Introducing D&D to Newbies

[JamesEightBitStar]

So I wrote this document you see below. I wrote this primarily for friends and family members who I am trying to convince to play D&D with me, in answer to concerns they've stated in the past (and by "concerns" I mean "things they've used as excuses not to play"). I wanted to run this by you guys to make sure I'm on the ball, and also to see if you can give me suggestions for other things to make note of.

Note that I'm trying to present everything in clear-cut terms and keep my explanations on the short side.

-----------------------------------------------

One of the hardest challenges I've faced as an aspiring player/referee for Dungeons & Dragons is getting new players. Most of the problem is simply ignorance. So, I figured I'd write this document, for the absolute newbies.

COMMON CONCERN #1:
"Will I have to learn complicated rules?"

In general, no. The only person who absolutely HAS to know the rules, is the Dungeon Master (aka the referee).

However, I DO recommend reading the Player's Handbook--especially the first edition one written by Gary Gygax. Not for the sake of "knowing the rules," but rather because A) doing so opens your mind, makes you more aware of the possibilities and B) because so many of the concepts that sound "complicated" initially actually make sense once you've read Gygax's rationale.

COMMON CONCERN #2:
"What's the point? What am I trying to do?"

D&D is in an odd position of being a game where you can't really "win," at least insofar as there are no set goals (unless you're playing the "Interactive Novel" method--more on that later). Basically, the objective of the game is to live the life of an adventurer in a fantasy world. You set your own goals. You decide what you want to do.

"So why don't I just play a computer game, like Grand Theft Auto or The Sims then?" you ask. Simple--computer games are inherently limited by technology. They pretend to let you do whatever you want, but really don't. D&D is only limited by human imagination.

Here's the question I had when I started playing:
COMMON CONCERN #3:
"How do you play this game, exactly?"

I guess there are a whole lot of different ways you could go about this, but the method I've always used is this:

The players tell me what their characters are doing. I, the Dungeon Master, describe their location and dictate the results of their actions.

Example:
DM: You are on the main street. Lining both sides of this wide road are many shops and merchants of all kinds. There are many people bustling about.
PLAYER 1: I go to the grocer and buy some food for the road.
PLAYER 2: I'm still out in the road. I pull out my sword and slash at a random person.
DM: Player 1, that food costs two golds. Player 2... [DM rolls dice] you succeeded in backstabbing a young woman. Her husband angrily turns towards you and draws his sword. The peasants all gasp in horror. Player 1, you can hear the commotion.
PLAYER 1: I ask the grocer if I can leave through the back door.
DM: He says yes.
PLAYER 1: I hotfoot it out of town.

You do NOT have to go into detail and you do NOT have to "act out" your role--just describe.

COMMON CONCERN #4:
"Isn't there a whole lot character information I have to keep up with?"

Not really. Most of it can be kept on an index card. Clerics and Magic-Users have to keep up with a spell list, but that's not that hard either.

If we were playing 3rd Edition, this would be another matter. But we're not, so it isn't.

[northrundicandus]

COMMON CONCERN #1

Don't bother with asking people to read the rules first. Just start playing with some pre-made characters. People can easily roleplay - they did it when they were kids. Just play. If they enjoy the experience, they'll want to read the rules, so they can learn more. Or maybe they won't. The beauty of D&D is that you don't really need to know a whole lot about the game to enjoy it.

COMMON CONCERN #2

That's stated pretty well. I'd leave it at that.

COMMON CONCERN #3

If you just do #1, that is, just play the game without a whole lot of fuss, then #3 isn't necessary. Start the characters at the entrance of some dungeon and let the players enjoy the game.

#4 is fine too. I highly recommend the 3" x 5" index card approach to D&D characters.

[AxeMental]

I'd follow Norths advice. The only thing different, I'd have the new players make their PCs. Just ask them what they want to be (most people know about LOTR so they have a good enough idea what most of the classes and races are all about).

Have them role their attributes, help them place them, and have them read ONLY their class and race. do their sheet for them but make sure they see their HPs and AC and know what it is. As well as their weapons.
(I think they'll take to the game faster if they "own" their PC).

Other then that, as North said, this is just playing make believe. Your players don't need to know anything, they just need to role the dice when asked (and can keep track of their HPs though as DM you could do that too).

[WSmith]

For charcater sheets, I would put very little and use much white space.

This file:

http://www.mind.org/dragon/ADND_Fast_Play.pdf

was created for 2nd ed, but might help. On page 5 and 6 are the sample characters. I would not have the newbie players exposed to any more information than what's on those sheets, (cards, actually.) Forget about the supplimental info to the abilites, like "Bend Bars/Lift Gates" or "Chance for Spell Failure" or all the encumberance and movement info and such. Those are the kinds of things that are not going to mean much to new players, (and may in fact confuse them). Besides, you as the DM know where to find that stuff if needed.

[JamesEightBitStar]

Advice taken--#1 has been truncated, removing the "I recommend you read the Player's Guide..." paragraph.

I am still not sure about #3 though, because as I said that is a question I myself have had (and every once in awhile, continue to have).

I'm also thinking of adding a bit called "My Oath As a Dungeon Master," which I also want your critique on. It goes like this:

"I pledge:

"To be completely impartial. I will not give in to player's demands, nor will I actively work against them. I will not dictate a plotline to you or force your actions along a specific course. I will not criticize the choices you make. My judgement will be the dice judgement, or what is best for the campaign."

[T. Foster]

Reconsider this bit:

"I will not criticize the choices you make."

Feedback from the GM (both positive and negative) is an important part of helping the players to understand how the game works and what's expected of them (and also helps the GM to understand what the players' expectations are of him). When the players do something unexpectedly good the GM should congratulate them on it (perhaps in a mock-adversarial tone so that the players don't feel lectured or condescended to: "curses! you guys foiled my devious plan again; but I'll get you next time, muahahahaha!"). Point out specific obstacles you expected them to have more trouble with than they did, and what horrible things might have happened had they done the wrong thing.

Likewise, when the players botch something, don't just shrug your shoulders, talk about it with them -- discuss what they could've done differently that would have led to a better outcome (hopefully something other than "have better die rolls") and see if you can find out from the players why they didn't do them (perhaps they didn't realize they could -- which might be your fault as much as theirs, if your descriptions were unclear or you've implicitly discouraged or forbidden such actions in the past). This sort of feedback loop will hopefully both improve the players' performance (as they begin to consider strategic and tactical options they might not have thought of before) and also the GM's (so you can create adventures that more closely match the players' expectations and thought processes -- for instance if you learn that the players love combat and hate riddles, you'll know that if you make adventures that emphasize combat over riddles the players will be more likely to enjoy them).

The idea of not bossing the players around and telling them what to do is good, but that shouldn't lead you to avoid post-game feedback and open communication altogether.

[JamesEightBitStar]

Okay, reworded: "I will not criticize the choices you make while I'm acting as Dungeon Master."

Reason I put that there was because in the past I've had a bad tendancy to see a bad decision and immediately criticize my players for it (which in turn leads them to doing what I want them to do). I agree that such talks should be after the game.

[T. Foster]

Yeah, it's a balancing act: you don't want the players to feel like you're telling them what to do, but you also don't want to see them settle into a rut of mediocrity and miss out on the other possibilities of the game. Striking the right tone (so that it comes off as "helpful suggestions" rather than "dictates from on high") is extremely important. So is keeping such discussions confined to post-play, after-the-fact -- so you're not telling them what they should be doing as they're doing it, you're telling them what else they could have done (both good and bad) after it's all moot.

It's a very good idea to plan to end the actual "play" part of the session 20 minutes or so before you intend to end the actual session and have a debriefing/cool-down period in which rewards (XP) are handed out, bookkeeping is handled (treasure division, level-ups, etc.), and the highlights and lowlights of the session are reviewed/discussed in a casual/informal manner.