Building Bhakashal - Teaching the Game

I run D&D a bit differently than many. I don’t do “voices”. I randomize almost everything. I run a “true sandbox” game where the players can do whatever they want, we don’t have “backstories” at all, your playable group (race), class and skills are your backstory.

But the place where my style of refereeing is the most differentiated from traditional D&D relates to teaching the game to the players.

For me, D&D is a GAME first, not a storytelling engine (though you can tell stories about it), not an “immersive experience” (though it can be immersive at times) but a game. And a fairly complex game at that. People like to talk about simplifying the game experience, rules lite and all that, but for me at least, that’s not D&D. D&D has a lot of rules for a lot of stuff. Not rules for “everything” of course, that would be far too cumbersome. You have to improv a LOT to make the game work, particularly when you are running a sandbox style game. But even then, the game ends up having a lot of rules.

And one of the purposes of running games for me is to teach players how to run their own games. Ideally, every player at my table that wants to become a referee will learn a lot about how to run a game while playing and feel confident enough to start their own game. 

In order to make that happen, I do a few things that might be considered unacceptable at other tables. The main reason for this is that they break immersion in the game as they draw attention to the game mechanics or decision making process of the referee, not to the “in character” experience. 

I understand the appeal of immersion, the idea that when you sit down at the table you become your character for a time, perhaps speaking in the first person, “I swing my axe”, as opposed to “Ragnar swings his axe”, that sort of thing. I’ve played in a few games where the idea was that you were in character whenever you were sitting at the table, no OOC references, etc. Immersion is one of the gems of the D&D experience. There is something visceral and rewarding about, in a way, being your character, and feeling like the game world is somehow “real”. 

However, I also break immersion regularly to reveal the mechanics of the game, the decision-making process that undergirds play, because I want the players to learn how to run a game, not just play it. I also encourage certain aspects of the play with the players to help them learn how to run the style of game I run. Playstyles emerge from a combination of player choices and referee choices. 

Here are a few things I do to make these things happen.

1. Rulebooks - When I was playing back in high school we all took turns as the referee, and we all read the books, it didn’t make the game any less fun or any less challenging. 

The rule at my table is that all of the rule books are available during play with the exception of the monster books when the PCs are involved with a monster, or the treasure entries when they have found treasure. I don’t want them looking up the stats for the dragon as they fight the dragon. However, what they do when they are not fighting the dragon is entirely up to them. I vary monster stats sometimes, “re-skin” monsters, and create a lot of home brew monsters as well, and I’ve told them I do this, so there is still some mystery, but I’m not concerned if the players know things about the monsters they fight. There are any number of in-game reasons why a PC might know some piece of lore about a monster if you need an in-game reason for it. I know a lot of people would lose their minds at this suggestion, as they feel this breaks immersion, they want to be able to “surprise” their players at the table, and they would feel this gives them an unfair advantage. What I find the most surprising is that players often don’t know what they are fighting when they fight it, even though they have access to the books. 

2. Player Consultation - There are many instances while running a game where the referee is required to come up with odds for something that is not explicitly covered in the rules. For example, in last Friday’s game the party traveled to a small village and one of the players asked if they had a leatherworker that could make custom armor out of the hide of the monster they had just defeated. I figured the odds of finding a leatherworker in a small village was fairly low but not impossible, one who was experienced with exotic monster hides was less likely, so I initially suggested a 1 in 6 chance. One of the players suggested that since the monster was found in the area that it should be more likely that a local might have experience with this, we discussed it for a few minutes and all agreed bumping it to 2 in 6. Involving the players in these sorts of exchanges helps them when they are running their own games and have to come up with odds on the fly. It also shows them that refereeing is a process that involves a significant amount of improvisation. 

3. Bring on The Rules Lawyers! - Rules discussion is ALWAYS welcome at my table. If it’s obviously disruptive or bad faith that’s another thing, but for the most part I find players who know the rules are a boon to the game. D&D involves a lot of judgment calls, and the sooner the players realize that the ref will have to handle occasional rules challenges the better. There is a strain of perfectionism in modern gaming, a desire to “get it right” all the time. This is a HUGE burden to put on the referee. Being comfortable and welcoming of player questions is a big part of growing and improving as a referee. Over the last 40 or so years of gaming I have only encountered a handful of players who abused this privilege, and they all didn’t last long at the table. 

4. Multiple PCs per Player and Mounts/Animal-Monster Companions - I have always encouraged players to have more than one PC, and to purchase mounts and use animal/monster companions. Not just because it allows me to run a very deadly game without the delays of having to roll up new PCs real time in game while the other players wait, nor because it speeds up overland travel with mounts. Instead, I do this as it allows players to become familiar with a greater range of PC classes through play, if you want to run the game, the more experience you have with different PC classes the better. Also it helps the player to become familiar with determining and tracking the actions of multiple characters/creatures. The referee is ALWAYS running multiple NPCs/monsters/animals etc., so running multiple PCs, and deciding on the actions of mounts/animal-monster companions, is good practice. 

5. Open Rolling - I do this for a number of reasons unrelated to teaching the game, but one important reason for open rolling is that it helps the players to see that a referee has to to pivot and interpret rolls. Players often think that the tables and mechanics of D&D are just about making a roll. That’s just the beginning. The sooner they see that the result is interpreted the better. If you roll behind a screen they just hear the result, if you see the result and hear the interpretation, you learn how to do it. It’s also an important lesson in transparency. When you roll in the open your players KNOW you are not fudging the dice, get to see the referee respecting the dice just like the players do.

6. Post Game Review - After the game I check in with the players to find out what they liked and what they didn’t like. To be clear I’m not talking about failure versus success, e.g. “I didn’t like it when the giant beat us”, I’m talking about playstyle choices, the amount of combat and social role play, the amount of travel and resource management, the kinds of adventures/quests the PCs are engaging in, that sort of thing. I find that this is important for two reasons. One, you can’t always tell if your players are enjoying something, on occasion they will keep their negative views private as they don’t want to hurt your feelings or make waves. I once had a conversation with a player who told me that he was uninterested in combat and mostly focused on social RP in the game. If he hadn’t told me I would have had no idea, his body language, tone of voice, in game choices and commentary betrayed no sort of discontent. I even asked if he wanted to talk to the other players about shifting focus away from combat and he said “no”, he was happy with the balance of combat and social role play in the game, he just liked the latter more. People talk a lot about “checking in” about many things, but not enough about checking in on playstyle choices. 

Two, it is good to model the idea that referees respond to player preferences. Being a good ref is not only about being creative, it’s about being adaptive. In one of those after game consults my home D&D group once told me they were getting tired of fantasy games. So we pivoted and played Stars Without Number for a year. At that point they wanted to switch back to D&D, but I likely wouldn’t have known if I hadn’t asked where they were at. Note that this doesn’t mean a ref runs whatever the players ask for, there may be games I’m not ready to run or comfortable running, but it’s good to be as adaptive as possible.

7. Lose your Fear of “Breaking the Game” - I have found that one of the most interesting things about D&D is that it is quite resilient. Every time I have thought that giving the PCs something would “break the game” I have found that the game itself weeds this sort of stuff out naturally. One example of this is flying PCs. I was contemplating aarakocra in my home game several years ago and I was worried about how they might impact the game. Wouldn't PCs be too powerful if they could fly from 1st level? So I reviewed the 1e AD&D rules for flying, and ran through some scenarios, and realized that this was a self-correcting problem. PCs can choose fliers from level 1 in my game, but this isn’t a problem as:

1. When you have sustained more than half your HP in damage you can’t fly, when you have sustained more than 3/4 your HP in damage you suffer an uncontrolled plunge

2. You can’t wear heavy armor so your AC is generally not great

3. Fliers are preferred targets for missiles and spells like wizards, and unlike targets on the ground, they don’t have cover and can’t hide behind the party tanks

4. Unless all of the PCs are fliers, they will be faster than their landlocked brethren, so they either have to slow down to stay with them (which makes their greater speed useless) or they fly ahead and are alone and vulnerable, often encountering danger before the party can catch up

I think it is important to show budding referees that the game is quite robust and that they shouldn’t be afraid of players “breaking the game” and overreact, nerfing their abilities or ideas. Run with them instead and trust the game to handle it. If for some reason it doesn’t work, let the play experience show you that in real time and adapt, showing the PCs that the ref can change their decisions.

8. Let Them Lose, Let them Win - One of the things I dislike the most about a lot of modern gaming discourse is that it assumes that encounters must be “balanced” and that it is the referees job to ensure balanced, “fair” encounters. In my games I model precisely the opposite of this approach. Sometimes the players are outmatched, and only luck and skill save them, sometimes they overmatch their opponents, and it’s a cake walk. Rather than adjust encounters on the fly to ensure the enemies survive, or that they go down, I let it happen on its own. Just this week the PCs in my Friday game were involved in an assault on a castle, and they had made an alliance with a warlock who flew on a black dragon. I could have kept the warlock and dragon “in the background” so the PCs could make the decisive moves in the encounter, but instead I had them attack alongside the PCs. As it happens the dragon used it’s breath weapon on two of the castle’s spellcasters, and they were incinerated instantly. I could have made up a magic item that gave them resistances, or used some other trick to get them out of dying, but instead I let it ride, making the encounter significantly easier (not a cake-walk however, it got hairy later). For the kind of play style that Bhakashal fits, it’s important for players who want to become referees to see that it is part of the ref’s job to ensure that the game world behaves consistently and impartially as possible. NPCs act in a way that fits with what THEY would want, not what the players want.

9. Let the Players roll for Allies and Monsters - One of the goals as a ref is to keep the players engaged, and let’s be honest, there are many times in a standard D&D game when some of the players will not be directly involved in the action. PCs get paralyzed or knocked out, one PC is on a “solo mission” separate from the rest of the party, etc. For large groups you might have to wait for 6 other players to take their action before your turn comes up. In some cases, I get the players to roll for allies (like henchmen) or monsters. This is both good for engagement and a good experience, players get the sense of what it is like to be running more than just their PC. A referee has to run THE WHOLE WORLD other than the PCs, rolling for the monsters when your PC is down gives you a brief glimpse into things from the other side.

10. Let them Explore - If you are going to run a sandbox game, you have to be comfortable with the PCs doing things other than what you have planned. So if this means they want to shop for equipment and mounts for a whole session then so be it. Show the players that ANYTHING in D&D can be an interesting encounter, show them that you can share world lore and build the world around them by allowing the players to do things other than fight. And show them how letting the players explore can lead to all sorts of fun. Some of our most rewarding and interesting encounters in our games have come from unplanned non-combat encounters that grew into something more. My players once encountered a passing caravan on their way to a dungeon. Rather than just passing by, they decided to stop and parley with them, asking questions about what they were transporting, where they were going. I rolled an encounter reaction and it was positive, so the caravan stopped for the day to camp down and asked the PCs to join them. They broke bread, bought some of their wares (I rolled randomly on the spot to see what they were carrying) and made friends with one of the merchants in the caravan, who was returning to the city. That merchant became a NPC contact for the party, and they have worked with him several times since. Every part of the game world can be an adventure, but they have to see that this can happen. Referees who don’t have this experience tend to be train conductors at the table. 

11. Bring on the Side Conversations - This piece of advice is highly contextual, it will vary in it’s application from table to table, but with the right group it is a great way to encourage players to become referees. In one of my Wednesday night games the players showed up and we started, about a half hour in one of the PCs was casting fireball, and I started to do the calculations to determine possible blowback. One of the players asked me to explain how this worked, so I did, explaining the AOE of the spell, and how it would fill the area. Well, this led to more questions from this player and the other players about how AOE’s worked in different situations. This morphed into a conversation about spell ranges versus AOE, and then a discussion about missile ranges indoors and outdoors, and so on. We spent most of that session discussing rules. Normally this would be brushed aside with a “we need to get back to the game”, but they were into it, and all of them learned a ton about adjudicating spells given the encounter environment that day, things that might otherwise be “behind the screen”. 

The goal with all of these practices is to show the PCs the mechanics and the process, to model and reveal practices at the table in a way that is transparent. Some of these are absolute immersion killers. But they are important tools in teaching the game to the players. It is important to show them that you can be adaptive to whatever comes your way, and show them how you take the chaos of the gaming world and translate it through rolls and interpretations.

Again, this is all if you want to have some of your players start to referee their own games, and you have a group that is on board with high referee transparency and diversions for purposes of talking rules. Every group will be a bit different, and some would find all this terribly immersion breaking and unfun.

I have been running after school games for 3 years now. Of the 40 or so players that have played or still play in my game, more than half run their own games at home. Many run 5e as it is the easiest to get and popular, but several run 1e or 2e. When a player tells me they want to run games, I give them a copy of OSRIC, so even if they don’t run 1e, they can raid it for inspiration and house rules for 5e. 

If you prefer to keep the mystery, and maintain more immersion in your game, most of these rules won’t be for you. If you run a more controlled game, for example, you can more fully develop encounters and the game world so they are more immersive. If you restrict the books then the players will know less about what they are encountering. 

The goal for me as a referee is to make myself redundant, get my players to the point where, if they are interested, they could run their own games and build their own worlds. Doing these things makes it possible. 

How I maintain immersion, or more accurately the style of immersion I use in my game, what I call fragmented immersion, will be the topic of another blog post.