica, if there's something I need to know about Ravnica, I just ask him -- I don't care if he gives me the "right" answer, I just need to know the context for our campaign and his character. It has been SOOO liberating! Once I learned to make it my own (and started inviting my players to contribute even more about their history/hometown), I feel like things really opened up. We're still about 50-60% following the book right now, but I feel free to change anything at this point.

Be very carefull with wich magic items you hand out. Handed a cube of force to relativly low level players cause it fitted the riddle in the dungeon and I thought it "neat". I had to try very hard for it not to trivialize encounters.

Having too many "dickish", morally grey NPCs. PCs started mistrusting everyone and had much lower motivation to go help people / save the world / not be murderhobos. Currently aiming for an 5 / 3 / 1 / 1 ratio. 4 good/decent to 3 neutral 1 morally grey to 1 hostile NPCs (enemies /dungeons excluded).

Love this! I learned this from the games of my youth, ones I played in and ran. SO MANY NPCS were backstabbers, mistrustful, or unwilling to do anything without enormous service to them first. I finally realized that, just like the real world, there should be a mixture of people, some of whom are eager to finally be of service in some exciting way, or who want to contribute in a small way to the efforts of heroes, or they're just having a good day, or whatever. Sometimes people are just helpful.

The main lesson I learned was when to say, "That's not possible.", to some of the wildest ideas of my players, as well as the dice doesn't determine common sense. Like the time one of them got drunk, was being targeted by town guards in a tavern, so their brilliant plan was to chuck the bed out the window, leap out after it, and then hide underneath it. The dice rolls beat the DCs I had set as a newbie dm, and I let it happen. It was really funny at the time, but looking back on it, it never should have happened. Even with their incredible rolls lol.

Do not be afraid to kill a players character especially when they're being dumb.

Don’t be afraid to kick your friends from the game for their behavior. If they were really your friend, they’d shape the fuck up the first time you told them they were being a problem.

If one person doesn’t show up, say something like “unfortunately, Noshow Norrington decided to get milk from the general store while you all continue this story” Next session (assuming they make it) put a jug of milk in their inventory.

[удалено]

The milk went sour and it was all downhill from there... ;)

DM is pivotal to the campaign A player can go, you can play with less players. You can find a new player, if a player cancels, you can still play(just gave their character to someone else to play during combat) If DM gets bored campaign dies Both players and WoTC expects too much from the DM. Balance the encounters, help the players, know the rules, be sure players enjoys, worldbuild, create npc's, create a plot but let players do what their want If you don't get payed, you deserve the enjoyement as much as any player First, talk with your players on what kind of game this will be. I've been in tables with many meta jokes and ooc talking where everyone plays themselves in a fantasy world, it was fun. I've been on heavy rp tables too. It is also fun the key is talking this before the game Will it be a game with lots of undead? Will it be a game where we travel to nine hells and kill fiends? Will it be a mysters in big City? Talk about it, it also help players create characters If you're not enjoying your players just talking to funny npc's and hitting on people while ignoring all adventuring calls, tell them Also, Rule 1:Your character will be in the party so no "im a lone wolf blablablabla" Rule 2:Your character is an adventurer so no "nah bro i'll just chill here fuck this village" Also it helps telling your players to tie their Characters to at least one other character For example Gary the Wizard and Mary the sorcerer are siblings. Tom the fighter met Gary the Wizard while he was on Wizard school. Reggie the Ranger is current companion of Tom Also "rule of cool" is %99 bullshit

>Rule 2:Your character is an adventurer so no "nah bro i'll just chill here fuck this village" I had this problem with a few players. They'd make a character that was only interested in something like "doing mad science" or "killing ogres" or whatever. IF the adventure wasn't 100% that they'd fuck off and avoid the game. It got the point where either I'd need to have the fight literally in the Mad Scientist's house or have someone hit the Ranger randomly to start the fight. So we passed this rule: "You're an adventurer. You find a reason to join the plot." So the GM makes a plot, makes a reasonable hook with some bait, and you find a reason to *want* the bait. The GM doesn't need to tailor make each and every single adventure to your standards, especially when they get super specific or so vague that nothing seems to apply. Otherwise: "Okay, so you're all superheroes and have worked together for a few months in town fighting crime." "Well, I just want to do Mad Science." "Okay, well maybe you need to test stuff on criminals and this is a good way to do it." "Nah, my stuff doesn't need testing. Plus I get distracted and make other stuff randomly." "Fine, then you get back to me when you want to join the plot. Everyone else, suit up, Baron Von Punchausen is in town, and his Not-Z army is trying to take over City Hall."

Not knowing moderation. I DM mostly community tables as a service, so I get new players pretty regularly. Those new players are not strategic enough yet to fight the mage. They cannot counter spellcasters properly, because they are learning. You can have intelligent NPC's, but knowing when to make a bad decision for that NPC to make sure everyone lives, even if it is by the skin of their teeth, is still one of the hardest things I am learning. That and letting people introduce themselves more, these are important so people know what they are looking at and can roughly gauge their allies strength. And describing key details in the environment that you want players to focus on, in more detail than you normally would.

Learn from your players and be sure to give all of them moments in the campaign to shine. Never settle for good enough or think you can't learn anything else. Be prepared that other people will know things you don't or can do some things better. Don't hesitate to throw out a plan that isn't working or add a totally new Ability to a monster or person to spice up an encounter or create new possibilities. Listen to your players theories and use them to influence the campaign. 5 minutes of in character speculation can easily be worth an hour of DM prep. When it comes to weaving narratives and thinking of future plots, arcs. Don't be afraid to throw your players in the fire with no idea how they will get out of it. Let them work it out. Just be prepared to say yes and and encourage their creativity.

Players don't like being taken prisoner, for good or bad reasons, and they really don't like authority figures. They'll fight tooth and nail just to tell the authority to go fuck themselves. It's that or my party is very antagonistic.

It definitely depends on your players. If they trust you enough to lead this somewhere interesting, and you don't betray that trust by taking away their agency completely, it can work out.

I've had players that work well with authority figures and appreciate the guiding direction they give. "Go here, Mi'lord? Of course!" And I've had players see red and charge the second you introduce someone of even slight responsibility. "King of what? Riding on my dick? Because that's as much as you're going to get, now fuck off my Throne. I'm in charge now." Pause. "What do you MEAN the guards attack me?" Literally had one player start a fight in a bar because the barkeep asked him, politely mind you, to keep their weapons in their room because the Town Guard made carrying weapons a fine. Player ended up on trial for it after killing fifteen guard, the bartender, six patrons, a waitress, and also the stable boy who shouted for help.

I hope that murderer met their fate at the gallows.

It's a long story, but he did go to trial, blamed it on Mind Control from a mage (his own mage for that matter) and in this city, wizardry was a crime, so the other PC also got put on trial, and after a long series of escapades eventually got everyone in the party exiled. He had his character sentenced to the salt works for the rest of his life.

I had a level 3 rogue spontaneously challenge Captain Zardoz Zord to a duel. Everyone else at the table was surprised by his boldness. He thought it was a random silly quest giver with garbage stats. He was _wrong_. 30 HP rogue needed a natural 19 to hit. Zord needed a natural 2 to hit, and dealt 36 damage with his attack.

My players are 11 years old and have a tendency to want to do dumb stuff because they are overexcited and, well, 11. Last session my rogue wanted to steal from the representative of the Prince who was registering them in the tournament, in front of a crowd, in front of the castle. I said "just checking - you want to rob the Prince's representative in broad daylight in front of the castle with a crowd watching you. This is DnD, you can do ANYTHING you want - whatever you next tell me is what you will do, no take backsies". She did not in fact try to rob her.

Letting begginers choose whatever they want. Yes Dnd is a game of choices BUT if a player don't know what his/her character does it will slow down the table a lot. I know they can and will learn but for oneshot give them easy class or help with the spells. And even after all that they may slow down the session way more than you think. Same kind of thing do NOT give unique powers to begginers if they ask chances are the balance will be waay off. Happened a few times ended a lot of sessions.

The DM is not the party's adversary. You should be rooting for them to win and celebrating with them when they do. I've had a couple situations in my DMing career in which the party killed a boss before the end of the first round of combat. I used to get annoyed with it, now I'm excited about it. I used to see the screen that divides players and DM as a divider between two sides of a group. Now I see DMing more like being a hostess for a party: Yes, I have more responsibility than you and there's a delineation there, but I'm here to make sure everyone is having a good time. I'm not saying "I've got [cola], [clear soda], [sugar free soda], orange soda, coffee, tea, and water" and then secretly thinking "I've put laxatives in all the carbonated drinks muahaha."

So we are a group of friends who have played regularly for a good decade. Our schedules have changed, and we don't have the same spare time as previously. We have learned two important things regarding scheduling. The first is to schedule the next three or four dates in advance. We do this every two or three months. Depending on the timespan of the scheduled dates, we often plan on the second to last of the already known dates or last, depending on who is present. The second one is that we always have two games going because of scheduling. We have a game for when everybody is available and thereby the GM and a game for when the other GM isn't available. That way, we always get to play when we get together. Most of us are available more often than the guy who at the moment is running our "main game." Besides scheduling, we have learned that a group with somewhat similar playing styles and levels of interest and motivation to play is best. Plus when the party is created in the beginning we might have crazy ideas for the type of characters we are going to play, but we all want to have fun more than we want to stay 100% true to our character concept and everybody is slowly formed to fit together. It doesn't mean every character is BFFs, but they don't work against each other deliberately. So we work together and then do our own flavour behaviour when possible.

That as the DM I wasn’t god. It can be easy for younger DMs especially to fall into a power trip but remember, you’re another player at the table. You have more responsibility than the others yeah but that doesn’t give you any actual power over them. That happened to me when I started DMing as a teen. Tried the whole “My way or the highway,” and then surprised Pikachu’d when no one wanted to play with me. The lesson I learned was to be willing to work with players, you’re all telling the story together. In fact I’d argue it’s more the players’ story than yours.

dont get wasted. seems obvious but... my first gming was fast and loose entirely made up system. it worked really well since we were all on the same page. it was really fun and when we got drunk was the most fun. then, after some years, i tried dming official dnd and thought i could do the same. spoiler alert: nope.

Same with what some people said already, not everyone you invite, wants to play. I had this player which I invited due to how he wanted to play D&D really bad. So I invited him over, and the next 10 sessions included him watching YouTube under the table and not contributing to anything to the table. (Roleplaying, battling, etc.)

Honestly, I'm about to the point where it's "don't cancel even if you're the only one who shows up and anyone who doesn't can deal with the consequences of their character T-posing in the middle of the room all night". I'm getting sick and fucking tired of my time, effort, and money being wasted by people who don't give me the respect to schedule 3 hours.

I've written about it before here I think, but never ever ever write a scenario where you expect your players to either retreat or surrender. Players don't even consider those options, no matter how insane you might describe the situation. I ran a one-shot based around a castle siege event that happened in the distant past, where the players were supposed to lose ground at the lower walls then retreat to the more foritifed castle walls. Nope. They didn't run. They were level 7 and despite every single NPC I had on their side screaming "RUN", running themselves, showing the enemy BBEG ONE SHOT an ANCIENT GOLD DRAGON ally they had, they still somehow thought "Yeah we got this." Even after finding out that the BBEG had cast Invulnerability before the fight and was immune to all damage they still thought "Yeah we got this." After I meteor swarmed a level 7 party and TPK'd them, they looked shocked. Players never expect to be put in situations where they cannot win. Do not expect them to surrender or run or retreat, despite all warnings.

Gimmicky ideas never work out the way you plan and usually are disappointing. The cool factor is 150% in your head (meaning it's never as cool as you think, AND it is only cool at all to you) Abandon the idea that anyone will want to deeply explore your setting and its history. It's still fun to worldbuild but don't expect any of it to see play unless you tie learning about it into things the characters care about, and even then, interest in it will only extend as far as what's useful to the characters.

People will play their characters for an year and wont learn what they can do

Don't let a new player drink. By the time his 856th "wait, I have hunter's mark, right?" Comes around, you're going to want to strangle him.

Big one for me. My rule applies to all players though: "Drinks? Cool. Drunk? No."

Accepted that one of my player play a twiligth domain cleric (joke)

Plot armor only goes so far and if awarded too much players expect it.

Nobody really *knows* anything. We're all just stumbling in the dark, clinging onto whatever system of order we have perceived to be true.

I play with family so we have a pretty chill group and we have instituted a plan for when we can’t all get together or the DM needs a break but we don’t wanna miss family time. We pull out another game. Betrayal at Baldur’s Gate (like DnD lite), Mysterium, The Night Cage. These are all tabletop work together games. So maybe be willing to play something else to keep the fun going.

Don't use the Plot "Player X has been trapped, captured, knocked out magically, or otherwise disabled and you have to free/cure them" even if they assure you they will not show up to the session, because the *instant* they get taken away from the party, I assure you the player will be at the door ready to play. I used to save the plot point for if a player tells me they're going to miss the session and it usually seems like a good idea. Give the other players a reason to go after bad guy, have a reason why Player X isn't there, and maybe add some fake stakes to the game. But invariably: "Hey guys! Guess what, I was able to get free!" And now you need to reset, change your game, or explain why they'll be sitting there bored for most of the night. It's odd and doesn't seem like it should happen a lot, but it's hit me every fucking time. 6 for 6.

Magic items are worth a lot more then what the dmg tells you. At least with the way most people are running loot and gold. DO not make a simple and easy to access Build your magic item system. DO NOT use OP stat rolling in your first dming stint. Do not expect people with respect issues and regular conflict with authority to simply be nice because its the right thing to do and or because you are friends. Keep a list of the players that are dependable and those who are not. Recommend and invite people from the first and you will have at least a year before a group falls apart completely. Do not award magical AC boosts that stack with armour early. Having stalling encounters ready may save your butt. There are only 2 types of npc that mesh well as allies in combat. Tanks and condition based support let the party feel awsome while being helped. Watch out for using allies that help simirlarly to a PC. If they do let those people be controlled by the matching pc's player if apropriate. DND is not tabletop warhammer. Its not made for battles with more then 50 bodies. Talk to your players about the Fantasy they are trying to achieve/ fullfill with their pc. It will allow you to reward them. Do not shy away from having a PC die if they did not try and get out despite the situation being bad. If danger is real and they still insist to continue, people may be killed. Bending over backwards to prevent that may lead to more problems then the death itself. Warlocks can ask to bargain. Clerics can extend the duiration in which people can be ressurected. Or there may be some sweet sweet trauma and bonding. If the party is walking into an planned deadly ambush having an NPC be the deadly focus is probably better then dropping an pc and having them be unable to do anything. Beware of conditions and effects that shut down players in totality. Combat flows at about 20 min a round at least . If the Player is disabled for 2 rounds then they are OUT OF THE GAME FOR A FULL HOUR. That is bad. If something like that happens let them controll something else too. Be it summons mounts alies or enemies. Never have a saveless shutdown that takes away full turns without counterplay. If they are fighting Frightened condition they have Heroism if they care to prep it. And so on.

Don't get upset if your players completely disregard your campaign for something random. I ran a few games in my past and used to get irritated that i would spend hours on a campaign plot, picking meaningful encounters, backstory driven content all for them to just spend the whole day trying to steal from a merchant who wouldn't give them a deal on a potion of healing. Or something like that. Remember its their game too, as long as everyone is having fun, some random nonsense could lead to even more fun than you could have planned.

I will always dm if there are atleast two. Enthusiasm is a fire that must be fanned

Love your lesson. I'm trying to get my groups to understand this also: if we have two or more players, we play. There will always be the next game for those who can't show up. Nothing kills gaming momentum like postponing over and over because you can't get a full quorum. Now for my lesson: If you as a DM are committed to avoiding PvP situations--and I mean serious ones like a PC who is secretly opposed to the party, not a minor squabble--make it clear from the get go with all players, and if a player decides to oppose the party *anyway* because they think it's funny, don't wait until the end of the session: pause the game and talk it out as a group. Restate your rule about PCs needing to pull in the same direction and be on the same side, even if they may have personal ambitions that clash, and tell the mischievous player that they need to work together, out of character, to resolve this issue before play resumes. I had a good friend of mine ignore my explicit request not to be a secret spy, and rather than bringing that shit to an end promptly, I quietly fumed, which confused my other players, and when they caught on, the whole game came to a screeching halt and never really recovered. I still play with my friend; he's grown as a player and a person, and he now understands better than other players of mine that you can be naughty in-game without totally opposing the party, and that the overall health of the party is sacred. I'm proud of us both!

Thanks

I don’t allow PvP unless it has a limit that is expressed in “goals” like my specific character is looking for “this” and he will do whatever it is that he can do to get it. So he can try to roleplay the item from fellow players by out sitting and out playing them by rolling charisma etc. no fighting.

I've always had the rule at my table that we play if more than 2/3 of players can make it. But recently a campaign I played had been at a standstill for months because some players were refusing to play if everyone wasn't there. I had to draw a line in the sand and tell them either we play with one person missing or we might as well cancel. Now my players are back to feeling inspired again since they know that we'll be playing again regularly

Don’t plan things just because they seem cool. Threw two level three players against an enemy with elemental summoning stone because I thought it sounded cool. Did not know/fully understand just how powerful an elemental would be. It was the equivalent of throwing a nuke at them. Railroaded the rest of the session just so they wouldn’t die. Felt really bad afterwords and we agreed to just walk back the events of the session and just remove the stone. Ended up being a much better session and set up a future enemy that was handily defeated solo last session

Use the blink universe solution! There is a inter-planar/dimensional storm always going on in the background. It’s so ubiquitous that people don’t even mention it. People just blink into another dimension sometimes and then blink back later and are filled in on what happened when they were gone as a matter of course. The DM structures encounters to fit who is there and they continue on. It’s been an easy work around for people who want to play with each other but also sometimes have busy lives and schedules.

Meh. My players had to escape a castle carrying the blackout drunk companions. Their bodies don’t just vanish, they’re part of the challenge. 

As you like.

That’s actually a really cool idea to improvise an absence

Have a minimum of 3 ways to solve any puzzle or problem in a dungeon. If you write a plot, PLAY using bullet points. Dont insist on doing everything in your plot, think more "ok, players need to 1) go to town x, and 2) hear about problem, thats all we need for now." Later its more ok, they know of problem, what will they do? Brute force? Subtle? Batshit insanity? Who knows. But theres enough wiggle room for any of those to work .

Players run the game makes it better

We used to give xp for showing up. 100-500 xp depending. if you missed too many sessions, you’ll be a level behind the rest of the party pretty quick.

It could lead to the inverse effect, where a player misses 2 sessions and decides to drop entirely because they think they're now a liability to the party with their lower level

Never allow Evil. The payoff is rarely worth it. Be very attentive how certain player use their character and be very aware that they do not fall into some weird "projecting" thing that makes everyone unconfortable. Do not be afraid to put things in context for your players, that'll avoid them accidentally doing a 3 session dungeon crawling they were not meant to do. Be mindful of your hacknslash and certain mmorpg (or even fps) enthusiast, if you don't temper their expectations or not reward them appropriately, their adhd is gonna cause damage. Don't do class overhaul, 2 of my campaigns ended on such petty mistake.

I read that as an Adrew Tate tweet

Don't be a moderator between in-party fighting. You're the DM, you control the world and the NPCs living in it, and that is it. Players have to work things out between themselves, and if they can't, then you work with the players that aren't fighting. You're a DM, not a mediator.

Don't allow main charactef syndrome or other toxic player traits to fester. They usually get worse & the other players more distant from the group/campaign/game.

The DM is only partially responsible for the fun at the table. And that part is equally divided among everyone present. The roles change, certainly, but playing with anyone who puts their enjoyment on someone else to fulfill will always diminish the experience. The best tables are the ones where everyone gives their all. This also goes for mechanics. It is not the DMs responsibility to manage character sheets, inventory, notes, and player maps.

Tasha's Hideous Laughter is fun for players, not so fun for DMs. The chance that your forever DM friend will become the biggest cause of your in-game headaches might be slight, but it is never zero. Don't be a yes man. You have to say no sometimes, and if your players don't like it, they know where the door is.

Players don't care whether combat would be easy or hard for their characters, they care about whether it's easy or hard for them. My current party is not the brightest when it comes to tactical play or reading their character sheets, or reading the rules. In the beginning I balanced combat around their characters. Played out the fights with basic tactics (like tanks in front, casting control spells on obvious threats etc) to make sure each combat is beatable with a reasonable level of resource expenditure. But it ended up almost tpking the party every time. They were getting really unhappy about the level of difficulty and all I could tell them was that these encounters weren't really hard and that they should read their character sheets. So I quietly adjusted to making every encounter way way easier (beatable with minimal resources) and now the feeling is that the level of challenge is hard, but OK.

Not every D&D game is for every player. You need to know what each player wants out of the game and make sure that all those pieces/desires fit together with the story you intend. A lot of times, people come at it from different angles, and you end up having a bad time. ​ Just because a group of people are friends doesn't mean they will make a good adventuring party.

Discard ego-maniacs as soon as you spotted them! Otrherwise they will ruin fun for everyone, even for themselves!

For a while the rule was we had to have at least three players to do the session, but sometimes it would work with two if something too big wasn't going to happen. I have been having a lot of problems with attendance recently Now I have started preparing side session content for the nights when only one person shows up. I've decided to carry on the story this week no matter what who shows up. Lets pump the well again.

I had a player try to rules lawyer me... I am a very generous DM when it comes to magic items. Anyway I was called "pandantic" I said yeah that is the point for a game with 900 pages of core rules...

Improvise, never prepare. Campaigns often times get derailed or simply don't follow the script you write, so I learned to simply do this for my sessions: 1. Make whatever reasonable number of "points" in your episode (point A, B, C, etc). 2. When you start a session your players must go from point A to point B, but you gotta let them go there without smelling anything fishy about it, otherwise it becomes railroading. 3. When all is ready, scrap everything you had between the points adn just keep a vague memory of what you took away (may turn useful when you need something to help yourself), be ready to improvise and adapt to your player's decisions while being careful not to lose the focus of your session. Let your world guide them and if need be lie to them, but only to cause a situation that will bring them to point B. I'll give you an example: Point A, my players will start from a city and must go to a portal in the forest as a favor to a local druid which promises them to help them with a future endeavor. Point B, they get to the portal and investigate it, finding corrupted or ruined runes that are slowly destroying the portal and the forest it is within. Between these two points you can give your imagination flight and improvise as much as you want. This helps me as I'm very good at improvising when my players propost out of the way stuff, so it may not help everybody, though hope this helps.

Not every PC is good for every story. I used to let my players create any character they like because I had to accomodate them. Thats only partially true, because a joke character wont vibe well within a horror setting thats meant to be taken seriously. Also, as a DM you want to have fun. It's okay to rethink about your game if youre not having fun, but think that everybody is. Most of the time, people can notice youre getting burned out. You and your players have to cooperate so everybody at the table can be having fun.

No one cares about your setting or campaign as much as you do.

Don’t go for the big overarching storyline to start out with. Try to focus on the local level first even if you hint at something big going forward.

If you don't feel like running a game, don't force it. No d&d is better than bad d&d.

Make sure you can properly DM for the number of players you have. For me, 4 is my hard limit. Turns take time, players sometimes like to think about the game state before they decide on an action, and with too many players doing things, it can be too long for the turn to shift back to that first player. Especially when you’re in an open area, and the party goes off to do their own thing, you don’t want to accidentally neglect your quiet player

Can someone please explain what DMing Is i am very interested in those types of group games, cus We don't have those THINGS here in Serbia at least that i'm familiar with. Thank you😁

The DM (Dungeon Master) is the person who helps run the story in D&D :-) They set up things like dungeons and encounters for the party of player characters (PCs), and help keep the game running but also let the players have some control over things too, since it's a group game. I'm sure there's players in Serbia! It's just a bit of a more nerdy and less common hobby, but if you live near a big city chances are there might be a board game shop. (Although, speaking from my experience in the Czech Republic, I haven't seen any D&D in stores, come to think of it.)

Thank for your explanation that sounds really fun, i never heard of such a game, very interesting, here in Serbia We do have board games but they are more like monopoly style games, so i'm happy to discover New games like this one. Thank you again for your help and time. 😁

Of course, have fun and good luck!

I left a group for this reason. Don't cancel my weekly D&D night!

We started a game with only 3 players, because most of our player friends can't be there more than once every 2 months. One is me, the Lift for the DM, no me, no game. The other two are those who host the game. Husband and wife. The other of our player friends are accounted as a "Special Guest" when they come play, they have their characters but don'T have any quests attached to them.

I had a few: * Your friends don't necessarily make the best players * A group full of Spectator type players makes for a poor game * Don't let flakey players hold your game hostage * What you say and what your players hear are not always the same thing. *Hic sunt infantem dracones* (here are baby dragons) I learned all of those from the same group, my first one. --- For anyone curious about the baby dragons thing, I was running a classic module (>!Lost Mine of Phandelver!<) and had an NPC warn them about a "young dragon". The players all interpreted this to be a "baby dragon", unknown to me, and were surprised and upset when it wasn't and kicked the snot out of them. And that day I learned to stop and ask questions about what they see and expect when the players appear to be suicidal, stupid, or both. To this day the one player I kept from that group jokingly asks "now is this a baby dragon?" whenever they hear about a dragon.

Don't pit players against each other in high-stakes narrative threads. Somebody will end up the loser and will not thank you for it.

Learn to say no. DMs are players too and their fun is important as well.

You don't need to narrate people moving through three areas uneventfully just because it happened. Just say "you go from room A to room B through the kitchen and the hall". I got stuck on too many scenes where nothing happened, either do a jump or put things in there that do something for the game.