D&D 5E A better basics

[guachi]

If I had to make "D&D for Dummies" I'd make character generation even easier.

They try to do that with a standard array and equipment choices of a or b but it still takes too long and these choices are buried in too much other text. I'd have premade PCs of various types with the bare minimum of description for items/abilities/stats and then page number references for further clarification.

I believe there are four classes and four races in the Basic Rules. Since there is only one subclass choice, that's 16 different PCs (minimum) you'd need to make stats for. You could probably cram four on a page or two on a page if you wanted a bit more breathing room.

If you really wanted, you could make variations for each, like a strength-based human fighter and a dexterity based human fighter. Or you could leave those differences to the races so Human and Dwarf are strength-based and the elf and halfling are dexterity-based.

In any event, all the player would have to do is say "I wanna be an elf fighter with a bow" and you hand him the book and he copies the stats down. It's pregens, basically, just a lot of them.

 

[thalmin]

So the basic rules we have are only really basic in that there's not much there, rather than being easy to play (I'm looking at you Wizard with your decision-paralysis inducing spells).

So what classes and races would you choose if you could make your own Basic handbook?

I would use the D&D Starter Set. Easy to learn, easy to play. Nice set of pregens.

 

[S'mon]

Clearly you misunderstand. I'm not asking what you would put in a "Demo Handbook". I'm asking what you'd put in "5E for Dummies".

Totem Barbarian, definitely - players find it very easy to play, it's very tough and has simple but elegant special abilities.

Rogue (prob Assassin) - intuitive, classic class, not superpowerful but decent.

Fighter (Champion) - my tweaked version that gets abilities 3/long rest not 1/short rest.

Some kind of Arcanist class. Probably 5e Bard is best since it combines healing with a wide variety of other powers, but I'd change the name to Loremaster or Scholar. This is not a very dummy-oriented class, but
spellcasting PCs is very D&D and it could be the second PC for more experienced players.

I would just have human PCs and standard array 16 14 13 12 10 9 for attributes.

 

[Croesus]

Are you trying to be hard?
I don't care what's DnD at it's core. I want to know what you'd put in a handbook designed to introduce players to DnD without completely overwhelming them. That means keeping it as simple as possible.

I personally believe 5E is pretty darn simple as is, but it can always be simplified further. Heck, we could just make it where in a combat round, every character and monster rolls a single die, and whoever rolls lowest dies. Very simple...but it's no longer D&D. So while you appear to be soliciting ideas for simplification, my question is: what's your guiding principle, i.e., how will you know when you've gotten there, and yet still have a system that you can call D&D? No matter how simple you make it, someone will say "My new players are having trouble understanding the game, so it needs to be simpler." To repeat: How do you know when you've gone too far?

Personally I would swap out the Wizard for the Land Druid, although I'm not sure about the rest.

At which point, it's no longer D&D to me. See the problem?

With any game system, there are trade-offs. Simulation vs. ease of play. Balance of classes vs. uniqueness of roles. Tactical decision making vs. "beer and pretzels" play. No system can do everything. While soliciting random ideas may can be useful, in the end, I think you need to first define what must be in a basic system, then build around that. Trying to simplify by taking stuff away will almost certainly lead everyone down rabbit-holes. YMMV

 

[Alexemplar]

D&D has always needed a simple "Mage" class designed along the lines of the 3e Warlock. Basically an at-will blast that scales with level, and a small selection of additional supernatural powers explained in plain language. Something that doesn't require the player to have to browse through dozens upon dozens of spells during character creation/level-up and when their turn comes up, they can say, "I blast it with my magic" and know they're making a mechanically sound choice.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Agreed on the starter set.

There are pregens, and a reduced spell list. I've seen 9-year-olds make and play wizards using that.
Even using the PHB, the "quick build" rules give perfectly viable suggestions to remove the need to make a choice (e.g. PHB p. 113 for the Wizard.)

Really, "decision-paralysis" is something I see in experienced players, because they think there is some optimized choice. It is not something I have encountered with new players or with younger ones -- they hear the name of the spell, and roll with it. I'm not saying your players don't feel this, but it is surprising that it's an obstacle given the support that exists.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Wizard with a preselected spellbook. Cleric with a list of recomended spells.
It isn't exactly steing theory level of difficulty...

 

[Satyrn]

Aye. I don't think anything would need to be done beyond reducing the number of spells available and making some pregend.

Well, also don't present 20 class levels. Probably just 10.

 

[the Jester]

Are you trying to be hard?
I don't care what's DnD at it's core. I want to know what you'd put in a handbook designed to introduce players to DnD without completely overwhelming them. That means keeping it as simple as possible.

New players aren't stupid. They're fine with the full suite of options. They don't need a simple, for-dummies version, at least in my experience and opinion. I bring new players into the game fairly often and have never found it necessary to dumb the game down or limit their options.

 

[Yunru]

New players aren't stupid. They're fine with the full suite of options. They don't need a simple, for-dummies version, at least in my experience and opinion. I bring new players into the game fairly often and have never found it necessary to dumb the game down or limit their options.

That's nice for you, but the last group I was in, for an example, spent five hours creating the mechanical side of their level 1 characters because of decision paralysis.