Review of D&D 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 1

 

D&D 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide was created by Wizards of the Coast, published in the summer of 2003 based on the original D&D game created by Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson

I know, I know, this is supposed to be a blog dedicated to mmos and the mmorpgs I and others regularly play, but I reason that Dungeons and Dragons is the table top precursor to not only mmos, but video games in general with so many of its mechanics having been coopeted or directly inspiring concepts such as health, experience and combat. So from time to time I will take a break from mmo adventuring and commentary and will discuss some of the intricacies of the other gaming hobbies I love.

Even though I dabbled with 1st Edition D&D as a teen and young adult, I didn't really go in depth into DMing or playing consistent game sessions until years later and I certainly wasn't around table top role play gaming in 2003 when D&D was once again rebooted. I thought it would be a good time to review the DM's Guide's first chapter here because that is the version of the game that I am currently playing with a few friends via zoom. It is also the edition rules set my favorite D&D mmo, Dungeons and Dragons Online is based on. 

According to the intro of the core book, the creators of the book and those involved with marketing the game to the masses wrote that they considered D&D to be a "living game, that constantly evolves as it is played." That explains why this version of the popular role playing game was quickly rebooted after only five years with 4E in 2008. 

The first chapter contains the usual definitions and explains what a DM's role is in running a campaign, information that was contained in previous editions, but there is an interesting section in chapter one on adjudicating which has some good insights. It goes on to address "house rules" and the ongoing discussion about what's better: A game master who is a stickler for the printed established system rules, or someone who is very flexible. My own thinking on this is that for a system like 3.5 which seems to be "rules" heavy or more complex than other editions, a balance between both approaches works best. But what does the manual have to say about it? In summary, I would say that the writers and game developers emphasize the concept of consistency when it comes to adjudicating the game session.

They wrote: "Consistency keeps players satisfied and gives them the feeling that they adventure in a stable predictable universe and not in some random nonsensical place subject only to the DM's whims." At this point if the reader allows me to digress a second from the review, I want to interject my two cents on the "edition wars" debate which is sure to rear itself again should WoTC ever decide to come up with D&D 6th edition. On that point, I think it is silly to try and compare one edition versus another, because they are all different, but also because I think something like 4E gets a lot of unnecessary hate since it was the version that differed most from the ones which came before it. A lot of people hated it. Personally, I always tell people if you have a good DM it doesn't really matter what system you play, creativity and participation will win out. I personally experienced this about six years ago when I played for a few months with a DM who incorporated some 2E material (notably from the Dragonlance setting popular at the time) into our 4E system based game. Everyone had a blast.

I skipped the section which provides a sample game session as I have participated in so many or watched some online, I am sure the reader has as well if you have read this far, so no need to say much about an illustrative game session excerpt. So what else is in the first chapter? What other kernels of knowledge and wisdom were imparted so long ago in this volume? Well there is quite a bit of ink devoted to good DM management, handling unbalanced PCs, pacing the game session and describing the action, changing the rules and reasons why this is or is not a good idea, and what to do if you as a DM make a mistake.

I think a fascinating portion of the first chapter deals with equipment needed for running the game. Some of course argue that there should not be any required and that a good imagination and "theater of the mind" versus a heavy emphasis on combat, grids, counters and miniatures is the way to go, but the authors make the point that these elements are not for everyone. The book includes a two-sided poster map containing a simple dungeon on one side and a 1-inch grid on the other.

The chapter ends with a discussion of determining outcomes, something which is of course always done in D&D by rolling dice. Surprisingly, and interesting, there is a discussion on whether a DM should occasionally cheat when rolling dice for players to determine the outcome of say a fight against a foe or monster. So should a DM cheat? I won't spoil it for you and will leave it to those interested to seek an answer to that question, the tome does say that if everyone in the party dies, that's bad for everyone "since the campaign might very well end there and then." 

In most of the games I have participated it in, it always seemed that the DM was well aware that his or her duty included running the obstacles and monsters the PCs encounter in game and they tend to be very unforgiving, actively trying to damage incapacitate or downright kill the PCs. I remember playing in a 5e campaign a few years back where I was given a "premade" character because I joined the session late and the party went up against a famous foe. I ended up dying and I just sat around the rest of the session watching the action and not really interacting. No cleric or healer even made the attempt to resurrect me or to involve me somehow. That is bad DMing in my opinion. Conversely, when I was younger and tried my hand at DMing 1st edition sessions with my cousin, brother and friends, I did not fully grasp the concept that part of my role was to throw obstacles and challenges that the PCs could not easily overcome. So my PCs ended up as superpowered beings with the best armor and weapons and loved it from that point of view, because they felt there was no challenge they could not easily best. With hindsight, also a good example of bad DMing. This first chapter also addresses these "mistakes."