D&D (2024) Deborah Ann Woll and Matt Mercer consulted on the 2024 DMG.

WotC consulted with celebrities including True Blood's Deborah Ann Woll and Critical Role's Matt Mercer when revising the upcoming 2024 edition of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Apparently another (unnamed) consultant provided advice on running game for kids.

That's it; that's the news.

 

[TiQuinn]

I quit when season 3 came off as more of the same.

Plus one guest DM just called for saving throws for everything. Need to listen at a door? Saving throw!

Saving throws? Who did this?

 

[TiQuinn]

I haven't gotten around to campaign 3 yet, I've heard it has ... issues. Which is too bad but it happens sometimes with all groups.

Eh, I’m hoping they adjust in the next season, if they stick with D&D.

 

[Seramus]

I haven't gotten around to campaign 3 yet, I've heard it has ... issues. Which is too bad but it happens sometimes with all groups.

The issues are... Well, I'll try to be detail free with my spoilers and speak in broad strokes. Mercer starts the campaign as a sandbox and the players kind of wander around aimlessly for a while. Then he changes things up and gives them a big central plot, but they don't have much in the way of victory for a very long time - they inch along with small discoveries about a much larger conspiracy. But without those victories it actually kind of drains morale.

There's a point where some guest players join the game, and those stories are actually pretty cool. And there are lots of very neat moments in C3. But the players feel lost for large chunks of the campaign, and they rarely get any clear triumphant story milestones the way they did in C1.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Saving throws? Who did this?

Aabria Iyengar. She’s cool and a fun DM but for some reason in that game she kept defaulting to saving throws.

 

[TiQuinn]

Aabria Iyengar. She’s cool and a fun DM but for some reason in that game she kept defaulting to saving throws.

Ahh, I think she isn’t familiar with D&D iirc.

 

[Seramus]

Ahh, I think she isn’t familiar with D&D iirc.

Yeah, I've seen Aabria Iyengar run games like Misfits and Magic and she does pretty well. Energetic, descriptive, and intelligent. But judging from EXU1 it seemed like D&D was not her game of choice. I'm also not sure why EXU1 started off like a sandbox when they had such limited run time. She did much better with a more focused game in EXU2, and I'm sure future games with her as a DM can only improve!

 

[CleverNickName]

Aabria Iyengar. She’s cool and a fun DM but for some reason in that game she kept defaulting to saving throws.

I use save throws a lot in my games. I rarely call for a straight ability check--every time I do, my players seem to get confused. Or they get nervous and start fishing around for Yet Another Bonus To Add.

"Make an Intelligence check."
"Is that, like, a History check?"
"Nope, just make an Intelligence check."
"Oh, like a save throw?"
"No. Roll and add your Intelligence modifier."
"I'm proficient in Nature, can I add that?"
"No, just make an Intelligence check!"
"I don't know what that means!"

So I've gotten into the habit of just asking for save throws for ability checks that don't involve a described skill (like remembering whether or not you left the campfire burning, or being able to win a game of rock-paper-scissors). It's not as distracting, and I can mentally subtract a proficiency bonus easy enough.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, I've seen Aabria Iyengar run games like Misfits and Magic and she does pretty well. Energetic, descriptive, and intelligent. But judging from EXU1 it seemed like D&D was not her game of choice. I'm also not sure why EXU1 started off like a sandbox when they had such limited run time. She did much better with a more focused game in EXU2, and I'm sure future games with her as a DM can only improve!

I'm not actually sold sandboxes are a particularly good choice for that sort of broadcast game anyway. A lot of what goes on in sandboxes can be unfocused and rambling, which can still kind of work for the participants, but isn't exactly a thrill to observers.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I use save throws a lot in my games. I rarely call for a straight ability check--every time I do, my players seem to get confused. Or they get nervous and start fishing around for Yet Another Bonus To Add.

"Make an Intelligence check."
"Is that, like, a History check?"
"Nope, just make an Intelligence check."
"Oh, like a save throw?"
"No. Roll and add your Intelligence modifier."
"I'm proficient in Nature, can I add that?"
"No, just make an Intelligence check!"
"I don't know what that means!"

So I've gotten into the habit of just asking for save throws for ability checks that don't involve a described skill (like remembering whether or not you left the campfire burning, or being able to win a game of rock-paper-scissors). It's not as distracting, and I can mentally subtract a proficiency bonus easy enough.

Well, it may just be that their perception is that there shouldn't be a lot of attribute rolls that aren't skill checks. In most systems that's often how I see it.

 

[Oofta]

I'm not actually sold sandboxes are a particularly good choice for that sort of broadcast game anyway. A lot of what goes on in sandboxes can be unfocused and rambling, which can still kind of work for the participants, but isn't exactly a thrill to observers.

I'm not convinced true sandbox are a good fit for many groups.