D&D for a Younger Audience

[WSmith]

It occurs to me that we should have Basic D&D, or BD&D (of course). Right now I believe the most basic system we have is the boxed set rules, right? I think even those are too complicated for the ages we're talking about. Some ideas:

-no stat numbers, only the bonuses. Your Strength isn't 16, it's 3. etc...

Great idea and nothing needs to be changed if the game stays under 4th level. Once a stat would improve, add a 0.5 to the number. (you could even do this during character generation, if the character has the higher of the two in the bonus chat, put a 0.5 so they know if the get to 4th level the bouns/stat can increase from 3 to 4, otherwise they get a 0.5 at 4th level.

-very basic classes and races. As discussed in many other threads: knight, thief, wizard, archer, fairy...

Yes. Keeping the classes simple keeps the rules simple.

-Ooh, hey, instead of using a battlemat or grid layout at all, how about simplified wargames-type rules using large areas, perhaps the floor? The entire room could be what's around them, and they'd use action figures to represent their characters. Just a thought.

Admit it! You played with your Star Wars figures like the rest of us! There was a coffee table in Mom's LR that was always the lauchpad for the X-Wing.

I'd really like to see someone come up with a standard set of basic rules. Personally, I'd like it much more than the endless middle-earth/space/horror games we see people burning their spare time with.

I would love to see more basic, user friendly, newbie oriented form of the game. A lot of people, probably the majority, disagree with me when I say there should be a Basic game. The AG is good, but the problem is no CharGen rules.

Dr. Midnight, I am not really sure what you mean about the ME/space/horror thingy? Are you talking about the settings themsleves?

 

[mmadsen]

I'd really like to see someone come up with a standard set of basic rules.

I think you could simplify the game tremendously. Consider this, just three stats:

• Strength -- Strength, Constitution, and the Fortitude Save.
• Reflexes -- Dexterity, and the Reflex Save; maybe perception (one aspect of Wisdom) and even some social abilities (Cha when used to Bluff, etc.).
• Wisdom -- Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma (at least for spellcasting), and the Will Save.

Then we could reduce the classes to three: Warrior (Strength), Rogue (Reflexes), and Wizard (Wisdom) -- with lots and lots of specific examples, or sub-classes: Knight (Lancelot), Outlaw (Robin Hood), Wizard (Merlin), etc.

A character's class could subsume his stats entirely.

 

[Dr Midnight]

I just mean the hundreds of conversions and adaptions of genres or properties to d20 rules. I don't really need to play superheroes or to try d20 in the Buffyverse. I think SOMEONE should try to make a set of basic rules that kids could follow. I just do not have the time, or the reason (no kids of my own, and I don't know any to playtest with) to do it myself. I'd just really like to see it available by the time I have some kids to play with.

 

[WSmith]

Dr. Midnight, now that I know what you mean, I can't agree with you more. I was in the process of striping down, (mostly omissions not changes) the d20 rules to a basic form, 4 races, 4 classes, for levels 1-5. It would be designed to be overlaid with the Core rules once at 5-6th level.

However, after seeing your idea and mmadsen's, I think I need to make it even MORE simple. Just off the top of my head, using the above ideas:

Stats: Strength, Dex, Mental, (this will be the actual modifier like Dr. said, 2, 3)

Races:
Human: no bonus to stat, but comp'ed some other was
Dwarf: racial bonus to STR
Elf: racial bonus to Mental
Halfling: racial bonus to Dex

Classes:
Warrior: Class bonus to FORT, (2 feats, no equip restrictions )
Rogue: Class bonus to REF (get points to specialize in some type actions, like moving silently, or disableing devices)
Wizard: Class bonus to WILL (spells)

Humans get an extra feat

Saves would be (stat+race bonus if any+ class bonus if any).

There are no skills, just actions that a rogue can focus their points on. (calling it by another name)

Hum, it is pretty rough but has potential. I will need to work on it.

 

[mmadsen]

As with any group of players you've got to find out what they like. Of the top of my head I think that a Harry Potter themed campaign could be a huge amount of fun for a group of 8-year olds.

Yes, definitely. One rule change I consider a must: introduce a spellcasting roll with failures and fumbles. Nothing's more fun -- and genre appropriate -- than a spell gone awry!

 

[mmadsen]

Dinosaurs.

That is so dead-on, Chronosome. From an 8-year-old's perspective, it's probably a privilege to get eaten by a T-Rex, let alone to kill one or get the chance to ride one!

 

[mmadsen]

I ran a holiday-con at a friend's house over just last Christmas and New Year's. We played several days straight, 6-14 hours each. There were eight lads, 10-14 years old. Only two had ever played D&D at all. Even that wasn't much. These lads were just blown away by the game.

Very cool, SHARK.

They were so into it, wide eyed and everything.

Ah, youth! I remember those days...

Seriously though, I remember killing the same goblin and dying to the same carnivorous ape over, and over, and over again -- and loving it over, and over, and over again.

(1) Let the lads pretty much run whatever decent humanoid race they want.

Elves, Dwarves, Humans, Minotaurs, and Wolfmen were the popular choices. The boys were so jazzed imagining their cool teeth, or horns, or their various weapons. They were psyched!

Hehe. I can totally see that.

(2) Keep the action flowing!

That's an obvious one!

(3) Build in time for them to shop and learn about equipment.

I thought I was the only kid who enjoyed that kind of stuff...

(4) Integrate Time for them to talk with and relate to some of the strange creatures and races.

The boys just went nuts talking to Trolls, and negotiating with the Dwarves of Vandaghar. They were amazed at encountering flocks of red birds that talked, and elephant grass that lashed at them like long razor blades! They thought it was fun to talk to Ents, and to find strange, magical fruits.

Hey, I'd enjoy that too!

(5) Use lots of mythology, classic creatures, color, and direct plots.

I was going to make the same point to use classic monsters and archetypes. I'd even remove "confusing" D&D staples like Clerics and just bundle all spellcasters together as Wizards (or more likely Sorcerers, since spell prep might confuse things).

I love your point about color. That's the kind of thing we forget as we grow up. Talking bright red birds are more exciting than plain talking birds.

 

[mmadsen]

Pokemon is kinda like D&D for younger kids... almost

There was, for a while, a Pokemon roleplaying game. I forgot the term they used instead of "roleplaying" though. Storytelling? Adventure?

Anyway, a Pokemon-style D&D game wouldn't be too hard. Limit the magic system to just the summoning spells, require a separate spell for each creature, only allow "trainers" to "summon" creatures they've previous captured (no different from finding spells for a spellbook), etc. When the character goes up in level and can cast Summon II, the creatures (or some of them) can "evolve" to two hit dice.

Heck, this might make for a very interesting non-Pokemon game for adult players.

 

[mmadsen]

Instead of dying at 0-(-10), have the character knocked unconscious.

Like a lot of ideas on this thread, I wouldn't mind seeing this one in an "adult" game. For a heroic game, D&D certainly makes it hard to get captured instead of killed -- especially for high-level characters with lots of hit points. They take so much damage every round, but they're still only Disabled at exactly 0 hit points and Dying from -1 to -9.

Why not spread out Disabled to cover from 0 to -9 and Dying from -10 to -20, and improve the Stability percentage from 10% to 20% (or maybe a DC 20 Fort Save).

Besides, they might get tired of being knocked out and waking up in a giant size bird cage suspended several hundred feet above the checkered pattern marble floor.

Love it.

Limit classes to arcane spellcasters for the PCs.

That one caught me off guard. The common wisdom, after all, is that the Fighter's the easiest class to play.

These classes allow the DM to craft situations that don't neccisarily lead to drawing steel. It allows them to find creative ways to best opponents. Instead of killing the guard of the captured princess, cast sleep, or darkness, etc.

Great point. I was thinking of Fighters or Rogues with magical Talismans (or Potions) from a mentor.

Use non-standard locations themselves to fascinate players. Imagine the bird cage above, a floating cloud castle, a giant city made of jade/gold/glass/etc., an underwater domed city, castles that only appear when the moon is full, etc. This age group may find it easiler to suspend disbeilief before they get old, jaded and cynical like us.

All good suggestions.

Consider the focus of adventure trying to return home after some surprising event, such as a tornado, getting absorbed into a mirror, or lost in a snow storm only to come into a tropical clearing.

I definitely have to work that one into a campaign.

Make all adversarial monsters nocturnal. They have all day to roam the countryside, but they better be near a castle by sundown, as camping is very, very dangerious!

Good!

 

[tleilaxu]

Personally I think the division of magic into arcane and divine is one of the wonkiest things about dnd. Clerics aren't anything like real priests. I'd love to play in a game were there was just one class "Magus" or "Mystic" or something (even "Magic-user")... If you want to do something just roll DC and see the results...

for example... a 3rd level mystic tries to cast "wish" which has a DC of 36 or something. he rolls a 15 (including his bonus). as the result is -21 something bad happens (like he is turned into a toad)

All spells are availible but are a risk to cast...

hmm....