RPG

926 readers

1 users here now

Discussion of table top roleplaying games.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

How do I get my players to read the rules? (self.rpg)

submitted 2 years ago by DrakeRichards to c/[email protected]

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I’ve been a DM for many years, and in all that time I’ve had maybe three players read the PHB. I don’t mind explaining the rules, but it would be nice to not have to remind the wizard how spell slots work (again). Is this a common thing for most groups?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't know if you're talking in the long campaign, same players context, but I often find that for one shots around half of players, at best, skim the rulebook of the particular system. Myself sometimes I do, sometimes I don't find time. Some people, like it or not, come to a session mainly to chill and even let the others do most of the adventuring. Others engage with the adventure but don't feel like engaging with the rules beyond what the GM requires.

I'm also assuming the GM will explain the rules, and I think they are the ultimate authority. So stuff from the rulebook may not even be relevant (thrown out, replaced), and GM is the interface for the rules. I would call it OSR mentality, though some may call it glorified player laziness. But as a GM it may give you more room for your ideas actually.

I think the situation is a problem if players don't know the rules and get mad when their plans are impossible. I suppose this can happen more often with rules-heavy systems.

Anyway, I think keeping the rulebooks close to the players (either as putting them on the table or sharing PDFs) is good advice.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

I very much agree. I would not have started with D&D if our GM gave me a 300 page book and said I needed to read this before we play.

Now if you're VERY into the game and want to play at a high level I think it's entirely fair to look for a group that brings this level of investment. Some other user brought up the analogy to a soccer team.

Ultimately you have to decide whether your focus is playing the best soccer you can or if you just want to kick a ball around with your friends. The former means you've got to look for players who take it as serious as you do. The later means you've got to make compromises to keep the group engaged.

Neither is inherently more right than the other.