D&D 5e: The Game That's Not a Game

Most games--whether tabletop, virtual, or purely social, can be played by pure "rules." That is to say, for example, that when playing poker, solitaire, or even your favorite side-scrolling platformer, your investment in the game can be as shallow as your investment in the rules and you can still beat the game and potentially have a great time doing it. The fun you have while playing the game can come from "overcoming" the game through the structure of the rules. A quick google search of "beating [insert video game here] in record time]" reveals how people have created a whole realm of gaming experience around the speed at which a game's structure can be surmounted in order to win. And, in some settings, that can be fun.

Dungeons and Dragons and other tabletop RPGs, however, are a game style in which beating the game in record time or by surmounting the rules is not the usual way to play and enjoy; in fact, the only "record times" Dungeons and Dragons players appear to care about are the longest running games.

Because of this important but often overlooked difference, I thought it might be useful to consider the two ways to look at Dungeons and Dragons and how seeing the game through these two lenses might enhance enjoyment of it and (occasionally) speed us through the "work" of the game and emphasize the areas that are the most fun. In other words, sometimes D&D is a Game. Other times D&D is Not a Game.

The Basics:

If this concept already makes sense to you, skip down to the advice! If not, read the two sections below for a more full explanation of what I mean.

The Basics: D&D is a Game:
This is the obvious way to look at it if you play with min-maxers, rule-wizards, or number-crunchers. When you play the game and always consider that it's a game, you constantly meta-game, you tend to consider your character as a very valuable but ultimately expendable resource, and it becomes much easier to think of your quests/missions as means to an end (leveling up or loot) rather than anything else.

The Basics: D&D is Not a Game:
This is the obvious way to look at it if you play with role-players, what-ifsters, actors, story-tellers, and (often) young children. When you play the game but immediately lose yourself in the pretend, in the narrative, in the story, you tend to think of in-character solutions, you think of your character as a person--requiring food, water, rest, entertainment, and having real emotions, reactions, and aspirations. It becomes much easier to pursue quests/missions related to your characters goals, and choosing new abilities or powers becomes a natural extension of your character's growth as an individual.

The Advice:

Many, many writers and gamers have tackled the relationship between these two, so I just want to focus on some ways these perspectives can be leveraged to help your game time be more fun and worthwhile! I try to take problems that arise from looking through one of the perspectives, and offer a solution grounded in the opposite perspective. Sometimes that's all it takes.

One last disclaimer is to take these first and foremost as tips to enhance your enjoyment of the game, and second as distinct items belonging under the heading I've placed them--this is a very loose framework!



The Advice: D&D is a Game:

• The Ten-Minute Round. When in combat, I often see gaming groups get hung up on "which spell is the optimum choice?" or "should I strike at this enemy, or that enemy?" If this is really a meaningful choice (for example, if you're the last man standing and have to decide with absolute certainty how to survive the encounter and revive your friends) then I understand some deliberation. However, in most cases, I feel like this is players taking advantage of the fact that they have far more than 6 seconds to determine what's going on in a round to the point of it becoming a detriment to the game (if not to their characters). 
• Solution: When you're not sure what to do because the choice isn't a meaningful one, use a cantrip, pick a target, or swing that sword. Does it really matter whether you wiped out the enemies this round or whittled them down over a few rounds? Does it really matter if you attacked the goblin who was threatening the cleric or the goblin who was threatening the rogue? Probably not. If you make a snap decision, chances are it's the right one--and you have everyone else's turns to think of something clever or "better" to do when your turn comes up again.
• The Thumb of God: Sometimes players--or DMs!--get into an adversarial mindset. They start thinking of a campaign as something where success is defined as out-thinking the person(s) on the other side of the screen. This is a common trope in D&D humor:
  
  
  Still, it can cause its share of drama or problems. The minute you start thinking the DM is out to kill you (or that the players are out to "ruin your story" or some such nonsense), you stop creating a communal narrative that allows the characters and the world to shine. I know this line of thinking tempted me when I was running an early session in Rise of Tiamat; my players transformed "Oyaviggaton," into "Olive Garden" and made one of the creatures there ("Marfulb") into "Marlboro."
• Solution: Even if you suspect that the DM is out to kill you, or that your players are in a particularly comedic/dramatic mood when you've set what you believe should be a dramatic/comedic session, just let it ride. Obviously, if it's a long-term issue, talk about it when you're not mid-game, but in the short term, get your head back in the game by not thinking of it as a traditional game. To refer back to my example above, the renaming was just a strategy my players were employing to (A) lighten the dark mood and (B) remember who was who among many complicated names. They were still vested/involved, and since I accepted that, we were able to have a very fun and intense session--despite talk about Olive Garden's night manager and whether or not the Marlboro Man worked there too.

The Advice: D&D is Not a Game:

• Realistic Villains. I've mentioned this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: I sometimes see groups thinking that just because they've found the villain or monster they've been looking for, that he/she/it is just going to throw everything at the PCs and (when it becomes clear that the end is near) cry out some last words and die. For some reason, players are shocked when the villain uses invisibility and runs away, or kills the hostage when the players come closer, or in any way has an escape plan ready to go. 
• Solution: Remember that this isn't a video game where the boss blinks red as you get closer to killing him, and stays on screen while you hammer away at him. Villains are "real people." If they're smart enough to orchestrate a devious plan that took several levels and multiple dungeons to sort out, chances are they have an escape hatch or two in case things go south. The sooner players see the villains as "real," the sooner they start looking for those escape hatches, the sooner they take the villains' hostage situations seriously, and the sooner the enjoyment comes as much from the drama of the showdown as from the death/defeat of the villain(s).

•  No Good Feat Goes Unpunished. Thankfully, 5e has done a great job of curbing the min-maxing tendencies of 3e through a herculean achievement of game balance. Still, when a party levels up and hits one of the ability-boost levels, sometimes a player hits upon a feat that really stands out for his/her character. This can leave other players searching feverishly for a power boosting feat that just doesn't exist for their character build. 
• Solution: If you really don't want to just take the ability boost (which, by the way, is almost always as-if-not-more powerful than the feat options), choose a feat which adds flair and character instead. For example, one Rogue in a party I DM for chose the Tavern Brawler feat. The rationale, for her, was that she (as her character) never wanted to be without a weapon, and being able to turn anything improvised into a proficient weapon would mean she'd remain deadly in almost any circumstance. Was it as good for her combat effectiveness as a straight up +2 to Dexterity? Probably not, but it made the character a lot more fun to play/roleplay, and the constant joke in the party is that if you don't treat her right, she'll kill you with a spoon. By thinking of it from the character-side, rather than the min-max side, it resulted in a lot more fun.