Another interlude from the onslaught of reviews...
Waaay back when I was getting ready for my first
Cauldron convention, I was checking the
DM Info page and came across the following in their "guidelines" section:
3. There is no upper or lower milliwhack limit.
What the heck is milliwhack, I wondered.
But after some research, I discovered that
"milliwhack" (
mW) is a non-real measurement, postulated (humorously, I believe) by
Michael Prescott in
this 2014 blog post as a way to determine the lethality of a campaign, adventure, or Dungeon Master. One's milliwhack score is based on the number of character deaths (or permanent traumas) suffered by players over a given number of sessions. For example, my mW score for my five sessions of Cauldron 2025 comes out to
341 and change. Which is probably a bit higher than my home game, but the Con players were not raising each other from the dead.
Anyway, milliwhack is supposed to be a joke...but then I started thinking about
golf handicaps. If you're a regular golfer, you have a handicap based on how well you play (and, more importantly, how well you've played
recently) which is used to give more parity to golfers of disparate skill levels that play together. I don't have a golf handicap (if I did, it would be in the 55+ range...). But if I played with someone
good (like my friend Connor) I would get to subtract the difference in our handicaps from my score to make our match more competive.
Here's the thing, though...a match between Connor and I would not be competitive. I've golfed with Connor (his son and mine are good friends and avid golfers, and we've taken the boys out before). He knows it; I know it. And just giving me a +40 stroke advantage (or whatever) doesn't change the fact that I SUCK at golf...and he's pretty good. However, here's the thing about the handicap...more than giving "parity" to disparate golfers, one can look at handicap and say, "Um, yeah...we probably shouldn't be playing together." You can use it to find someone close to your own level or (to put it another way) use it to somewhat judge whether you think you'd get a fun match with one or another of the people playing the course. It's a measurement to give you an idea of what you're getting into.
And I started thinking about this with regard to Dungeon Mastering.
When it comes to Dungeon Masters, the skill of the DM is often judged subjectively. Players describe a DM as "fun" or "challenging" or "deadly" but these descriptions rarely give a concrete sense of what a new player can expect at a table. What
would be helpful (IMO), is a numerical, composite measure of a DM's performance...something equivalent to an NFL quarterback's
passer rating...that communicates the style and intensity of a Dungeon Master's average game session.
Enter the Dungeon Master Rating (DMR), a method of measuring how a particular DM runs their table.
DMR examines three core aspects of a Dungeon Master's game (pace, reward, and challenge), and compiles them into a single score that can be used to gauge intensity and proficiency. It is mainly of use/interest to people who play "old edition" D&D...if your players are not exploring traditional adventure sites, searching for treasure, and facing the risk of death, then it will be of little use to you. It ranges from zero to 160.3, with a score of "100" being considered good/solid DMing, and anything over 100 to be varying degrees of excellence.
I recognize that DMR is an imperfect score. It does not measure flair, humor, improvisational skill, or rule mastery. It does not account for the relative skill of the players, nor the quality of the adventure being run. It focuses on objective, measurable elements of game play, providing a simple, transparent way for DMs and players to assess what to expect.
Calculating DMR
DMR is calculated in three steps:
1. Enter Your Variables
- h = hours played in the session
- e = keyed encounter areas visited/explored during the session
- p = number of PCs used during the session
- d = number of PCs killed during the session
- x = % of x.p. needed that was gained in treasure taken during the session
To explain that last one: add the total treasure take (in x.p.) and divide it by the total x.p. NEEDED of all surviving party members. EXAMPLE: Bill needs 1,870 x.p. to level up, Layna needs 346 x.p., and Al (playing a brand new magic-user) needs 2,500 x.p. Total needed is 4,716 x.p. If the party recovered 3,000 g.p. worth of treasure in the session, then x equals 63.6% (3,000 / 4,716 = .636).
2. "Normalize" Each Component
- E (exploration/pace) = e/h; divide results exceeding 3 by 1.5; E cannot exceed 5
- L (lethality/challenge) = 100d/p; divide results exceeding 15 by 4; d/p cannot exceed 60 (before dividing)
- T (treasure/reward) = 100x/h; divide results exceeding 8 by 3; x/h cannot exceed 20 (before dividing)
3. Find Composite Score ("DMR")
DMR = 7E + 8L/3 + 5T
-
DMR approaching 100 represents a solid session
DMR > 100 indicates high intensity and excellence
DMR 150+ represents a near-perfect, elite-level session
This formula ensures that DMR clusters around 100 for solid, balanced gameplay, while giving room to highlight extraordinary sessions.
FOR EXAMPLE, a session with:
- 13 rooms (keyed areas) over four hours (3.25 rooms/hour)
- 8 PCs, 2 deaths (25% lethality)
- 35,826 g.p. of treasure towards 90,000 x.p. needed over four hours (10%/hour)
is normalized to:
- E = 3.17 (.25 / 1.5 = .17; 3 + .17 = 3.17)
- L = 17.5 (10 / 4 = 2.5; 15 + 2.5 = 17.5)
- T = 8.67 (2 / 3 = .67; 8 + .67 = 8.67)
DMR = 22.2 + 46.7 + 43.4 = 112.3
...indicating a solid session with strong exploration, generous treasure, and a healthy level of danger.
The Dungeon Master Rating provides a simple, objective framework for evaluating DM sessions, in an attempt to give a clear sense of pace, reward, and risk. While it does not capture every nuance of DMing, it allows DMs to quantify and communicate their approach. By using DMR, Dungeon Masters can measure consistency, compare sessions, and give players meaningful expectations before they sit down at the table.
Gauging my own performance over my last eight sessions (the only ones I have real data for) has been interesting. My lowest scores were definitely in the adventures where I felt something "off" or lacking, whereas the ones I felt good about had higher overall scores. My "weighted average" (accounting for some sessions being shorter or longer than others) comes out to a score of
119, but that's adjusted based on some adventures I ran at the con having objectives
other than treasure. However, even throwing those sessions out (like
my running of the kids through Tamoachan), I still get scores of 104, 105, 125, and 135. That's pretty good stuff. If I was a QB with those scores for my passer rating, I'd be up for a pretty fat contract!
; )
ANYway. Just something I'm digging at the moment. When it comes to D&D, we don't have enough objective measurements to "grade" game play. And I think it's helpful to have them. NOT because we want to make people feel bad ("oh, nos! My DMR is only a 76!") but we want to have benchmarks for improvement. Stats like DMR...or "milliwhack"...don't tell the whole story about a Dungeon Master, but they tell us something...and can give us ideas about how we might refine our game to make it more smooth, more efficient, more exciting.
For me, it feels like a way to better measure, refine, and control my own game.
[Some Notes: baseline numbers are set per what I feel are solid. An 8% per hour rate of treasure accumulation against x.p. required is considered "good" by my account, but this maxes out at 20%...usually due to character deaths causing spikes in reward for survivors. Lethality includes those PCs who are raised or wished back to life, simply counting deaths (even though later mitigated) as a measure of how challenging the game is; to be clear, body counts can be TOO HIGH as well as too low, and this is reflected above. Pacing is based on "keyed locations" (i.e. numbered "rooms") that a party interacts with over the course of a session, does not count the same room more than once (even when re-visited), and is based on my observations of what it generally possible within a certain time frame.
DMR promotes a certain style of play: snappy, challenging, rewarding. It does not measure whether or not a DM is a "good bloke." Sometimes you want to play golf with someone just because they're a ton of fun: drinking, joking, slicing into the rough, etc. D&D is the same. DMR simply gives a measure for evaluating play, but there are lots of ways to find enjoyment and entertainment at the table]
