D&D 4e + new players = PURE WIN!!!

[Ethalias]

Sounds like awesome fun. I'm going to be running a game for some first-timers in a couple of weeks, so it's a great relief to hear an account of people picking up the rules easily. I had suspected that to be the case but the few people I've played with before have more of a background of rpgs/wargames, so it's hard to tell..

Do you have any advice as regards teaching the rudiments to new gamers e.g. what to explain up front and what to cover during play.. I'm planning on creating some pre-gens to save on time as at the moment it's planned as a one-shot.. That is unless I do a good enough job of convincing them to come back for more..

 

[Gothmog]

Great stuff! Sounds like an awesome session, great when the DM and players click on the same wavelength... especially on the first go.

"Neuropharmacology" sounds like something an evil wizard might practice...

Yeah, everyone was on the same wavelength, which is what surprised me so much. This is a system-independent feature, but I do think it might have a lot to do with many of the players being first-timers. Experienced gamers tend to come in with a lot of preconceptions about the "right" or "best" way to play, and all too often hold personal likes and opinions as absolute facts. Oddly enough, in a game all about creativity and choice, they tend to artificially restrict their own options by playing with a ruleset in mind first, and roleplaying second. I know I've been guilty of this a few times, but I find if I try to remember this and look at the game as a newbie, I have a lot more fun with a game and tend to have a better fit with a group.

The other thing I think the group picked up on was my enthusiasm for 4e, and how much I enjoy running and playing it. Having a GM who truly loves what they are doing and can't wait to see how their players respond makes a huge difference. Personally, I could never get this motivated or excited about the 3e games I ran- as others have pointed out, it felt more like a chore than fun to prep games. But hey, as long as the GM enjoys whatever system he's running, both his players and the GM win, and it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks.

As for me teaching Neuropharmacology, well... maybe I'm not an evil wizard, but I'm definitely a mad scientist.

 

[Gothmog]

Gothmog,

Thanks for a great post, you put a smile on a couple WOTC faces. Your campaign sounds like lot's of fun and I hope this game group becomes a longtime play group.

XP for you.

Hey Scott,

Glad I could give you guys the warm fuzzies. You all deserve it for giving us D&D 4e. I know you guys get some nasty flak about 4e, but those of us who do play 4e appreciate WotC's efforts and know it is a labor of love on the part of you guys (as every version of D&D has been). Thanks man.

I do have a question though that I've been curious about for a while. Both here and in other threads, I've seen a lot of people saying 4e is giving them an AD&D vibe during play. The POL thing strikes me as very AD&D, as does the emphasis on cooperative play, and the different design parameters for PCs and monsters- and I may be missing other things you guys considered during the design. Is this something you guys intentionally tried to incorporate into the design of 4e, is it a happy coincidence, or is my brain just playing tricks on me?

Anyway, I'll post more on Thursday after the session tomorrow night since a lot of folks are asking for a followup.

 

[Gothmog]

Do you have any advice as regards teaching the rudiments to new gamers e.g. what to explain up front and what to cover during play.. I'm planning on creating some pre-gens to save on time as at the moment it's planned as a one-shot.. That is unless I do a good enough job of convincing them to come back for more..

Well, in the initial session for character generation and campaign planning, we went over some of the terminology (AC, HP, defenses, etc), and I explained the core mechanic of the game (d20 + mods to beat a DC). I briefly talked about actions a PC could take in a round, and made a little cheat sheet for each of them explaining actions. The rest of the time we spent making characters, and me answering random questions from various players (how do rituals differ from powers, how do I know which kind of die to roll, etc).

We didn't do any sample combats before the first fight, and when we had that fight with the goblins, it went a little slower than normal due to questions. However, I think with 4e the mechanics are easy enough to understand and grasp during play that immersion in the game might be the best way to teach someone. Once they saw how skill checks worked in game, they got the idea really quickly, and after 3 rounds of combat, there were no more questions. Obviously, each group of people will be different, but I don't think there will be that much difference in how easily people will get the idea of 4e. My suggestion is just start playing and explain concepts as they come up, and don't worry about a lengthy explanation of game mechanics beforehand. Thats just going to curb the enthusiasm of new players for the game.

 

[CubeKnight]

Great stuff! Sounds like an awesome session, great when the DM and players click on the same wavelength... especially on the first go.

"Neuropharmacology" sounds like something an evil wizard might practice...

....you mean it's not? Excuse me while I go fix my DM notes

 

[Blizzardb]

Great tale! Have some XP

 

[CharlesRyan]

Sounds awesome.

This has been my experience too. Both of the D&D campaigns I play in include one or two people new to the game (or long-lapsed players); all have really gotten into it.

 

[Henry]

Is this something you guys intentionally tried to incorporate into the design of 4e, is it a happy coincidence, or is my brain just playing tricks on me?

I've gotten that, too - more of a Basic D&D thing, to me, but AD&D1, too. My speculation? Happy accident. Some basic concepts of how to do things from some of the older versions really worked well, and when they were experimenting with how to make things "funner, faster, stronger," these core ideas came back to the surface. An exact match it sure ain't, but the core ideas on things -- keeping combat relatively streamlined, having the mathematics support the rules (kind of an accident in AD&D in my opinion but it was there), reinforcing archetypes, reinforcing cooperation, giving the DM easy but powerful rules and structures to work with, and a host of other things that I'm forgetting right now -- those ideas are kind of timeless.

Gothmog, I'm really happy to hear a good old-fashioned "new group has a blast" story. Remember: If the players have never done the "you all meet in a bar/tavern" story before, it's new to them.

 

[Thanee]

'page 42' sounds like some kind of secret organization.



Bye
Thanee

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

'page 42' sounds like some kind of secret organization.

All claims on the existence of a C4bal or a Page 42 conspiracy are hoaxes. This has been proven time and time again. I recommend you to not spread more of such rumors, Bürger.