(If you're aware of the homebrew "Fractured Destiny" campaign, please stop reading, as spoilers are contained)
A friend (let's call him Justin) invited me to be a part of their summer campaign, and I readily agreed, but I'm starting to feel a little nervous about it all.
For context, Justin has been playing DND for a little over a year sporadically, roughly three months each for two campaigns which both ended pre-emptively, and is currently playing in a third for the past couple months. He has no experience DM'ing.
As he's been talking to me, I'm getting very nervous that he's using too much homebrew, and he might've bitten off more than he can chew. This includes
-A level 20 PC wizard who has a small chance to lose levels with every spell above 5th level he casts. (this was with a party of level 3's, so even without using the higher level spells he's still ridiculously broken. I managed to steer him away with some heavy convincing.)
-Homebrew powers that scale with the level 20 Wizard as he slowly turns into a demon.
-A table of crit fails and crit successes that scale with level (Idk how this even works, I'm trying to steer him away from it as well, explaining that an action surging level 20 fighter with haste has roughly a 40% chance to crit fail, but he's persistent.)
-A homebrew world roughly the size of our Eastern Hemisphere
-Homebrew planes on top of that
-Homebrew enemies
-Made a ruling that bonus action spells can be used with action spells "most of the time, unless it's game breaking" (which is frustratingly vague, imo)
-Made a ruling of ignoring material components "most of the time, unless it's game breaking" (see above)
-Seriously considered nerfing the level 3 Artificer and Cleric after they both off-hand mentioned cool features they had. (Managed to stop that one from happening as well)
-Homebrew a "sheathing" rule that's allows for infinite switches between weapons (Honestly not that bad, but it's gonna make everyone switch to shields on the end of their turn.)
-Implementing a magic item rental shop, providing session 1 access to game breaking homebrew items. (One, which allows you to tick a letter up or down one in the alphabet to change stuff as an action. For example, bars to bass, fold to gold, crooks to brooks, cock (being a male chicken) to dock, wine to vine, etc.)
-homebrewing a variety of gems that have various effects, which can be utilized in traps, spells, and modifying weapons
He then mentioned that he's decided to extend the campaign to be a multi-year one, rather than having it be summer long. I said that unfortunately, I'd be unable to play then, as summer is my only real time I'm free, but he said that I could play a different PC who at the end of summer betrays the party and turns into a reoccurring BBEG (Not THE BBEG, but one of his higher-up underlings) That way I could pop in every so often, without being a scheduling liability. I consented, as he seemed really bummed about having me leave, and I wanted to play some DND. But now I'm seeing more things that make me nervous. Since I'll become the BBEG, I'm privy to over-arching campaign info, but not individual session stuff. (So, I'll be taking a back seat on major plot points, but still contributing to individual session-stuff) and I'm very concerned.
-Immediately after I said I couldn't make it, Justin called in a friend of his (let's call him Frodo) to play my abandoned character, so that he could have someone experience the specific plot points he had already created for my backstory. Now that I'm privy to over-arching plot ideas, Justin mentioned that this includes coming back to find his home land completely destroyed and overrun with monsters, and all his loved ones dead. (Which seems like something he should've checked with me while I was still playing. I understand wanting plot twists, but it's a little harsh to have be a guaranteed, pre-planned thing.)
-Poor Frodo is playing his very first caster now, and I built him to be utility and conniving, using spells like magic mouth, Nystul's, enlarge/reduce, and eldritch adept siilentt image to solve issues. I'm not sure he'll enjoy it.
-Justin has told me that he intends for each continent to be an "arc" which seems significantly railroady :/
-He's already got a list of specific combat encounters that the party is going to encounter across the entire campaign, like an evil jester after meeting him in a masquerade ball, who will lead them into an ambush; a group of tech-magic guys who'll kidnap the party as they enter a specific hotel room. (I asked if the party will be able to make saving throws, or what he'll do if they don't check out the room. Justin said he'll just make it a REALLY hard combat instead. I pointed out that they can easily escape with really low level stuff like minor illusion, feather fall, invisibility, misty step, and that they'll just get more options as they continually level up.)
Sorry for the long rant, I'll wrap it up.
He's got so much game-breaking homebrew, but he's also nerfing things, and railroading people. In comparison, I like to do only a moderate amount of homebrew (i.e. world and the occasional enemy) and I prefer a "Breath of the Wild" campaign where there's several plots the PC can choose to pursue, and I have no idea how they'll end.
Am I just being snobby, and should just enjoy a DND style that isn't EXACTLY like mine, or should I try to talk about some of these things with him (although I'm not sure how to diplomatically so) or should I just find a polite way to leave the campaign, as it's looking significantly less fun than I originally intended?
Thanks for any input you can provide, and thanks for bearing with my wordiness!
Railroading is characteristic of new GMs. They often want things to go a certain way because that is how they planned their campaign. It takes experience to know how to adjust and plan a flexible game.
The lvl 20 PC thing sounds really unusual and sets a red flag. Why is it a necessity?
I'm guilty of using a lot of homebrew monsters and items. I only modify a handful of actual rules though.
Personally I would stay away from the game. There are too many variables and unknowns. But primarily I wouldn't want my PC turned into a backstabbing bad guy. That rubs me the wrong way. I know there are a bunch of people that would find that fun, but I have enough backstabbing going on in real life to think it's fun in a game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
So rather than cataloguing your various concerns with "Justen's" first time effort at DMing, I would have simply said, "I've got concerns about a first time DM overloading their world with homebrew that seems broken, should I intervene or just bow out?" No need for the litany; and you never know if anyone who actually knows this campaign may come by (btw saying "anyone who recognizes [insert campaign name] do not read" is like saying, "Don't think of an elephant)."
The easiest thing for you is to say, "you know, I don't think your campaign is quite my style, maybe it's better you find a player who's more into it" and opt to bow out. If they press you, and you feel like they honestly want feedback simply tell them, "Well, conventional wisdom on boards like DDB always tell first time DMs to start small, like the starting a campaign section of the DMG advises."
Really though, there are folks who really prefer or favor "design" over DMing (and to some degree "PC-ing") and use their opportunities to DM (and sometimes as a PC) as a showcase for all their homebrew, be it a world or mechanical funk-down, monsters, magic, etc. These games tend to be sorta railroady because they're almost literally tour vehicles of the DMs homebrew creativity. Many players of the more collaborative mode don't have the patience for this style, or willingness to put their agency in the back seat for a bit to let the DM "entertain"; but there are a lot of players, there actually is an "audience" player style, that do get a kick of going "whoaaaaah, that many dice!?!"
It sounds like you're pretty sure the game isn't for you. You have the option to tell the DM why you feel that is so, whether that feedback is solicited or not; but keep in mind this may be more "the way I have fun with D&D isn't the way you have fun with D&D" not so much "you're doing it wrong."
Why not just play a few sessions and see how it goes? Games almost always don't go according to plan, and all these wild ideas your friend may plan on putting the game may never even happen. Seeing that your previous campaigns weren't even finished, there is a good chance this one would not as well. Could be a good learning experience for your bro, but dipping out won't help him learn from it.
It sounds very much like his DM style is not up your alley. You could give it a shot and see if it suits you, but if you really feel strongly that he's not going to provide a gaming experience that you would enjoy, I think it's better to bow out now than to let him believe you're excited and invested when you aren't.
A new DM is going to make a lot of mistakes and learn how to balance things as time passes, but having a player who isn't happy is something people pick up on, especially if they're already friends. It isn't fair to him (or to yourself) to grin and bear it. No D&D is better than bad D&D. Some people just don't make a good DM-player match and that's okay.
And for what it's worth, there is nothing wrong with homebrewing a complicated universe for your first try at DMing. It sounds like he is going to be more of a Rule of Cool kind of dungeon master in a high-powered setting. Also, just because someone has planned campaign arcs and has detailed knowledge about their own world doesn't necessarily mean they will railroad the party into doing specific things at certain times. There's no harm in giving him the benefit of the doubt. He hasn't even run a session, yet. He has a lot to learn.
I've got to echo what's been said. It's partly a new DM with figurative eyes bigger than their stomach. Or probably - it's possible.his grand designs might come to fruition.
Either you have the patience to work him or not. Honestly, it sounds like the latter, and so I'd recommend you bow out and just say that you're busy or that you don't think it's the aesthetic for you or something.
If you do have the patience, offer to work with them as a mentor, and never say he's wrong, but offer a better way of implementing his desires. For example, if he makes a homebrew magic item that you feel is OP, find a similar one that already exists, show him the rating (Rare, Very Rare, etc) and the expected level for receiving it. Then describe the relative power level of the two items and show him a more appropriate power level. You haven't said no, you've just said that it's something that he can bring on another time.
Mentoring takes time, energy, effort and most of all patience, so only do it if you're willing to go the extra mile.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The only thing I see as any sort of danger flag there is the level 20 PC. Even then, it comes down to context. Mixed level campaigns are a thing.
Maybe I read it wrong, but that looks to me like the DM wants a powerful mage NPC to be the focus of an arc and is more familiar with player classes than with monster stat blocks. It's a common new DM habit to give class levels to NPCs when what they really want is a specialized, high-CR humanoid. Without more context, it's hard to say for sure. But it's a red flag if this is a DMPC.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello, everyone!
(If you're aware of the homebrew "Fractured Destiny" campaign, please stop reading, as spoilers are contained)
A friend (let's call him Justin) invited me to be a part of their summer campaign, and I readily agreed, but I'm starting to feel a little nervous about it all.
For context, Justin has been playing DND for a little over a year sporadically, roughly three months each for two campaigns which both ended pre-emptively, and is currently playing in a third for the past couple months. He has no experience DM'ing.
As he's been talking to me, I'm getting very nervous that he's using too much homebrew, and he might've bitten off more than he can chew. This includes
-A level 20 PC wizard who has a small chance to lose levels with every spell above 5th level he casts. (this was with a party of level 3's, so even without using the higher level spells he's still ridiculously broken. I managed to steer him away with some heavy convincing.)
-Homebrew powers that scale with the level 20 Wizard as he slowly turns into a demon.
-A table of crit fails and crit successes that scale with level (Idk how this even works, I'm trying to steer him away from it as well, explaining that an action surging level 20 fighter with haste has roughly a 40% chance to crit fail, but he's persistent.)
-A homebrew world roughly the size of our Eastern Hemisphere
-Homebrew planes on top of that
-Homebrew enemies
-Made a ruling that bonus action spells can be used with action spells "most of the time, unless it's game breaking" (which is frustratingly vague, imo)
-Made a ruling of ignoring material components "most of the time, unless it's game breaking" (see above)
-Seriously considered nerfing the level 3 Artificer and Cleric after they both off-hand mentioned cool features they had. (Managed to stop that one from happening as well)
-Homebrew a "sheathing" rule that's allows for infinite switches between weapons (Honestly not that bad, but it's gonna make everyone switch to shields on the end of their turn.)
-Implementing a magic item rental shop, providing session 1 access to game breaking homebrew items. (One, which allows you to tick a letter up or down one in the alphabet to change stuff as an action. For example, bars to bass, fold to gold, crooks to brooks, cock (being a male chicken) to dock, wine to vine, etc.)
-homebrewing a variety of gems that have various effects, which can be utilized in traps, spells, and modifying weapons
He then mentioned that he's decided to extend the campaign to be a multi-year one, rather than having it be summer long. I said that unfortunately, I'd be unable to play then, as summer is my only real time I'm free, but he said that I could play a different PC who at the end of summer betrays the party and turns into a reoccurring BBEG (Not THE BBEG, but one of his higher-up underlings) That way I could pop in every so often, without being a scheduling liability. I consented, as he seemed really bummed about having me leave, and I wanted to play some DND. But now I'm seeing more things that make me nervous. Since I'll become the BBEG, I'm privy to over-arching campaign info, but not individual session stuff. (So, I'll be taking a back seat on major plot points, but still contributing to individual session-stuff) and I'm very concerned.
-Immediately after I said I couldn't make it, Justin called in a friend of his (let's call him Frodo) to play my abandoned character, so that he could have someone experience the specific plot points he had already created for my backstory. Now that I'm privy to over-arching plot ideas, Justin mentioned that this includes coming back to find his home land completely destroyed and overrun with monsters, and all his loved ones dead. (Which seems like something he should've checked with me while I was still playing. I understand wanting plot twists, but it's a little harsh to have be a guaranteed, pre-planned thing.)
-Poor Frodo is playing his very first caster now, and I built him to be utility and conniving, using spells like magic mouth, Nystul's, enlarge/reduce, and eldritch adept siilentt image to solve issues. I'm not sure he'll enjoy it.
-Justin has told me that he intends for each continent to be an "arc" which seems significantly railroady :/
-He's already got a list of specific combat encounters that the party is going to encounter across the entire campaign, like an evil jester after meeting him in a masquerade ball, who will lead them into an ambush; a group of tech-magic guys who'll kidnap the party as they enter a specific hotel room. (I asked if the party will be able to make saving throws, or what he'll do if they don't check out the room. Justin said he'll just make it a REALLY hard combat instead. I pointed out that they can easily escape with really low level stuff like minor illusion, feather fall, invisibility, misty step, and that they'll just get more options as they continually level up.)
Sorry for the long rant, I'll wrap it up.
He's got so much game-breaking homebrew, but he's also nerfing things, and railroading people. In comparison, I like to do only a moderate amount of homebrew (i.e. world and the occasional enemy) and I prefer a "Breath of the Wild" campaign where there's several plots the PC can choose to pursue, and I have no idea how they'll end.
Am I just being snobby, and should just enjoy a DND style that isn't EXACTLY like mine, or should I try to talk about some of these things with him (although I'm not sure how to diplomatically so) or should I just find a polite way to leave the campaign, as it's looking significantly less fun than I originally intended?
Thanks for any input you can provide, and thanks for bearing with my wordiness!
Railroading is characteristic of new GMs. They often want things to go a certain way because that is how they planned their campaign. It takes experience to know how to adjust and plan a flexible game.
The lvl 20 PC thing sounds really unusual and sets a red flag. Why is it a necessity?
I'm guilty of using a lot of homebrew monsters and items. I only modify a handful of actual rules though.
Personally I would stay away from the game. There are too many variables and unknowns. But primarily I wouldn't want my PC turned into a backstabbing bad guy. That rubs me the wrong way. I know there are a bunch of people that would find that fun, but I have enough backstabbing going on in real life to think it's fun in a game.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
So rather than cataloguing your various concerns with "Justen's" first time effort at DMing, I would have simply said, "I've got concerns about a first time DM overloading their world with homebrew that seems broken, should I intervene or just bow out?" No need for the litany; and you never know if anyone who actually knows this campaign may come by (btw saying "anyone who recognizes [insert campaign name] do not read" is like saying, "Don't think of an elephant)."
The easiest thing for you is to say, "you know, I don't think your campaign is quite my style, maybe it's better you find a player who's more into it" and opt to bow out. If they press you, and you feel like they honestly want feedback simply tell them, "Well, conventional wisdom on boards like DDB always tell first time DMs to start small, like the starting a campaign section of the DMG advises."
Really though, there are folks who really prefer or favor "design" over DMing (and to some degree "PC-ing") and use their opportunities to DM (and sometimes as a PC) as a showcase for all their homebrew, be it a world or mechanical funk-down, monsters, magic, etc. These games tend to be sorta railroady because they're almost literally tour vehicles of the DMs homebrew creativity. Many players of the more collaborative mode don't have the patience for this style, or willingness to put their agency in the back seat for a bit to let the DM "entertain"; but there are a lot of players, there actually is an "audience" player style, that do get a kick of going "whoaaaaah, that many dice!?!"
It sounds like you're pretty sure the game isn't for you. You have the option to tell the DM why you feel that is so, whether that feedback is solicited or not; but keep in mind this may be more "the way I have fun with D&D isn't the way you have fun with D&D" not so much "you're doing it wrong."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Why not just play a few sessions and see how it goes? Games almost always don't go according to plan, and all these wild ideas your friend may plan on putting the game may never even happen. Seeing that your previous campaigns weren't even finished, there is a good chance this one would not as well. Could be a good learning experience for your bro, but dipping out won't help him learn from it.
1 shot dungeon master
It sounds very much like his DM style is not up your alley. You could give it a shot and see if it suits you, but if you really feel strongly that he's not going to provide a gaming experience that you would enjoy, I think it's better to bow out now than to let him believe you're excited and invested when you aren't.
A new DM is going to make a lot of mistakes and learn how to balance things as time passes, but having a player who isn't happy is something people pick up on, especially if they're already friends. It isn't fair to him (or to yourself) to grin and bear it. No D&D is better than bad D&D. Some people just don't make a good DM-player match and that's okay.
And for what it's worth, there is nothing wrong with homebrewing a complicated universe for your first try at DMing. It sounds like he is going to be more of a Rule of Cool kind of dungeon master in a high-powered setting. Also, just because someone has planned campaign arcs and has detailed knowledge about their own world doesn't necessarily mean they will railroad the party into doing specific things at certain times. There's no harm in giving him the benefit of the doubt. He hasn't even run a session, yet. He has a lot to learn.
I've got to echo what's been said. It's partly a new DM with figurative eyes bigger than their stomach. Or probably - it's possible.his grand designs might come to fruition.
Either you have the patience to work him or not. Honestly, it sounds like the latter, and so I'd recommend you bow out and just say that you're busy or that you don't think it's the aesthetic for you or something.
If you do have the patience, offer to work with them as a mentor, and never say he's wrong, but offer a better way of implementing his desires. For example, if he makes a homebrew magic item that you feel is OP, find a similar one that already exists, show him the rating (Rare, Very Rare, etc) and the expected level for receiving it. Then describe the relative power level of the two items and show him a more appropriate power level. You haven't said no, you've just said that it's something that he can bring on another time.
Mentoring takes time, energy, effort and most of all patience, so only do it if you're willing to go the extra mile.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Maybe I read it wrong, but that looks to me like the DM wants a powerful mage NPC to be the focus of an arc and is more familiar with player classes than with monster stat blocks. It's a common new DM habit to give class levels to NPCs when what they really want is a specialized, high-CR humanoid. Without more context, it's hard to say for sure. But it's a red flag if this is a DMPC.