Alright so I hope this thread shouldn't be in /r/ but I'm

>>43965831
You should watch videos if you don't know what it is at all, but if you're gonna do it you're going to need to get the rulebook of the edition you're gonna play and read through it to familiarize yourself with the rules.

>>43965867
I'm guessing I'll ask the group which book they use, but is there a commonly considered "Best Version" that online communities like more?

>>43965906
Don't start this shit, even unintentionally. That's a Balkanized landscape of strongly held opinions. Essentially the best edition is whatever your group is all comfortable playing. The best parts of the game (roleplaying and chilling with friends) are all independent of the system anyways.

There's a game finder thread if you're interested in joining a game, and there's actually a wealth of information on the official D&D site for new players.

The typical recommendation is to buy the 5e starter set, since it basically holds your hand throughout the learning process (including premade characters, an adventure designed to teach a DM and the players the game, and dice), and lets you get a good feel and taste for the game.

After that, if you still want to play, all you need to do is pick up the core rulebooks, which you can actually download from the 5e general thread. They all contain tips and tools to help you learn the game, and a lot of the best advice you'll ever get is in them.

It may seem daunting at first, but it's pretty simple once you understand the core mechanic and how everything is just some extension of it. Roll a d20, add modifiers, check against a target number to determine success or failure. Once you've got that in your head, everything else is just rolling with the punches as they come to you.

>>43965906
No, it depends on what people like. AD&D is classic dnd, and I wouldn't suggest playing it for you since it isn't the specific kind of game you're looking for. I like it, but it's generally not what people expect when they say dnd. 3.5/pathfinder is a clusterfuck of dense rules and options, and so has some fun in it for that but otherwise lacks any sense of mechanical balance or forethought in its rules. 4e plays like a tactical combat video game, which it's pretty good at. Much less rules heavy, most 3.5 people hate it, it's not that bad. 5e is newest and what I would suggest. Much more straightforward rules and sense of balance, with enough options and differences for classes not to feel samey. Figure out what your group likes to play.
Honestly, most people are going to tell you not to play dnd because other games are better, and they aren't wrong, but it sounds like that's what your group wants to play so I'm not gonna talk about other systems.

>>43965944
Thanks for the warning.

I should say I am familiar with Warhammer and 40K tabletop, so i get the basics like dice rolls. I've also played with character cards and most of the basics.

>>43965959
Good to hear, I'll lurk a bit until I find them.


If I get into this and end up being a DM like these guys want me to, am I supposed to keep up with a certain lore or is lore and story telling a free for all?

>>43965993
Yeah they're big into D&D I really like warhammer because I follow the lore, play table top etc. but they and a group of Youtubers I speak with all play D&D. I was thinking if I enjoy it I'd ask the Youtuubers to make a D&D game online, but that's a future project.

>>43966011
Dnd has it's own lore and worlds and frankly that's the best thing it does at running. It's not very good at the generic fantasy everyone wants to use it for. However, you can use it for anything you want, and I doubt your friends have been playing in the official world

>>43965993
>4e plays like a tactical combat video game, which it's pretty good at.

Eh. Even after you use the various "patches" to fix the combat, it still ends up feeling pretty samey and dull. It's not terrible, but it's not exactly in the realm of "pretty good",

It definitely works better in the board game versions than it does as a full RPG.

>>43966156
The most I know about the lore, and it's not even lore, is about the alignment stuff.

I also remember reading about enemies on somethingawful that made me laugh a bit. Like Rot Grub and morkoth. Are the old ass monsters from the first few monster manuals still in play, or do they update with the rule books? I'm guessing if the group is relaxed enough they wouldn't care but I'd have to ask how strict they are next semester.

Speaking of which that's why I'm looking into this now, when I go back in february I want to be adequate enough to just jump in. I don't know how reasonable that time table is but I have nothing better to do.

Also, just some tips for first time dming. You're going to need to do some planning ahead of time, especially if you're doing a dungeon crawl. I've never met someone who thinks they're good at winging it who is actually good at winging it. On the other hand, you don't want to plan too much. Have a dungeon layout with monsters and traps for a dungeon crawl, have a city map if playing in a city, have some basic plot points written out and npc notes for how you want the npcs to act and sound, but don't plot out every action you think the party will take, because the players are going to think of other ways to do things or miss little clues you left and they're going to jump off your plotline. Don't railroad them into following your story exactly, set up a good hook and good players will follow your plot on their own. If a player thinks of a different way to do something than you had planned, don't immediately tell them no. Think about if it has a chance to work, and let them roll a relevant skill. Give your players room to move and think in your world. Don't make a pc for yourself to use. Dmpcs, especially for new dms, are seldom good. Essentially just have a grasp of the rules and the story you're gonna tell with your friends, but don't get too attatched to the details and have fun puzzle solving and watching stupid shit happen with your buds. Stupid shit will happen by the way, don't get angry when a grimdark world you makes ends up silly because of rolls, because dnd rules lend themselves to the characters simultaneously being badass and incompetent. Also, remember that a nat 20 is not automatic success with skills, and that a successful roll can never be so successful it hurts the party. Don't do that.

>>43966309
Enemies update with new editions, but a lot of the monsters stay around, just with new rules. That seems like a reasonable time table to me.

>>43966284
Yeah, I'm just trying to say good/semigood things about all of them. Really, all them them are pretty poor at what they do, other than maybe 2e

>>43966284
If you ask me, the best version of 4e is its Gamma World rehash. Aside from the cards it's elegant as fuck.

>>43966339
Thanks for the advise, I kind of knew that unlike 40K storytelling events and progress may change at the drop of a hat and not just if team A wins or team B wins, but I never thought to plan out a map. I don't want to sound full of myself but I think I could have winged it regardless, but that's from years of doing ad-libbed stories. I used to do make your own adventures in MS paint on old internet clan forums, those weren't to serious though and I'm in hopes I could blow this group out of the water. I'll probably make a map after I read enough lore to give me a location and quest line(s) i like.

>>43966459
When I first started playing I was confident I could wing it for similar reasons, and I did. The players had fun, but looking back those were the worst games I ever gm'd. When you wing things without a strong grasp of the rules, you forget certain skills, and that can leave certain player characters useless. Plus, the story becomes segmented and incoherent, as something that worked one way earlier now suddenly works a different way for a very similar situation later on, just because the GM's split second decision changed. It leaves the players feeling like their actions don't matter, and that the world is an inconsistent mess. Trust me, you're better off not.

File: thumbs-up.jpg (24KB, 301x267px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 301x267px

This is one of the most civil threads I've seen on /tg/ in a long time, let alone threads about D&D. Keep it up guys.

>>43966546
Don't worry I'll definitely be taking that into consideration. I think I'll wait until I pull off hosting half a dozen games to wing it, I enjoy creative struggles like that and that's probably the only reason D&D is drawing me in so much.

File: Anon's Guide to Beginning D&D V1.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

So I saw this thread and decided to take a few minutes to write up my answer for this question, since I see it asked so often on the board.

I will take suggestions, additions and corrections from this thread and modify the document accordingly until the thread dies. I don't really care to work on this past that point. Do with it what you will after that. Just keep it short and broad, the more comprehensive this gets, the more useless this gets to a noob.

Also no system wars please.

The point of this is just to have an easy to share PDF to throw at any anon that makes a thread such as this, because goddamn there are so many.

Anyway, here's V1

>>43967358
By the emperor! I didn't expect anything like this.! Thanks, will read through.

OP - this is just my own personal advice, but I'd suggest playing a few sessions/a short campaign before DMing yourself. It will give you a good enough grasp of the rules, and also give you a perspective on roughly how your players will think/act during your campaign.

As >>43966339 PLAN AHEAD. This guy also gives top advice RE: not forcing your players to follow your story exactly how you want it to be played out. The way I think of it is that you want a) a rough idea of an overall plot (what is the BBEG like/what are their motives/etc.) and b) a good knowledge of the 'world' you're running the game in and the key NPCs in it - even if that''s just localised to a town/city. Those two will allow you to improvise more convincingly when (not if) your players don't do things the way you were expecting them to.

It's worth making a handful of fleshed out NPCs in your head for your players to get attached to/rival with/have any kind of emotional relationship for, as this will make them more invested in the story.

I don't know how widespread this is, but the guy who mainly DMs for our group at the moment gives people 'inspiration points' for particularly good roleplaying - this allows them to call (before rolling) that they're using their inspiration point, which means they roll twice and get to take the highest number. That actually works quite well, because it incentivizes people to actually RP and not just grind/murderhobo.

>>43966615
You fucking cocksucking faggot :^)

>>43967728
>gives people 'inspiration points' for particularly good roleplaying
I like that idea.

I love character development, I had a few ideas of fleshed out NPCs even planting 2 good red herrings, one of which would lead the group stumbling into where they needed to be, the other ending up at a comical dead end.

is it too much to consider writing notes or dialogue on these kinds of things the days preceding, or do most DMs tend to commit it to memory?

Question I just thought of:

I get a lot of inspiration for my stories from games like Myst. I like the idea of the players not knowing too much initially and being forced to look around for clues to even progress. While looking for clues they would inevitably learn about the backstory and have foreshadowing to who they should and shouldn't trust. Does this work well for D&D or do players usually just want to get to dungeon crawling?

Are there any games better for in depth story/exploration?

>>43967870
Red herrings can be cool, but don't put in too many. I had a GM lead us around on wild goose chases for 5 hours and I never played with him again.
>>43967976
I do this a lot, and I really like mysteries in my games. The thing is, is that for players to have fun, they need to be able to solve the mysteries. You need to remember that their perception of the world is entirely based on you, so if they don't have all the clues to solve the mystery that's generally on you. I would say put about 3 times the amount of clues that they need to solve the mystery, so that even if they miss 2/3rds of the clues they can still solve it. Also, if they misinterpret a clue and it leads them somewhere wrong, have it lead them to another clue or miniclue where they get a different point of view on the clues they have. Never have the players go to a wrong place and just say "lol u guise are shit detectives". It's not fun for anyone

>>43967976
>>43968061
Also, not the best for dnd but it can be done in anything. I would suggest something a little more prone to detective work though, but a lot of those aren't going to be fantasy games. Call of Cthulu or one of the 40k rpgs or world of darkness will be better. Fantasy wise I would say it works better for low fantasy, but I don't know many fantasy games honestly. Song of swords is one I think? Riddle of steel maybe? Song of swords might be a wargame

>>43967870
>dialogue
Difficult because you never know what the PCs will say. If you know the character though you may be able to come up with realistic responses for them though

>notes
I usually make quite extensive notes on characters/places/'factions' etc before running a campaign. You can have them with you if you like while you're playing, but best to use them as a safety net as a DM checking notes constantly can slow things down or even make the players lose interest.

Another thing I'd add sort of also in relation to this >>43967976 is again not to get too much attached to a certain way you want the story to pan out. Yes - reveal more to players about the world as they spend more time in it, but DnD isn't you writing a novel, it's more like collective story telling. If players feel they have no actual impact on the plot they'll get fed up and bored.


Different groups are different - some just want to dungeon crawl till they fight the boss and get the loot - I've been lucky enough to be in a group that likes good storylines, and are willing to invest in them and take them seriously enough to see them through. It can be quite hard to predict how they pan out though, either due to rolls or players taking unexpected action.

An example from my last session:

There was a statue in the dark part of town (not a ghetto, it was a magical darkness), which was an effigy of a previously good mage who turned necromancer, and was inhabited by her spirit. Upon 'activating' the statue the three party members got shown visions by the spirit - what vision they received and if/how much mental damage it did them depended on making a will save. I rolled a nat 1, so the DM - thinking quickly - actually made my character become possessed by this spirit, which then obviously impacted how the story (in which the spirit was the BBEG) played out, even though the fundamental motives and intentions of the spirit stayed the same.

I've heard some of these guys talk about their games talking weeks or even months, but some taking place over a day. Are game lengths that varied?

>>43968118
If they have any of these on online tabletops or something similar I'd try those.

>>43968240
Yes, very varied. Some people run never ending campaigns where the plot just extends every session. These can last years. Sometimes you just play a single session when you have a cool story that can be told in one. Sometimes you have a story that can split into 5 and you run it in 5.

>>43968217
Thanks, that's something I never thought of going into this.

>>43965831
If you want to be able to easily find other people that play the game, 5e is your best bet. It's the current edition, has a sizable player base, and is simpler than its immediate predecessors. Moldvay/Cook Basic, or B/X, is the simplest edition of D&D, but it can look a bit wonky to modern eyes (a bunch of subsystems that work different ways, but even so it's still simpler than modern D&D), and doesn't have the mechanical options that newer stuff has (the game leans more on GM fiat / improvisation built on top of very simple rules so they won't get in your way). If you want to start your own group and aren't as worried about finding folks who already play it, but still want to stick to authentic D&D, that's what I'd recommend. The Basic set of it, which covers levels 1-3, is only 64 pages, including monsters, treasures and so forth (and the Expert set of it, which completes the game, is only another 64 pages).

If you're okay with the extended D&D family (and again, aren't that concerned finding folks who already play the game), then Swords & Wizardry White Box is a very minimalist clone of original D&D (check out White Box Heroes if you want more classes for it). Finally, if you're not tied to actual D&D (and don't need to find people who already playing the game), then Barbarians of Lemuria is simpler than any edition of D&D (which is complicated by underlying issues related to the extreme power arcs related to leveling, and a number of idiosyncrasies related to its wargaming roots and dungeon-crawling niche) and really fun to boot. That is the game I'd recommend if you can make it happen.

>>43967358
Wow... This is incredibly useful and I've already got an idea on where to start.
Thanks man.

>>43965831
Since you're just starting out 5th Edition DnD is your best bet. The rules are fairly simple and the character options aren't overwhelming so casuals should get into it just fine.

Eventually though you'll realize the system is limited in options for customizing a character and your characters essentially become slight variations of each other. Also the balance everyone goes on about is nonexistent. They're describing a relative balance to a previous edition that had magic-using classes far above weapon-swinging classes. In reality the balance is still fucked, heavily in favor of weapon-swingers, i.e. barbarians.

It's me back from whatever it is I do with my evenings.

Has anyone who's read the PDF have any suggestions? Has anyone saved it for future use?

To sum up the major D&D editions.

AD&D 1e is quite janky, but decent for low fantasy type stuff.

AD&D 2e is just an improved version of the last.

3.5 is a heavily expanded and altered version of 2e. All the janky bits from 2e have been replaced with simpler ones that the later editions further smoothed. Character customization is huge, but if you're using a physical character, you're going to suck compared to your magic using counterparts.

>>43974826
Cont

4e is practically it's own thing. Basically, it simplified everything that isn't combat and made everything that is combat much more complex. Balance between physical and magical characters is a bit less pronounced, but still there, especially at later levels. Overall the most controversial edition of D&D so far, but there are still a few people who like it.

5e is the newest and it's basically a simplified version of 3.5. Numbers are a lot smaller, you have to keep track of fewer bonuses, and reliance on magic items from 3.5 was reduced (physicals still need some access to magic weapons, as some monsters later on will resist non-magical attacks, but this can be handled by the GM altering or just not using those monsters). Feats and skills were simplified, but this made customization a bit less fine grained and granularity in skills went away completely (either you get a level dependent bonus to a skill or you don't).

Personally, I think 5e is the cleanest and simplest edition to introduce to a newby, but it's got its own unique problems that will prevent it from becoming the clear "best edition" of D&D (as if people would even accept such an edition anyway). If someone's willing to guide you through the learning process and the campaign concept sounds like a good time, don't be afraid of trying a different edition, though.

>>43974952
>Handled by GM altering

Literally the solution to every problem in every edition ever. But faggots keep bitching about muh balance.

File: editions of D&D graphic.png (229KB, 911x1470px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 911x1470px

>>43967358
Listing 3.5 (!?!?!) and 2e as editions for beginners, but leaving out Basic? Dude, come on.

>>43974826
>>43974952
Why does everybody skip OD&D and Basic? Basic is a great beginner game and a lot less cluttered than AD&D.

>>43965906
No, but 5e is best for ease of getting into. Forgive >>43965944 , he was a bit course, but the truth is that people get really defensive about their systems, and the easy route for trolls looking to get easy responses is to start ' edition wars'. These get better the farther from d&d you get, I think, but those and certain other games (FATE, GURPS, Dungeon World) make for explosive disagreements.

Though, I'd recommend at least looking into Fate, since you've apparently told your friends you're familiar with dnd and a lie would be super obvious given the nature of the genre, ESPECIALLY as GM.

Legit question here:

WHY THE FUCK DO WE HAVE THESE THREADS WHEN GOOGLE IS A THING THAT EXISTS?

Why is your first thought always "Oh hey, I'm an idiot, maybe I should make a thread on /tg/ instead of just typing that shit into Google!"?

God dammit, every fucking day.

>>43977090
And weed through hundreds of links that bring me to garbage info? Nah I'd rather come to 4chan and have you all call me an idiot while providing lots of personally gained experience. Besides, what better things do you have to do?

I have to say some of the suggestions I've got here are not ones I'd find on google. I've also had a lot of suggestions for other games, so I may even notice one I like better.

File: barbarians of lemuria spiel.png (96KB, 869x425px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 869x425px

>>43969191
Barbarians of Lemuria:

Mythic Edition (current edition) -- https://www.mediafire.com/folder/7llc83r2xf8bg/Barbarians_of_Lemuria_-_Mythic_Edition

Legendary Edition (earlier edition, fewer details & more minimalist presentation makes it even easier to learn, but the rules aren't as refined) -- http://www.mediafire.com/download/p5w885sa9a869ma/Barbarians+Of+Lemuria+-+Legendary+Edition.pdf

House Rules / Patches for Legendary Edition (if you want the added minimalism of Legendary, but with the rules tightened up a bit) -- https://mega.co.nz/#F!CtQR2bST!y_awB-GHCiL3CdK4iLCV7A

File: strength bx vs ad&d.png (333KB, 781x679px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 781x679px

>>43976973
An example of the difference between Basic and AD&D.