Mappers had to look listen to the description of the DM and try to draw a “good enough” map. Very easy to get things mixed up or one square off, and have to erase and redraw. “A doorway to the left” can be confusing when you’re are heading south and it on the right of your map. Or maybe the DM means the left of the map?

Bear in mind, there was often treasure hidden in secret rooms, so knowing where the unexplored space was could be pretty important.

Once in a blue moon there was a player who got a thrill from that, but most folks hated the hassle.

There was a fair deal of “rules of order” style rules in early D&D.

Ever hear of a “caller”? That was the special player in early D&D rules who got the privilege of telling the DM what the party would do. It did kind of help with big groups, actually.

Better that than being stuck as the “mapper.”

Hope you brought your diamond dust!

You can also safely check with Vicious mockery. The spell can target any creature, but only damages the target if it can hear, which “inanimate” things cannot.

On the other hand, Dissonant Whispers causes the target to hear (rather than hearing being a precondition as it is with Vicious Mockery) and with this you can kill petrified creatures, thus ensuring no spell casters return them to flesh-and-blood, without damaging the statue.

You’re not dead when you’re petrified, either, which can lead to some pretty interesting exploits, rules-as-written.

Petrified creatures count as creatures, not objects, so rules-as-written you can determine if a statue is a petrified creature by trying to target it with a spell that requires a creature for a target.

With the cantrip Poison Spray, you can check for petrified creatures without using spell slots or risking damaging the creature, since it would be immune to poison while petrified.

They had trouble with simultaneous releases when they put out 4e, there were some troublesome proofreading/quality issues. So with 5e, they put out the pieces one at a time, allowing each title to have its own turn to be the urgent, top priority.

I started running 5e before the release of the Monster Manual 5e, using the smattering of monsters in the back of the PH. It was limiting, but fun in its way.

I gave my 8 players a Condorcet poll for which game I should run next. Their main gripe was a Condorcet poll sounded complicated (it wasn’t).

Kevin Crawford’s “Without Number” games swept the podium (Stars, Cities, Worlds) knocking D&D to fourth place.

The real big table might be a factor. Combat is just so much faster.

Oh, I don’t let the fickle dice tell me when to give a hint or twenty. Nat 1’s come aplenty when you gate-keep crucial information on a die roll.

Only thing that worked was jettisoning the players who torpedoed campaigns for whatever reason.

Nah. Basic was way deadlier.

You can be the first type, and some players will still see you as the second.

Like, they attack the king’s castle for no reason and are upset the guards don’t lie down and die, then refuse to surrender when things are entirely hopeless and they’re offered mercy. Such a mean DM!

This is just another way to out yourself, gamer.

Had me until your last sentence.

It’s always going to be mixed, to some degree. The challenge is making it work anyway.

Yes, and Noon to 3:00 PM can blow a hole in your free time in a way that something running 7:00-10:00 PM doesn’t.

I put about 6-10 hours a week into RPG’s (DM’ing/playing/prepping) but would never want to play every Saturday afternoon. That would totally crimp my other interests.

It’s even better when the DM for you!

This can happen with new players who are native English speakers too, as D&D has a fair deal of vocabulary not everyone knows. Words like charisma and melee really got popularized by D&D.

Deep cut here: When I was a kid (ages past) and first heard friends talk about D&D, I thought there was a lens to keep you on the border. And without it, you might go straight Into The Unknown.

Are you quoting something with those ellipses?

If “5.2” were a marketing decision, then it would probably be getting used in their marketing materials. But there you see stuff like “One D&D.”

Incrementing the second number here is in line with general “geek numbering system” convention. It doesn’t seem to me like marketing barged into the production room and insisted on a more “marketable” version number — not that that has never happened, but marketing would most likely have wanted “5.5” not the inscrutable “5.2.”

Shades of the original (only much better art). I like it.

I’m not sure it’s an exact match, but SRD 5.1 was published around the same time as the PH accrued the “This printing includes corrections to the first printing” message in the front matter.

They both contain the corrections from the previously-published errata.

So if you will, if your PH has that message, and it probably does, you’ve probably been playing 5.1 for a while now.

I ran 2 tables in 4E, but when 5E came out they never wanted to go back.

It all came down to keeping track of all the powers, nobody liked that. They also hoarded their encounter and daily powers, rarely using them (and hoarding encounter powers doesn’t make a lot of sense).

I was a little disappointed because the one table was about to hit their paragon paths, which seemed like fun, and the players seemed excited for. It’s a concept I wouldn’t mind seeing in a new game – it was a little like choosing a subclass at 10th level.

SRD 5.1 was released 8 years ago though, long before TCE. And since Tasha’s rules are all considered optional, that book didn’t really revise the rules, just expand on them.