Dear Unregistered! We notice you don't currently have a silver subscription here on EN World. We'd love to encourage you to give it a try, so we've made this coupon for $5 off your first 4-month Silver Subscription. Simply go to the subscription page and enter coupon code SILVER. With that subscription you get access to TWO adventure paths, which between them cover D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, and D&D 4th Edition - War of the Burning Sky (which has been completed) and ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution (which is currently ongoing). You also get a whole bunch of site perks and features here on EN World, including access to the Search function, images and links in your forum signature, a larger PM box, give out more XP at a time, and more. Please give a try; we're proud of our adventure paths, and we're sure you'll love them both!
D&D 4th Edition DiscussionDiscuss D&D 4E rules and house rules in here.
All the latest EN World
official reviews, columns, and subscriber articles here.
Don't have your subscription yet? It's only $3 a month and you can grab
it right
here!
Well, I hope this counts as problems and/or issues.
Frankly, I'm disappointed. I was hoping for a new 4e-compatible version of the Mentzer box. This isn't that, and I think WotC has missed the point of a Starter Set. Again.
Look, maybe this is marketing's fault, but stop throwing up starter sets that aren't complete games. There's enough here that you can make characters, but ONLY by walking through the adventure. Limited classes and races are fine. But it should meet the following criteria:
It should be fully compatible with the rest of the D&D Essentials line. Comparing it to the Ampersand Heroes of the Fallen Lands preview articles, the rogue (supposedly a thief) is markedly different, and the fighter (supposedly a slayer) adds CON to damage instead of DEX. As errata in a regular book, those would be annoying. In a Starter Set, they're inexcusable.
It should include real character creation rules. The new Red Box doesn't. You can't change weapons, or have your rogue pick up a short sword from the goblins. Why can't the PCs pick up bows or short swords? Sure, in the solo adventure, fine. But that option needs to be addressed before you go on a "real adventure." Especially if you go back to town where, presumably, there's a weapons shop.
It should enable the DM to create his own adventures, and provide the essence of the D&D experience. That means monster stats, treasure to give out, and ideally a trap or two. Some of this is there, but some of it is sadly lacking.
This is not meant to be a rant. I truly believe a real 4e-version of the Red Box has the potential to expand the audience for D&D - a lot. Sadly, this isn't that. I wanted to be able to buy this for young gamers, but without Heroes of the Fallen Lands, it's not complete. Ergo, it's not worth it. The $20 entry point is a fiction.
It wouldn't have to go very high in level. Maintaining the tradition of it going to Level 3 would be best, but even Level 2 would be okay if it included actual character creation rules (and an equipment list!) so you could create a PC of any combo you can imagine. Default array stats are fine. Limited options for classes and races are fine. Limited monster and treasure options are fine. But there should be SOME.
This, sadly, isn't a complete game. It's a fancy intro with basically pre-gen characters and one adventure. In other words, it's a lot like the LAST 4e Starter Set. Nostalgia packaging aside, it's a disappointment.
It is my hope that this feedback will make the next printing of this set BETTER.
Last edited by JohnSnow; 31st August 2010 at 07:44 PM..
This, sadly, isn't a complete game. It's a fancy intro with basically pre-gen characters and one adventure. In other words, it's a lot like the LAST 4e Starter Set. Nostalgia packaging aside, it's a disappointment.
.
I disagree. It is a MUCH better starter set. It teaches a new player the rules better than any previous version.
Char gen rules do not make a starter set. The whole point of the starter set is to hook someone so that they will want to buy HotFL so they can do full char gen.
As far as a newbie is concerned, they are making a character with the Red Box. They get to choose from 4 races and 4 classes and then make meaningful choices over the powers that those classes have. Anything more is overwhelming.
BL: the Red Box is not targeted at the established player. But it's still a great value for $20 and I'll be sure to get my moneys worth out of it.
I disagree. It is a MUCH better starter set. It teaches a new player the rules better than any previous version.
Char gen rules do not make a starter set. The whole point of the starter set is to hook someone so that they will want to buy HotFL so they can do full char gen.
As far as a newbie is concerned, they are making a character with the Red Box. They get to choose from 4 races and 4 classes and then make meaningful choices over the powers that those classes have. Anything more is overwhelming.
BL: the Red Box is not targeted at the established player. But it's still a great value for $20 and I'll be sure to get my moneys worth out of it.
Like all the recent Starter Sets, but totally unlike the original Red Box, this isn't in any way replayable - at all. It's basically one starter adventure. And once you hit level 2, you realistically need more than this box includes. Granted there's monsters and you can build your own encounters, but if you want to hand out rewards to 2nd-level heroes, you need more than the information in the Red Box. So, protestations to the contrary, it's really a 1st-level (honestly 1 adventure) set, not a set for characters of Levels 1-2. That may be good at forcing those people who really want them to buy more products, but it's terrible for getting lots of people to WANT to buy more products.
You're falling for the same mistake that WotC has - seeing this as a "bait and switch" product. That's what every starter set has been since the Basic D&D days. Not surprisingly, they've ALL fallen well short of the success of the Mentzer Red Box. Why? Because a Starter Set that lacks replayability doesn't sink its teeth in well enough to create a gamer. It may be good at teaching someone how to play (I agree it is), but unless you can play more than one adventure, you won't get "what the big deal" is. The "amazing" factor that truly makes D&D is just not there in this set.
I guess I shouldn't have expected more, given their recent track-record with Starter Sets. But WotC raised my expectations by putting it in the classic packaging. I thought they got it. And then...they blew it. Newbies aren't expecting much, so they'll probably be okay with what they get in this set. It'll do "okay." It's a decent safe set that may gain them a few new players. Meh.
But I'm convinced a true 4e version of the original Red Box would have wowed the newbies. They would have gone in not expecting much and been blown away, just like we all were back in 1983. Sure, it carries the risk that they could have played forever without buying Heroes of the Fallen Lands or anything else. But none of them would have wanted to. Launching that product is risky. And I guess the "play it safe" crowd won - again.
To get so close to the mark and then miss it is just a damn shame.
Last edited by JohnSnow; 1st September 2010 at 12:19 AM..
Stating that the Starter Set does not including anything but the intro adventure is flat out wrong.
Pages 40 ff. of the DM's Book have advice on Creating Adventures, including quests, building a dungeon (with example maps), designing encounters, monsters, and rewards (treasure).
Granted, there is limited content, but this is a Starter Set. Its very name makes it clear that there is more of the game to be had.
__________________ Still excited about 4th edition!
'If there steady paycheck in it, Krusk rage against anything you say.' - this post
Stating that the Starter Set does not including anything but the intro adventure is flat out wrong.
Pages 40 ff. of the DM's Book have advice on Creating Adventures, including quests, building a dungeon (with example maps), designing encounters, monsters, and rewards (treasure).
Granted, there is limited content, but this is a Starter Set. Its very name makes it clear that there is more of the game to be had.
Limited info is not the the problem here. Information that is almost completely incompatible with the content in Heroes of the Fallen Lands IS the big problem. The starter is a complete throwaway unless what comes in later volumes builds upon what is presented in the redbox.
It would be like the Mentzer Expert set being released and covering the basic rules again but changing the hit die for classes, XP tables, spell progession, etc. That would make the Basic set fairly worthless wouldn't it? WOTC has done the same thing here by turning the redbox into nothing more than a highly inaccurate preview for essentials.
Imagine the newb who eagerly grabs HOTFL to advance his 2nd level rogue to 3rd level. Haha -you thought you were playing the actual game for two levels is what he's going to see.
Stating that the Starter Set does not including anything but the intro adventure is flat out wrong.
Pages 40 ff. of the DM's Book have advice on Creating Adventures, including quests, building a dungeon (with example maps), designing encounters, monsters, and rewards (treasure).
Granted, there is limited content, but this is a Starter Set. Its very name makes it clear that there is more of the game to be had.
Sorry, but no.
I've read those pages. They pay lip service to the notion of creating new adventures, using the existing map. Granted there are monsters, I freely admit that, but the treasure information is woefully inadequate. Do you really think 7 distinct magic items is sufficient for a Starter Set? The Moldvay set had 48 (plus character creation rules and DM advice, all in 64 pages, but I digress...). The Mentzer set had 53! And that's not accounting for the possibility of different KINDS of spell scrolls.
Even though you're theoretically based in Fallcrest, there's no discussion of how to buy new weapons or armor. Moreover, what if a player wants to pick up the weapons of the goblins he kills? A shortsword or short bow is intuitively BETTER than a dagger, and a 2nd level rogue knows he's proficient with them and gets the same bonus (Weapon Finesse, DM's Book, p. 39). So, why can't he use them?
No ability to change weapons? No general character creation rules? 7 magic items? Sure, maybe you can muddle through a second level but that's hardly the "Complete D&D Experience." It's more like...one adventure.
You're saying we should excuse this on the basis that "it's a Starter Set." But consider: by putting it in the Red Box, they're obviously aiming it at the lapsed gamer, who is going to expect a similar experience to the Mentzer set. It's extremely disingenuous to claim (as the back of the Starter Set does) that this is "game rules and adventure content for heroes of Levels 1-2." They have repeatedly claimed (including in the recent Podcast) that "it's D&D in a box." But is it, really? The Red Box was. By using that packaging and those terms, they raised expectations that they could deliver the same thing. And then they fell woefully short. And I admit that there are technically "character creation rules," but being able to make nearly the exact same fighter, or whatever, with 4 different races is kinda...weak. They'd have as much variability with 16 pre-gen characters. Aside: how exactly does a halfling fighter use a Greatsword or Greataxe anyway?
For the next printing, WotC should double the length of the Player's Book and include full, if abbreviated, class and race descriptions. 4 pages per class and 1 per race is 20. Toss in a couple (possibly condensed) equipment tables (6 pages). That leaves 6 pages to play with. If that's too long, you might be able to keep it to 16 extra pages by leaving the power descriptions on cards. Include a few more low-level magic items in the DM's Book (or mention them there and include a couple more sheets of just item cards). THAT would truly be "D&D in a box," and something worthy of the Red Box packaging.
This is meant, not as a rant, but as constructive criticism for Wizards. However, I admit it's not appropriate if this thread is just tracking errata. So if the mods want to move my posts into a "Red Box: Some Constructive Criticism" thread, I have no objection.
Last edited by JohnSnow; 1st September 2010 at 08:55 PM..
You're saying we should excuse this on the basis that "it's a Starter Set." But consider: by putting it in the Red Box, they're obviously aiming it at the lapsed gamer, who is going to expect a similar experience to the Mentzer set.
I started with the 'blue book' basic set, basically the same thing as the red box, just a cheesier cover. My experience was playing it a little while (with friends who just didn't get it), then moving on to AD&D. I found that characters were quite different, rules were different, it was a noticeably different game.
Now, I don't think WotC intentionally made the Red Box inadequate or intentionally made mistakes or intentionally made the Red Box characters noticeably incompatible with the PH and Heroes of... But, coincidentally enough, the Red Box may well deliver the same bewildering experience as starting with the Basic Set in the 80s and going straight to AD&D (rather than on to the rest of BECMI).
I started with the 'blue book' basic set, basically the same thing as the red box, just a cheesier cover. My experience was playing it a little while (with friends who just didn't get it), then moving on to AD&D. I found that characters were quite different, rules were different, it was a noticeably different game.
Now, I don't think WotC intentionally made the Red Box inadequate or intentionally made mistakes or intentionally made the Red Box characters noticeably incompatible with the PH and Heroes of... But, coincidentally enough, the Red Box may well deliver the same bewildering experience as starting with the Basic Set in the 80s and going straight to AD&D (rather than on to the rest of BECMI).
The major difference being that, in the 80's there were two separate product lines; D&D and AD&D. The Holmes book was indeed a mishmash product caught between the two lines. The Moldvay and Mentzer sets were clearly presented and non AD&D focused. This time there is only one line, just D&D and new players shouldn't have to be subjected to this kind of confusion.
The important feature about these sets was that they were the actual D&D game for the limited levels that they covered. Expert, Companion, and other future sets built on and added to the basic box but never invalidated it. With the basic set you could run a full campaign, limited to 3rd level and largely in the dungeon of course.
The problem with every WOTC starter set is that it has little to zero value once the supporting product is released. The maps and tokens are reusable but that's about it. I'm not saying that the starter set should have had exclusive rules content or anything (which would have made it mandatory for experienced players) but enough info to make it into a replayable set with concise character creation even if the options are really limited.
A little more time spent making this set more complete and compatible with later product would have had a huge impact on the quality and utility of this product.
I have not looked at the Red Box so I can't comment completely about certain things, but I will agree and disagree with several points here.
I agree that if the character classes created within the Red Box are not the same as the the first two levels you'll get with HotFL, then that was an unfortunate mistake on the part of WotC to finalize the Red Box's edit and go to print before they finalized the HotFL edit. That kind of discrepency just looks a little unprofessional. (Although truth be told, the kids who will be looking at this game will probably have their heads swimming from so much new information, rules and terminology that they might not even notice it when they pick up HotFL.)
However, I would greatly disagree that the Red Box needed anything more as far as character advancement was concerned. While I can accept your belief that making it a replica of the old Red Box was indeed an attempt to re-woo really lapsed gamers from the 80s... that in no way should impact the content of the box.
It is a starter set meant to be found on the shelves of Target or Walmart that a mother or father will grab and throw into the cart when they need to pick up some game or toy for their child's birthday or Christmas, or some other's child's birthday party their kid is going to. Many of the children who will be receiving this box quite possibly will have not even heard of the name 'Dungeons & Dragons', let alone played it. So for most of them... they will possibly open this box up, maybe play the solo adventure for a couple hours, and then when they're done, they'll throw it into their closet with the rest of the junk they've acquired over the years, never to be looked at again.
Like it or not... that's how probably most of these Red Boxes will be treated. A curiousity for a few hours after some impulse purchase, but never treated seriously by the kids who will play them. So to put anything in that box that raises the price point such that it can't be an impulse birthday purchase (because no parent would want to blow $40 on some random game for some random kid whose birthday party their child got invited to), or makes the game more involved and difficult to understand (thus making it even more unlikely the kid might latch onto the game) is complete folly.
If we're lucky, maybe one out of every ten kids who get this Red Box will consider playing again. And at that point... when the game tells you to pick up these next couple of products to continue the adventure, those kids will WANT to spend the money for it. They WON'T CARE that the starter set wasn't a so-called "complete game". They'll WANT to play it, and thus they'll spend the money TO play it. And while there may be that small, sliver of kids who will want to play it again but not want to actually spend money on it... at the very least the starter set gives a little help in creating their own stuff as needed.
WotC is all about making money. As is every other game company. That's why you give the introductory game cheap or free, and hope to entice them enough to want to pay further. That's why Blizzard offers those "Play WoW for 10 hours free" cards. Get them hooked, so that they'll WANT to spend more money on it later.
I really like that it requires nobody to instruct you as to how to play, it takes you through an adventure that you can read by yourself to get oriented to how to play the game and afterwards you have a viable character.
The (low) price of the product probably dictated what could fit into the product, and it was very likely a trade off to keep the price down yet have something that new players would enjoy. It is a starter set after all. My expectation is that whenever I am looking at a starter, it's going to be limited in what it can do, it's a sample of the game, not the full game.
There is an adventure packaged is there not? Does that not count for several hours of fun? How long would it take to play through the adventure? Divide that by the number of participants and figure out the fun for value... I am willing to bet it's a pretty good deal when compared to almost anything else.
It includes everything you need to run that game. Tokens, maps, adventure, character sheets, and dice. If I wasn't playing D&D and spotted this in the store, I would think it was really great that it included everything... otherwise I would return it as a piece of crap that wasn't playable.
Lastly... we ENWorld folks are not really the primary target of this product. In fact, I don't think even our friends and family are the target of this product unless they live far away. Because our friends and family would ask us about D&D if they were interested and we would probably say "Here is what you need... PHB (or rules compendium), Heroes of the fallen lands, etc" instead of saying buy the red box. If you had someone far away where you couldn't be there to show them how to play... which product would you direct them to?
Anyhow, I plan on picking up the red box to check it out, and probably will get some copies as gifts to give out this holiday season to my friends and family who do not play D&D and live far away.
__________________ Join me the 1st Saturday of every month at the Pasadena D&D Meetup!
WotC is all about making money. As is every other game company. That's why you give the introductory game cheap or free, and hope to entice them enough to want to pay further. That's why Blizzard offers those "Play WoW for 10 hours free" cards. Get them hooked, so that they'll WANT to spend more money on it later.
Yes, but there's a difference between the "Red Box" and Blizzard's free trial cards for WoW. The Red Box isn't FREE!
"Get them hooked with a super-limited experience" is a fine marketing idea for a free product. It is a terrible, sneaky, underhanded tactic for a product people shell out good money for.
We can debate the value for money that D&D offers until the cows come home. I think it's spectacular. But the point is that to get someone who's never played to truly understand that, you have to convey that D&D offers an unlimited game experience that is infinitely replayable. To properly convey that, you need to offer some level of that repeatability in your introductory product. Without that, it's a piss-poor representation of what D&D is, which is what a Starter Set should tell people.
By offering no (or very limited) character creation rules and super-limited magic items, with one, maybe two adventures, you're inviting the comparison of D&D to a video game. All the Starter Set offers is "a few hours" of gameplay, once, with no graphics. It comes across as less replayable than Monopoly. Does that give a fair representation of what D&D is? Sure, if it were free, it would be fine. But it's not free.
Full character creation rules and enough variability in magic items and monsters that the DM could run an infinite number of 3-level (or even 2-level) campaigns out of the box would convey, very solidly, what D&D offers. The value for money it provides would be made obvious to anyone who was inclined to try it. Not everyone would move on to further products, but far more would than will do so from the super-limited trial the box currently provides. As is, the only people who will move on are the ones who are predisposed to "get" the game. And most of those people are already playing it. New customers will compare it to the latest video game and think: "That's all I get for $20? Meh, no thanks." You can tell people until the cows come home about all the great stuff "the full D&D experience" offers, but unless you show them, they won't GET it.
D&D isn't like most conventional games, because it's an experiential product. Most people don't really "get it" until they play. And the more you play, the more you get it. That's why it becomes an addictive hobby game for most of us who play it. Trust me, by offering a richer experience in the Starter Set, it would mean more people would buy the subsequent products, not less (as long as those products offered options and levels than the Starter Set lacked). It baffles me that WotC doesn't seem to get this.
The new "Red Box" does a great job of explaining the game, and a pretty good job of conveying the gameplay experience, and for that I give it kudos. But if it also did a great job of conveying the game's infinite replayability, it would be perfect.
Last edited by JohnSnow; 3rd September 2010 at 06:36 PM..
"Get them hooked with a super-limited experience" is a fine marketing idea for a free product. It is a terrible, sneaky, underhanded tactic for a product people shell out good money for.
I'd say it would be terrible, sneaky and underhanded if they gave you the box but inside you only found tokens, maps, a set of dice and a sheet of paper directing you to sign up for DDI content in order to play... but wow I don't agree with the words selected. It's an excellent value in my opinion, for the poster map alone I have spent more. It is a starter, my expectation is vastly different than yours I guess.
I don't have access to the box cover to read it, but do they list what you get inside and what the experience will be? Technically speaking, the solo adventure is a character creation method... just not what you were expecting... and far from efficient once you know how to play... but you can craft different characters using it.
__________________ Join me the 1st Saturday of every month at the Pasadena D&D Meetup!
Recent News
Join me the 1st Saturday of every month at the 
Linear Mode
