I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am looking forward to your replies!
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
This isn't exactly a contradiction, but the Light property on Hand Crossbows does absolutely nothing despite being present on the weapon.
The PHB on page 194 uses the terms "melee weapon attack" and "ranged weapon attack", which in English can mean (for the melee one) any of "an attack which is both weapon and melee", "an attack which is weapon and that weapon is melee", or "an attack which is both weapon and melee and that weapon is melee". The SAC is the only rules source explaining that the chosen definition in 5E is "an attack which is both weapon and melee". This is an example of missing information.
As a follow-up, p194 is backed up by the SAC in how you determine what stat you throw a longsword with - Dexterity, because the modifier is chosen based on the attack. PHB p14 states that you choose the modifier based on the weapon, not the attack, so you throw a longsword with Strength. This is an example of a contradiction - your GM has to choose which RAW to obey.
This is merely the top of a rabbit hole of working out how improvised weapons work; most GMs, including Jeremy Crawford, inject their own rules into the improvised weapon rules. If you want to keep going down the rabbit hole, here are corner cases, most of which are actually clear RAW, it's just that the RAW is so unacceptable that many GMs change it:
If you throw a longsword while you have longsword proficiency, do you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll? RAW yes; most GMs say no.
Does a weapon in the weapons table retain its properties when used as an improvised weapon? RAW yes; most GMs, explicitly including Jeremy Crawford, say no.
When you throw a vial of acid or holy water, how exactly does it work?
Is the action Use an Object or Attack? A dizzying number of rules care about the answer.
What adds to the acid or radiant damage - your ability modifier? The 1d4 bludgeoning the vial itself is supposed to do? Neither? Both?
All of the above questions apply to swinging a torch and its fire damage, it's just that the rules aren't a direct copy and paste of the thrown vial rules.
While there's no question nothing adds to the fire damage of alchemist's fire, the above questions otherwise apply to a thrown flask of alchemist's fire or oil.
Nets deal damage "-", which is never ever defined anywhere. The GM will need to determine what this actually means, in particular for both a rogue or ranger throwing a net (where additional damage can be added via hunter's mark or sneak attack) and a warlock (where hex can add additional typed damage).
Adding additional damage is also never explained anywhere, it's just that weapons that deal mixed types are typically challenging to get. If a rogue sneak attacks with a weapon with elemental weapon on it, what damage type is the sneak attack damage?
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
Before combat, before spells, before skills, before even roleplay. The first experience players have in any campaign is making a character.
Rolling for stats, determining modifiers, what a proficiency is, the difference between attack rolls, saves, and ability checks, how to determine AC, how to determine HP, how to rest, etc. Touch on how to determine attack modifiers and weapon damage, but don't worry about explaining attacks yet (same for spellcasting attack bonus and spell save DCs).
This way, later on when you are talking about other subjects, you only need a light reminder on determining values and not a full explanation (because combat and spellcasting are lengthy enough without having to explain character sheet stuff).
I'd start with the role of both (who does what, what is good etiquette, etc) regardless. Then I'd talk about the core books: PHB, MM, and DMG.
If the video is for players, "how to fill out a character sheet" is probably the next step, followed by how to roll checks, attacks, and saves. I'd follow up with combat and spell casting.
For DM's, basic rules for adjudicating the game (Specific v. General is a biggie, but also how to set checks, and how to read a creature statblock, how to run a combat, how to award loot)
I'd start with the role of both (who does what, what is good etiquette, etc) regardless. Then I'd talk about the core books: PHB, MM, and DMG.
If the video is for players, "how to fill out a character sheet" is probably the next step, followed by how to roll checks, attacks, and saves. I'd follow up with combat and spell casting.
For DM's, basic rules for adjudicating the game (Specific v. General is a biggie, but also how to set checks, and how to read a creature statblock, how to run a combat, how to award loot)
Honestly, my first advice would be not to DM until you have played a bit first.
I'd start with the role of both (who does what, what is good etiquette, etc) regardless. Then I'd talk about the core books: PHB, MM, and DMG.
If the video is for players, "how to fill out a character sheet" is probably the next step, followed by how to roll checks, attacks, and saves. I'd follow up with combat and spell casting.
For DM's, basic rules for adjudicating the game (Specific v. General is a biggie, but also how to set checks, and how to read a creature statblock, how to run a combat, how to award loot)
Before combat, before spells, before skills, before even roleplay. The first experience players have in any campaign is making a character.
Rolling for stats, determining modifiers, what a proficiency is, the difference between attack rolls, saves, and ability checks, how to determine AC, how to determine HP, how to rest, etc. Touch on how to determine attack modifiers and weapon damage, but don't worry about explaining attacks yet (same for spellcasting attack bonus and spell save DCs).
This way, later on when you are talking about other subjects, you only need a light reminder on determining values and not a full explanation (because combat and spellcasting are lengthy enough without having to explain character sheet stuff).
Thank you very much for your reply, it helped me a lot!
I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am looking forward to your replies!
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
This isn't exactly a contradiction, but the Light property on Hand Crossbows does absolutely nothing despite being present on the weapon.
The PHB on page 194 uses the terms "melee weapon attack" and "ranged weapon attack", which in English can mean (for the melee one) any of "an attack which is both weapon and melee", "an attack which is weapon and that weapon is melee", or "an attack which is both weapon and melee and that weapon is melee". The SAC is the only rules source explaining that the chosen definition in 5E is "an attack which is both weapon and melee". This is an example of missing information.
As a follow-up, p194 is backed up by the SAC in how you determine what stat you throw a longsword with - Dexterity, because the modifier is chosen based on the attack. PHB p14 states that you choose the modifier based on the weapon, not the attack, so you throw a longsword with Strength. This is an example of a contradiction - your GM has to choose which RAW to obey.
This is merely the top of a rabbit hole of working out how improvised weapons work; most GMs, including Jeremy Crawford, inject their own rules into the improvised weapon rules. If you want to keep going down the rabbit hole, here are corner cases, most of which are actually clear RAW, it's just that the RAW is so unacceptable that many GMs change it:
If you throw a longsword while you have longsword proficiency, do you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll? RAW yes; most GMs say no.
Does a weapon in the weapons table retain its properties when used as an improvised weapon? RAW yes; most GMs, explicitly including Jeremy Crawford, say no.
When you throw a vial of acid or holy water, how exactly does it work?
Is the action Use an Object or Attack? A dizzying number of rules care about the answer.
What adds to the acid or radiant damage - your ability modifier? The 1d4 bludgeoning the vial itself is supposed to do? Neither? Both?
All of the above questions apply to swinging a torch and its fire damage, it's just that the rules aren't a direct copy and paste of the thrown vial rules.
While there's no question nothing adds to the fire damage of alchemist's fire, the above questions otherwise apply to a thrown flask of alchemist's fire or oil.
Nets deal damage "-", which is never ever defined anywhere. The GM will need to determine what this actually means, in particular for both a rogue or ranger throwing a net (where additional damage can be added via hunter's mark or sneak attack) and a warlock (where hex can add additional typed damage).
Adding additional damage is also never explained anywhere, it's just that weapons that deal mixed types are typically challenging to get. If a rogue sneak attacks with a weapon with elemental weapon on it, what damage type is the sneak attack damage?
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
These are things (some of them) that even I didn't know of, thank you!
That at a table the DM has a final say on how things work and they can modify the rules or introduce any house rules if they think it will make for a better game and that it’s bad manners to “rules lawyer” and argue with the DM, the amount of posts here and on other d&d sites boiling down to “my DM doesn’t allow X at the table but the rules say X is allowed, can I do X?” shows that this is something lots of players seem to struggle with.
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
This isn't exactly a contradiction, but the Light property on Hand Crossbows does absolutely nothing despite being present on the weapon.
The PHB on page 194 uses the terms "melee weapon attack" and "ranged weapon attack", which in English can mean (for the melee one) any of "an attack which is both weapon and melee", "an attack which is weapon and that weapon is melee", or "an attack which is both weapon and melee and that weapon is melee". The SAC is the only rules source explaining that the chosen definition in 5E is "an attack which is both weapon and melee". This is an example of missing information.
As a follow-up, p194 is backed up by the SAC in how you determine what stat you throw a longsword with - Dexterity, because the modifier is chosen based on the attack. PHB p14 states that you choose the modifier based on the weapon, not the attack, so you throw a longsword with Strength. This is an example of a contradiction - your GM has to choose which RAW to obey.
This is merely the top of a rabbit hole of working out how improvised weapons work; most GMs, including Jeremy Crawford, inject their own rules into the improvised weapon rules. If you want to keep going down the rabbit hole, here are corner cases, most of which are actually clear RAW, it's just that the RAW is so unacceptable that many GMs change it:
If you throw a longsword while you have longsword proficiency, do you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll? RAW yes; most GMs say no.
Does a weapon in the weapons table retain its properties when used as an improvised weapon? RAW yes; most GMs, explicitly including Jeremy Crawford, say no.
When you throw a vial of acid or holy water, how exactly does it work?
Is the action Use an Object or Attack? A dizzying number of rules care about the answer.
What adds to the acid or radiant damage - your ability modifier? The 1d4 bludgeoning the vial itself is supposed to do? Neither? Both?
All of the above questions apply to swinging a torch and its fire damage, it's just that the rules aren't a direct copy and paste of the thrown vial rules.
While there's no question nothing adds to the fire damage of alchemist's fire, the above questions otherwise apply to a thrown flask of alchemist's fire or oil.
Nets deal damage "-", which is never ever defined anywhere. The GM will need to determine what this actually means, in particular for both a rogue or ranger throwing a net (where additional damage can be added via hunter's mark or sneak attack) and a warlock (where hex can add additional typed damage).
Adding additional damage is also never explained anywhere, it's just that weapons that deal mixed types are typically challenging to get. If a rogue sneak attacks with a weapon with elemental weapon on it, what damage type is the sneak attack damage?
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
These are things (some of them) that even I didn't know of, thank you!
I'd save these for last. You don't want to be explaining weird rules without having already covered what "normal" rules are.
(There is also the fact that weird rules are often argued about what they should mean).
I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am looking forward to your replies!
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
This isn't exactly a contradiction, but the Light property on Hand Crossbows does absolutely nothing despite being present on the weapon.
The PHB on page 194 uses the terms "melee weapon attack" and "ranged weapon attack", which in English can mean (for the melee one) any of "an attack which is both weapon and melee", "an attack which is weapon and that weapon is melee", or "an attack which is both weapon and melee and that weapon is melee". The SAC is the only rules source explaining that the chosen definition in 5E is "an attack which is both weapon and melee". This is an example of missing information.
As a follow-up, p194 is backed up by the SAC in how you determine what stat you throw a longsword with - Dexterity, because the modifier is chosen based on the attack. PHB p14 states that you choose the modifier based on the weapon, not the attack, so you throw a longsword with Strength. This is an example of a contradiction - your GM has to choose which RAW to obey.
This is merely the top of a rabbit hole of working out how improvised weapons work; most GMs, including Jeremy Crawford, inject their own rules into the improvised weapon rules. If you want to keep going down the rabbit hole, here are corner cases, most of which are actually clear RAW, it's just that the RAW is so unacceptable that many GMs change it:
If you throw a longsword while you have longsword proficiency, do you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll? RAW yes; most GMs say no.
Does a weapon in the weapons table retain its properties when used as an improvised weapon? RAW yes; most GMs, explicitly including Jeremy Crawford, say no.
When you throw a vial of acid or holy water, how exactly does it work?
Is the action Use an Object or Attack? A dizzying number of rules care about the answer.
What adds to the acid or radiant damage - your ability modifier? The 1d4 bludgeoning the vial itself is supposed to do? Neither? Both?
All of the above questions apply to swinging a torch and its fire damage, it's just that the rules aren't a direct copy and paste of the thrown vial rules.
While there's no question nothing adds to the fire damage of alchemist's fire, the above questions otherwise apply to a thrown flask of alchemist's fire or oil.
Nets deal damage "-", which is never ever defined anywhere. The GM will need to determine what this actually means, in particular for both a rogue or ranger throwing a net (where additional damage can be added via hunter's mark or sneak attack) and a warlock (where hex can add additional typed damage).
Adding additional damage is also never explained anywhere, it's just that weapons that deal mixed types are typically challenging to get. If a rogue sneak attacks with a weapon with elemental weapon on it, what damage type is the sneak attack damage?
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
I think these are far too detailed items to try to explain to beginner players. In addition, I think minutiae like that are the LAST thing to try to explain to new players since how it plays out is entirely at the discretion of the DM in the end and the players may never find out that there might be other ways it can be played - they just play the way their DM runs it.
In addition, I don't really find the long sword scenario as ambiguous as you seem to think though DMs can always discuss different ways of running it.
For example .. the longsword situation is covered under improvised weapons:
"If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet."
Since a long sword does not have the thrown property it is explicitly considered an improvised weapon. It does d4 damage. However, since it is an improvised thrown weapon it would use the strength modifier rather than dexterity for making the attack roll. As far as proficiency goes it is up to the DM
"Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus."
If a thrown long sword happens to be similar enough to a thrown weapon the character is proficient with (maybe a hand axe if the sword isn't too long?) then the DM could give them proficiency at their discretion. However, in many cases, a DM might rule that throwing a long sword is not similar enough to any other weapon the character is proficient with. Alternatively a character with the Tavern Brawler feat could use their proficiency on an improvised weapon attack.
In terms of the other thrown or improvised weapons ...
Torch: "If you make a melee attack with a burning torch and hit, it deals 1 fire damage."
Oil: "Oil usually comes in a clay flask that holds 1 pint. As an action, you can splash the oil in this flask onto a creature within 5 feet of you or throw it up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. Make a ranged attack against a target creature or object, treating the oil as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target is covered in oil. If the target takes any fire damage before the oil dries (after 1 minute), the target takes an additional 5 fire damage from the burning oil."
The oil is an improvised weapon. Improvised weapons do 1d4 damage. This also explicitly states a ranged attack for resolution - meaning dexterity.
Acid. "As an action, you can splash the contents of this vial onto a creature within 5 feet of you or throw the vial up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. In either case, make a ranged attack against a creature or object, treating the acid as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target takes 2d6 acid damage."
Again, a ranged attack and the acid vial is treated as an improvised weapon - so proficiency only at a DMs discretion and doing 1d4 damage.
Alchemist's Fire. "This sticky, adhesive fluid ignites when exposed to air. As an action, you can throw this flask up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. Make a ranged attack against a creature or object, treating the alchemist's fire as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target takes ld4 fire damage at the start of each of its turns."
Again, a ranged attack, the flask is considered an improvised weapon and the contents do fire damage as specified.
Anyway, there are probably multiple ways to read it but in each case the item is considered an improvised weapon which has additional effects which are described so although there may be different interpretations I don't really see it being that ambiguous or confusing and certainly not something a new player has any need to know.
Some good advice in this thread - especially "how to read a character sheet" - but I want to step back to general principles.
If this is really for "newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD" -
Start way back, further back than you think you need to. I find that intro materials on DnD are very opaque and make a lot of assumptions about pre-existing knowledge. Assume your reader is bright enough to figure things out when they see them but just haven't seen them yet. "You play a character in a party confronted by challenges and dangers, and the result of those confrontations is resolved by your decisions and the roll of dice." Getting right into the complications and contradictions of the rules is, I've found, a huge deterrent to curious new players, who feel daunted by everything they have to keep track of. There are a lot of rules but most of the time most of them don't come up.
Go step by step. Don't bog down your reader with the differences between X1 and X2 when what they need is ABC.
Also don't assume people are coming familiar with jargon and concepts, either from other RPGs or from video games. I can't tell you how many cleric guides start off with "don't worry, a cleric is more than just a heal bot," which is confusing for people who don't come to the game pre-knowing that clerics are healers in video games. Terms like "tank" and "DPR" are not helpful if you deploy them as explanations rather than knowing that these terms themselves might need explanation. A lot of people play RPG video games but not everybody who comes to D&D is arriving from there.
Make it clear that every table is going to be different, and that the tone and content of each game is something the DM and the players build themselves. The customizability of D&D is going to be a draw for new players.
Go big picture, broad strokes. For example, what do you use the 20-sided dice for? Primarily, you use dice to see if you succeeded at something you attempted, or to see if you hit an opponent in a fight, or to see if you can avoid something bad happening to you. When you're rolling that die, you're usually trying to roll high enough to hit or exceed a target number set by your DM.
Go that big and simple. It would be a genuine service to have more intro materials that are clear and welcoming for totally new people.
One important thing that seems to get glossed over is a basic introduction to action economy. When you ask a new player "you see an orc, what do you do?" a common thing they will say is something like "I run into the room, grab the candelabra, poke it in the orc's face, then pull down their pants and push them down the stairs and then take the money from the chest..."
So even before explaining all the possibilities of what people can do, giving simple guidelines of how much someone can do with an action is helpful.
Another thing: it would be great if new players have access to a set of dice with all different colors. That way you can say "roll the d20 to hit... that's the red one. Then for damage, roll a d8, the blue one - that is how much damage a battle axe does..."
Beware the prestidigitation spell (or any other spell with very open-ended effects). New players (actually, some experienced players who should know better too) will try to use this for things that are waaay beyond the effects of the spell. "I use prestidigitation to make a blindfold appear over the zombie's eyes... I use prestidigitation to drug the wolf with knock-out gas. I use prestidigitation to create a gun and shoot the wizard..."
And finally: Try to guide new players away from the druid class. Druids are VERY attractive to new players... who doesn't like nature and animals and magic? But they are probably the most complicated class with wildshape (how many times have I told a low-level druid they can't turn into a flying animal) as well as spells, especially summoning spells.
One of the biggest misconceptions I see with D&D is that people assume that the DM is the enemy. They think that the game is a players VS the DM situation, and that the players and DM should be actively trying to stop the other. The reality is that the players and DM are working together to create an interesting story. The players are the protagonists, and the DM is the narrator. One is not more important than the other, and both roles rely on each other to move the story forward.
I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am looking forward to your replies!
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
This isn't exactly a contradiction, but the Light property on Hand Crossbows does absolutely nothing despite being present on the weapon.
The PHB on page 194 uses the terms "melee weapon attack" and "ranged weapon attack", which in English can mean (for the melee one) any of "an attack which is both weapon and melee", "an attack which is weapon and that weapon is melee", or "an attack which is both weapon and melee and that weapon is melee". The SAC is the only rules source explaining that the chosen definition in 5E is "an attack which is both weapon and melee". This is an example of missing information.
As a follow-up, p194 is backed up by the SAC in how you determine what stat you throw a longsword with - Dexterity, because the modifier is chosen based on the attack. PHB p14 states that you choose the modifier based on the weapon, not the attack, so you throw a longsword with Strength. This is an example of a contradiction - your GM has to choose which RAW to obey.
This is merely the top of a rabbit hole of working out how improvised weapons work; most GMs, including Jeremy Crawford, inject their own rules into the improvised weapon rules. If you want to keep going down the rabbit hole, here are corner cases, most of which are actually clear RAW, it's just that the RAW is so unacceptable that many GMs change it:
If you throw a longsword while you have longsword proficiency, do you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll? RAW yes; most GMs say no.
Does a weapon in the weapons table retain its properties when used as an improvised weapon? RAW yes; most GMs, explicitly including Jeremy Crawford, say no.
When you throw a vial of acid or holy water, how exactly does it work?
Is the action Use an Object or Attack? A dizzying number of rules care about the answer.
What adds to the acid or radiant damage - your ability modifier? The 1d4 bludgeoning the vial itself is supposed to do? Neither? Both?
All of the above questions apply to swinging a torch and its fire damage, it's just that the rules aren't a direct copy and paste of the thrown vial rules.
While there's no question nothing adds to the fire damage of alchemist's fire, the above questions otherwise apply to a thrown flask of alchemist's fire or oil.
Nets deal damage "-", which is never ever defined anywhere. The GM will need to determine what this actually means, in particular for both a rogue or ranger throwing a net (where additional damage can be added via hunter's mark or sneak attack) and a warlock (where hex can add additional typed damage).
Adding additional damage is also never explained anywhere, it's just that weapons that deal mixed types are typically challenging to get. If a rogue sneak attacks with a weapon with elemental weapon on it, what damage type is the sneak attack damage?
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
Excellent, detailed post. A good session 0 where you chat with your DM about these or starting a google doc for “rules clarification” is a great idea for all campaigns.
all due respect, but are these the important pieces to stress *for beginners*? weedsy stuff like this seems like it's a deterrent for new players, not an invitation. the message of materials for brand-new players should be "you can do this, it's fun and you'll pick it up," not "here are the most complicated use-cases." heck, i hang out on D&D boards and this is daunting to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello everyone!
I am planning on creating videos to explain DnD to newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD.
What rules do you think are the most important ones that need further declaration in order to be understood in its best possible way? I was thinking of starting with the character sheet and having the ability scores as a first topic.
What are topics that you, as a player or DM had a hard time with?
I am looking forward to your replies!
Assuming you aren't necessarily doing these in priority order, I find the most important rules to discuss are the ones where the rules contradict themselves and/or leave crucial situations out - i.e. your GM will need to houserule a solution, so the GM needs to be forewarned of this, and so do players, before they assume something works a certain way. That's generally what leads to the posts you keep seeing crop up on these forums as people ask for rules help. Second most important are rules which aren't in the rulebook, so you need the SAC.
Some examples from the weapons table in the PHB and the rules for making an attack:
That's only what comes up when you read the weapons table, read the rules for attack and damage, and then try to attack and damage, without getting into things like the rabbit holes of cover and visibility. Spell targeting is its own rabbit hole, and we have a thread going right now based on spell targeting vs cover and visibility, in fact. You could do a video on cover, a video on visibility, and a video on spell targeting, and you still wouldn't have covered everything stemming from those rules interacting, given how much information is straight-up missing or contradictory from each.
tl;dr I think the most important rules to openly discuss online in a frank and honest manner are the ones where the rules as written are missing, self-contradictory, or contradict particularly common beliefs about how things ought to work.
How to make and read a character sheet.
Before combat, before spells, before skills, before even roleplay. The first experience players have in any campaign is making a character.
Rolling for stats, determining modifiers, what a proficiency is, the difference between attack rolls, saves, and ability checks, how to determine AC, how to determine HP, how to rest, etc. Touch on how to determine attack modifiers and weapon damage, but don't worry about explaining attacks yet (same for spellcasting attack bonus and spell save DCs).
This way, later on when you are talking about other subjects, you only need a light reminder on determining values and not a full explanation (because combat and spellcasting are lengthy enough without having to explain character sheet stuff).
Is the intro for players, DMs, or both?
I'd start with the role of both (who does what, what is good etiquette, etc) regardless. Then I'd talk about the core books: PHB, MM, and DMG.
If the video is for players, "how to fill out a character sheet" is probably the next step, followed by how to roll checks, attacks, and saves. I'd follow up with combat and spell casting.
For DM's, basic rules for adjudicating the game (Specific v. General is a biggie, but also how to set checks, and how to read a creature statblock, how to run a combat, how to award loot)
It will be for the players! :D
The first videos will be for the players.
Thank you very much for your reply, it helped me a lot!
These are things (some of them) that even I didn't know of, thank you!
That at a table the DM has a final say on how things work and they can modify the rules or introduce any house rules if they think it will make for a better game and that it’s bad manners to “rules lawyer” and argue with the DM, the amount of posts here and on other d&d sites boiling down to “my DM doesn’t allow X at the table but the rules say X is allowed, can I do X?” shows that this is something lots of players seem to struggle with.
Some ideas:
1) What is a role playing game?
2) What is a fantasy role playing game?
3) What is D&D?
4) Dice - what kinds of dice are there - terminology.
5) Intro to D&D - the three pillars - social, exploration, combat.
6) The role of the DM - bringing a world to life - characters and NPCs - interacting with the world
7) Creating a character - race, class, background/story, stats, equipment
8) Interactions - the d20 - attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks.
I'd save these for last. You don't want to be explaining weird rules without having already covered what "normal" rules are.
(There is also the fact that weird rules are often argued about what they should mean).
I think these are far too detailed items to try to explain to beginner players. In addition, I think minutiae like that are the LAST thing to try to explain to new players since how it plays out is entirely at the discretion of the DM in the end and the players may never find out that there might be other ways it can be played - they just play the way their DM runs it.
In addition, I don't really find the long sword scenario as ambiguous as you seem to think though DMs can always discuss different ways of running it.
For example .. the longsword situation is covered under improvised weapons:
"If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet."
Since a long sword does not have the thrown property it is explicitly considered an improvised weapon. It does d4 damage. However, since it is an improvised thrown weapon it would use the strength modifier rather than dexterity for making the attack roll. As far as proficiency goes it is up to the DM
"Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus."
If a thrown long sword happens to be similar enough to a thrown weapon the character is proficient with (maybe a hand axe if the sword isn't too long?) then the DM could give them proficiency at their discretion. However, in many cases, a DM might rule that throwing a long sword is not similar enough to any other weapon the character is proficient with. Alternatively a character with the Tavern Brawler feat could use their proficiency on an improvised weapon attack.
In terms of the other thrown or improvised weapons ...
Torch: "If you make a melee attack with a burning torch and hit, it deals 1 fire damage."
Oil: "Oil usually comes in a clay flask that holds 1 pint. As an action, you can splash the oil in this flask onto a creature within 5 feet of you or throw it up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. Make a ranged attack against a target creature or object, treating the oil as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target is covered in oil. If the target takes any fire damage before the oil
dries (after 1 minute), the target takes an additional 5 fire damage from the burning oil."
The oil is an improvised weapon. Improvised weapons do 1d4 damage. This also explicitly states a ranged attack for resolution - meaning dexterity.
Acid. "As an action, you can splash the contents of this vial onto a creature within 5 feet of you or throw the vial up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. In either case, make a ranged attack against a creature or object, treating the acid as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target takes 2d6 acid damage."
Again, a ranged attack and the acid vial is treated as an improvised weapon - so proficiency only at a DMs discretion and doing 1d4 damage.
Alchemist's Fire. "This sticky, adhesive fluid ignites when exposed to air. As an action, you can throw this flask up to 20 feet, shattering it on impact. Make a ranged attack against a creature or object, treating the alchemist's fire as an improvised weapon. On a hit, the target takes ld4 fire damage at the start of each of its turns."
Again, a ranged attack, the flask is considered an improvised weapon and the contents do fire damage as specified.
Anyway, there are probably multiple ways to read it but in each case the item is considered an improvised weapon which has additional effects which are described so although there may be different interpretations I don't really see it being that ambiguous or confusing and certainly not something a new player has any need to know.
Some good advice in this thread - especially "how to read a character sheet" - but I want to step back to general principles.
If this is really for "newbies that need explanations and a helping hand with starting with DnD" -
Start way back, further back than you think you need to. I find that intro materials on DnD are very opaque and make a lot of assumptions about pre-existing knowledge. Assume your reader is bright enough to figure things out when they see them but just haven't seen them yet. "You play a character in a party confronted by challenges and dangers, and the result of those confrontations is resolved by your decisions and the roll of dice." Getting right into the complications and contradictions of the rules is, I've found, a huge deterrent to curious new players, who feel daunted by everything they have to keep track of. There are a lot of rules but most of the time most of them don't come up.
Go step by step. Don't bog down your reader with the differences between X1 and X2 when what they need is ABC.
Also don't assume people are coming familiar with jargon and concepts, either from other RPGs or from video games. I can't tell you how many cleric guides start off with "don't worry, a cleric is more than just a heal bot," which is confusing for people who don't come to the game pre-knowing that clerics are healers in video games. Terms like "tank" and "DPR" are not helpful if you deploy them as explanations rather than knowing that these terms themselves might need explanation. A lot of people play RPG video games but not everybody who comes to D&D is arriving from there.
Make it clear that every table is going to be different, and that the tone and content of each game is something the DM and the players build themselves. The customizability of D&D is going to be a draw for new players.
Go big picture, broad strokes. For example, what do you use the 20-sided dice for? Primarily, you use dice to see if you succeeded at something you attempted, or to see if you hit an opponent in a fight, or to see if you can avoid something bad happening to you. When you're rolling that die, you're usually trying to roll high enough to hit or exceed a target number set by your DM.
Go that big and simple. It would be a genuine service to have more intro materials that are clear and welcoming for totally new people.
One important thing that seems to get glossed over is a basic introduction to action economy. When you ask a new player "you see an orc, what do you do?" a common thing they will say is something like "I run into the room, grab the candelabra, poke it in the orc's face, then pull down their pants and push them down the stairs and then take the money from the chest..."
So even before explaining all the possibilities of what people can do, giving simple guidelines of how much someone can do with an action is helpful.
Another thing: it would be great if new players have access to a set of dice with all different colors. That way you can say "roll the d20 to hit... that's the red one. Then for damage, roll a d8, the blue one - that is how much damage a battle axe does..."
Beware the prestidigitation spell (or any other spell with very open-ended effects). New players (actually, some experienced players who should know better too) will try to use this for things that are waaay beyond the effects of the spell. "I use prestidigitation to make a blindfold appear over the zombie's eyes... I use prestidigitation to drug the wolf with knock-out gas. I use prestidigitation to create a gun and shoot the wizard..."
And finally: Try to guide new players away from the druid class. Druids are VERY attractive to new players... who doesn't like nature and animals and magic? But they are probably the most complicated class with wildshape (how many times have I told a low-level druid they can't turn into a flying animal) as well as spells, especially summoning spells.
One of the biggest misconceptions I see with D&D is that people assume that the DM is the enemy. They think that the game is a players VS the DM situation, and that the players and DM should be actively trying to stop the other. The reality is that the players and DM are working together to create an interesting story. The players are the protagonists, and the DM is the narrator. One is not more important than the other, and both roles rely on each other to move the story forward.
Excellent, detailed post. A good session 0 where you chat with your DM about these or starting a google doc for “rules clarification” is a great idea for all campaigns.
all due respect, but are these the important pieces to stress *for beginners*? weedsy stuff like this seems like it's a deterrent for new players, not an invitation. the message of materials for brand-new players should be "you can do this, it's fun and you'll pick it up," not "here are the most complicated use-cases." heck, i hang out on D&D boards and this is daunting to me.