Yeah, I try to keep new player games as official as possible so players can learn the system. Most of my personal homebrews are circumstantial, so it's easy to introduce them after they have a full grasp of the regular mechanics.
Both the Dragon of Icespire Peak from the Essentials Kit, and the Lost Mine of Phandelver from the Starter Set use the basic rules. Or at least a very close approximation.
D&D campaigns back then were usually quite short. There were no character backstories, because there's no point in getting too attached to someone who's going to be dead in a few hours. I much prefer the modern D&D with its focus on narrative storytelling and character development.
Do you mean basic like BECMI. Or basic like the free version of 5e, where there’s only one subclass per class and such? I have done the first, but not the second.
The game gets as complex as it gets in the end. For me the class abilities (including feats, since they're a perk from leveling up in a class) don't really make things more difficult, nor do racial qualities, and pretty much everything else comes down to "here's how to handle this kind of situation" - which, if it's not part of the basic or otherwise restricted ruleset in use is just going to be ruled on by the DM if it comes up.
The best games to me are the ones where there's a good mutual understanding between DM and players of what characters can do in a turn or, in non-combat situations, in a span of time that can reasonably be allotted to a single player before there should be input from the DM and/or other players' choices should be evaluated and the players choose in-game actions to try more than mechanics to use. It's more organic and more immersive that way. But from an adjudication standpoint, that still requires at least as many rules and/or rulings as a game where the players think mostly in mechanical terms, and likely more since those latter players tend to stay well within the box of formal, written rules while the more organic ones will occasionally come up with stuff that's just not covered explicitly in a book.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I haven't run such a game yet, but I plan on doing so for my partner who has recently come to like watching D&D streams. I think like most people who have never played and only watch streams, she gets what's going on and it's entertaining enough, but when it comes to what classes there are, what abilities she has, and what dice she has to roll, that's when it throws her. She's quite intimidated by the amount of books she's heard of, and worries she won't wrap her head around the rules, but I'm confident enough in my own ability to play the game to relay information and make it easier to remember when it's in practice.
I may have to get the Essentials or Stranger Things set as I'm told those provide more things to use on the table, whereas I only own the Starter Set. The rules seem complete enough and the premade character sheets ought to give us both the info we need to run the adventure.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
I may have to get the Essentials or Stranger Things set as I'm told those provide more things to use on the table, whereas I only own the Starter Set.
The Essentials set is the single one item where buying the physical book (or in this case box) lets you claim the digital counterpart on DDB for free - the adventure, anyway, but also the 3 follow-up adventures.
... I'm confident enough in my own ability to play the game to relay information and make it easier to remember when it's in practice.
Honestly, this is by far the best way for new players to learn: letting them simply play the game knowing just the essential mechanics. They'll pick up on the other rules quickly enough, and this way they get in the habit of considering their character's action as anything they want the character to do rather than something they know the rules allow their character to do. If the rules don't cover it explicitly the DM will make a ruling, so the players really don't have to limit themselves either deliberately or subconsciously.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Both the Dragon of Icespire Peak from the Essentials Kit, and the Lost Mine of Phandelver from the Starter Set use the basic rules. Or at least a very close approximation.
The Essential Kit expand on the Basic rules with the Bard class and the Entertainer background among other things.
Do you mean basic like BECMI. Or basic like the free version of 5e, where there’s only one subclass per class and such? I have done the first, but not the second.
Closest I got was PHB only....it was pretty good actually.
Now if I have a new player I simply ask them what they want to play and walk them through some options. Generally for new players I suggest a martial character as they are easier to grasp (for the most part...some are complicated I know) or a warlock as they tend to be fairly new player friendly for their playstyle (but less so their options! So many options!).
The game gets as complex as it gets in the end. For me the class abilities (including feats, since they're a perk from leveling up in a class) don't really make things more difficult, nor do racial qualities, and pretty much everything else comes down to "here's how to handle this kind of situation" - which, if it's not part of the basic or otherwise restricted ruleset in use is just going to be ruled on by the DM if it comes up.
The best games to me are the ones where there's a good mutual understanding between DM and players of what characters can do in a turn or, in non-combat situations, in a span of time that can reasonably be allotted to a single player before there should be input from the DM and/or other players' choices should be evaluated and the players choose in-game actions to try more than mechanics to use. It's more organic and more immersive that way. But from an adjudication standpoint, that still requires at least as many rules and/or rulings as a game where the players think mostly in mechanical terms, and likely more since those latter players tend to stay well within the box of formal, written rules while the more organic ones will occasionally come up with stuff that's just not covered explicitly in a book.
I found that having less choices, especially for new players, is less confusing to them to begin with. Making characters can be a daunting task when you have to explain to them exery races, classes and backgrounds in the Player's Handbook.
I also did one shot using the Basic rules to showcase it, telling players that the game had even more options in terms of races, classes, backgrounds and more and that if they wanted to play again, we could expand on that.
I also did some playtesting using the Basic rules , modules etc... and making Basic Char is even faster.
The game gets as complex as it gets in the end. For me the class abilities (including feats, since they're a perk from leveling up in a class) don't really make things more difficult, nor do racial qualities, and pretty much everything else comes down to "here's how to handle this kind of situation" - which, if it's not part of the basic or otherwise restricted ruleset in use is just going to be ruled on by the DM if it comes up.
The best games to me are the ones where there's a good mutual understanding between DM and players of what characters can do in a turn or, in non-combat situations, in a span of time that can reasonably be allotted to a single player before there should be input from the DM and/or other players' choices should be evaluated and the players choose in-game actions to try more than mechanics to use. It's more organic and more immersive that way. But from an adjudication standpoint, that still requires at least as many rules and/or rulings as a game where the players think mostly in mechanical terms, and likely more since those latter players tend to stay well within the box of formal, written rules while the more organic ones will occasionally come up with stuff that's just not covered explicitly in a book.
I found that having less choices, especially for new players, is less confusing to them to begin with. Making characters can be a daunting task when you have to explain to them exery races, classes and backgrounds in the Player's Handbook.
I also did one shot using the Basic rules to showcase it, telling players that the game had even more options in terms of races, classes, backgrounds and more and that if they wanted to play again, we could expand on that.
I also did some playtesting using the Basic rules , modules etc... and making Basic Char is even faster.
PHB at least helps with the racial lore (if you choose to default at least) so it helps somewhat.
I have found it balances pretty well and since I can even lend them a physical copy (I have several) it seems to work out well.
but I mostly play IRL so its easier to walk them through things I feel.
Making characters can be a daunting task when you have to explain to them exery races, classes and backgrounds in the Player's Handbook.
Don't explain everything they could choose to play - ask them to explain what they'd like to play most (because they'll likely want to play a lot of things) based on very broad categories. Mostly magic, mostly skill at arms, or a mix? Broadly skilled or more focused on combat ability? Outdoorsy or street smart? A handful of questions like those should narrow it down enough to suggest a class and a background. For a first time character you can pretty much just suggest a race or two based on those previous choices and the preceding answers, as players can choose to lean into racial stereotypes or go against type anyway.
It's a first character. It's not going to last, and players will very likely find they want to try other things or aren't quite happy with their decisions anyway, even if you did explain every possible option in detail. Play a short-ish intro adventure first, let them get a taste of their character and after that first adventure - which won't take more than a couple of sessions, unless your sessions are kept short - give them the option to adjust their character or create a completely different one as desired. That first character is never going to be perfect, so don't try for perfection. Just get them playing, it's much more fun to learn about the game while playing it than by having everything explained by someone in teaching from a textbook mode.
If a newbie tells me they don't know how to play, I tell them that yes, they really do - all they're supposed to be doing is tell the DM what their character does. They don't need to know the rules for that, the DM will translate to D&D mechanics. It absolutely helps if they know the essentials - what's an ability check, what's a save, what is AC, what are hit points, things like that - but a 20-30m explanation with their character sheet as an aid will cover that. Reinforcing that knowledge will happen through using it; in other words, by playing the game.
Making characters can be a daunting task when you have to explain to them exery races, classes and backgrounds in the Player's Handbook.
Don't explain everything they could choose to play - ask them to explain what they'd like to play most (because they'll likely want to play a lot of things) based on very broad categories. Mostly magic, mostly skill at arms, or a mix? Broadly skilled or more focused on combat ability? Outdoorsy or street smart? A handful of questions like those should narrow it down enough to suggest a class and a background. For a first time character you can pretty much just suggest a race or two based on those previous choices and the preceding answers, as players can choose to lean into racial stereotypes or go against type anyway.
It's a first character. It's not going to last, and players will very likely find they want to try other things or aren't quite happy with their decisions anyway, even if you did explain every possible option in detail. Play a short-ish intro adventure first, let them get a taste of their character and after that first adventure - which won't take more than a couple of sessions, unless your sessions are kept short - give them the option to adjust their character or create a completely different one as desired. That first character is never going to be perfect, so don't try for perfection. Just get them playing, it's much more fun to learn about the game while playing it than by having everything explained by someone in teaching from a textbook mode.
If a newbie tells me they don't know how to play, I tell them that yes, they really do - all they're supposed to be doing is tell the DM what their character does. They don't need to know the rules for that, the DM will translate to D&D mechanics. It absolutely helps if they know the essentials - what's an ability check, what's a save, what is AC, what are hit points, things like that - but a 20-30m explanation with their character sheet as an aid will cover that. Reinforcing that knowledge will happen through using it; in other words, by playing the game.
Agreed. Explaining every little thing woukd just overwhelm them. I'd use more categories and a decision tree style method to get to what they want than you, though. My first question would be "Do you want to be a fighter, a sneak, a magician or a smoothtalker?", then when they pick one, my second question would be to present the rough theme of each class that matches their description and see what takes their fancy. Talking about the specifics is just going to confuse the poor guy and get no one nowhere. There is just too much complexity to take it all at once and make meaningful decision.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Have you ever played or run a campaign using D&D Basic rules only?
If not would you?
Yeah, I try to keep new player games as official as possible so players can learn the system. Most of my personal homebrews are circumstantial, so it's easy to introduce them after they have a full grasp of the regular mechanics.
The first game run for me was done likewise.
Both the Dragon of Icespire Peak from the Essentials Kit, and the Lost Mine of Phandelver from the Starter Set use the basic rules. Or at least a very close approximation.
I've done it. Back in the early 80s.
D&D campaigns back then were usually quite short. There were no character backstories, because there's no point in getting too attached to someone who's going to be dead in a few hours. I much prefer the modern D&D with its focus on narrative storytelling and character development.
Anzio Faro. Protector Aasimar light cleric. Lvl 18.
Viktor Gavriil. White dragonborn grave cleric. Lvl 20.
Ikram Sahir ibn-Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad. Brass dragonborn draconic sorcerer Lvl 9. Fire elemental devil.
Wrangler of cats.
Yes, in the 80s and again in the 201Xs.
The 80s were a collection of tacked on one-shots and Keep on the Borderlands.
The 201X were various campaigns for my students.
"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
Do you mean basic like BECMI. Or basic like the free version of 5e, where there’s only one subclass per class and such?
I have done the first, but not the second.
The game gets as complex as it gets in the end. For me the class abilities (including feats, since they're a perk from leveling up in a class) don't really make things more difficult, nor do racial qualities, and pretty much everything else comes down to "here's how to handle this kind of situation" - which, if it's not part of the basic or otherwise restricted ruleset in use is just going to be ruled on by the DM if it comes up.
The best games to me are the ones where there's a good mutual understanding between DM and players of what characters can do in a turn or, in non-combat situations, in a span of time that can reasonably be allotted to a single player before there should be input from the DM and/or other players' choices should be evaluated and the players choose in-game actions to try more than mechanics to use. It's more organic and more immersive that way. But from an adjudication standpoint, that still requires at least as many rules and/or rulings as a game where the players think mostly in mechanical terms, and likely more since those latter players tend to stay well within the box of formal, written rules while the more organic ones will occasionally come up with stuff that's just not covered explicitly in a book.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I haven't run such a game yet, but I plan on doing so for my partner who has recently come to like watching D&D streams. I think like most people who have never played and only watch streams, she gets what's going on and it's entertaining enough, but when it comes to what classes there are, what abilities she has, and what dice she has to roll, that's when it throws her. She's quite intimidated by the amount of books she's heard of, and worries she won't wrap her head around the rules, but I'm confident enough in my own ability to play the game to relay information and make it easier to remember when it's in practice.
I may have to get the Essentials or Stranger Things set as I'm told those provide more things to use on the table, whereas I only own the Starter Set. The rules seem complete enough and the premade character sheets ought to give us both the info we need to run the adventure.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
The Essentials set is the single one item where buying the physical book (or in this case box) lets you claim the digital counterpart on DDB for free - the adventure, anyway, but also the 3 follow-up adventures.
Honestly, this is by far the best way for new players to learn: letting them simply play the game knowing just the essential mechanics. They'll pick up on the other rules quickly enough, and this way they get in the habit of considering their character's action as anything they want the character to do rather than something they know the rules allow their character to do. If the rules don't cover it explicitly the DM will make a ruling, so the players really don't have to limit themselves either deliberately or subconsciously.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
as DM I did a mini campaign for my daughters using the Basic rules but i never did as a player.
The Essential Kit expand on the Basic rules with the Bard class and the Entertainer background among other things.
I mean the 5E Basic Rules
Closest I got was PHB only....it was pretty good actually.
Now if I have a new player I simply ask them what they want to play and walk them through some options. Generally for new players I suggest a martial character as they are easier to grasp (for the most part...some are complicated I know) or a warlock as they tend to be fairly new player friendly for their playstyle (but less so their options! So many options!).
I found that having less choices, especially for new players, is less confusing to them to begin with. Making characters can be a daunting task when you have to explain to them exery races, classes and backgrounds in the Player's Handbook.
I also did one shot using the Basic rules to showcase it, telling players that the game had even more options in terms of races, classes, backgrounds and more and that if they wanted to play again, we could expand on that.
I also did some playtesting using the Basic rules , modules etc... and making Basic Char is even faster.
PHB at least helps with the racial lore (if you choose to default at least) so it helps somewhat.
I have found it balances pretty well and since I can even lend them a physical copy (I have several) it seems to work out well.
but I mostly play IRL so its easier to walk them through things I feel.
Don't explain everything they could choose to play - ask them to explain what they'd like to play most (because they'll likely want to play a lot of things) based on very broad categories. Mostly magic, mostly skill at arms, or a mix? Broadly skilled or more focused on combat ability? Outdoorsy or street smart? A handful of questions like those should narrow it down enough to suggest a class and a background. For a first time character you can pretty much just suggest a race or two based on those previous choices and the preceding answers, as players can choose to lean into racial stereotypes or go against type anyway.
It's a first character. It's not going to last, and players will very likely find they want to try other things or aren't quite happy with their decisions anyway, even if you did explain every possible option in detail. Play a short-ish intro adventure first, let them get a taste of their character and after that first adventure - which won't take more than a couple of sessions, unless your sessions are kept short - give them the option to adjust their character or create a completely different one as desired. That first character is never going to be perfect, so don't try for perfection. Just get them playing, it's much more fun to learn about the game while playing it than by having everything explained by someone in teaching from a textbook mode.
If a newbie tells me they don't know how to play, I tell them that yes, they really do - all they're supposed to be doing is tell the DM what their character does. They don't need to know the rules for that, the DM will translate to D&D mechanics. It absolutely helps if they know the essentials - what's an ability check, what's a save, what is AC, what are hit points, things like that - but a 20-30m explanation with their character sheet as an aid will cover that. Reinforcing that knowledge will happen through using it; in other words, by playing the game.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Agreed. Explaining every little thing woukd just overwhelm them. I'd use more categories and a decision tree style method to get to what they want than you, though. My first question would be "Do you want to be a fighter, a sneak, a magician or a smoothtalker?", then when they pick one, my second question would be to present the rough theme of each class that matches their description and see what takes their fancy. Talking about the specifics is just going to confuse the poor guy and get no one nowhere. There is just too much complexity to take it all at once and make meaningful decision.
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.