The Beginner Box

[enpeze66]

What really counts is if Paizo goes the way of a simplified rule system or just a teaser. THAT is important for me and nothing else. If it is just a teaser to lure people to the complex monster game Pathfinder than I am not interested. If it is really a extremely simplified but full game on its own with the option to play from 1-5 and further 64 page "expert" box with levels 6-10 in a year, then I am in.

The 64 page Players booklet which explains every rule from chargen to combat, skills and spells makes me believe that its the latter, because there is no way to explain the basics of the current 520p pathfinder rulebook 1.0 in only a few 64 pages. So it has to be either a VERY simplified system or a VERY small font.

 

[BigWeather]

I still think they wold be better off giving a set of simpler and more basic rules that provide unlimited play to entice new customers into their Pathfinder lines of products. ... So I was hoping/expecting yet another ground breaking approach to this type of product. I'm just sort of disappointed that Paizo opted to go the same old "done and done again" route. ... Oh well. I'll still be like many of you, give Paizo the vast majority of their sales on this product, read it over, likely pull out the cool gizmo's to use with my real rules set, and put this box with its little rule books up on the book shelf, never to be used.

I'm confused. Has Paizo actually stated that it won't be a simpler rules set? I'll be disappointed as well if it is just levels 1 through 5. But I hadn't heard that that was certain to be the case.

 

[Beginning of the End]

This set will let you play the game from 1st level to 5th level. On the slow XP track that can take quite some time to play through. You will likely be able to pick up PFS mods, or other early level mods and supplement your playing with those mods. The set seems to come with everything needed to play the game - dice, tokens of some sort, flip mat and such. A buyer literally gets a game in a box at a reasonable price and for much less monetary commitment than going the core rulebook route and the additional things you would need to get started that way.

... which makes it just like roughly half of the other pay-to-preview product that has failed in the last 25 years.

I don't regard the Holmes-Moldvay-Mentzer sets as "pay to preview"; they were all fully playable games with character generation, lots of monsters & treasure, and 3 levels of play; potentially months of entertainment.

Holmes comes pretty close to being a pay-to-preview product. But even Holmes was supported with an entirely independent product line.

As Pathfinder aims at something more akin to a month per level model it is likely that once a week play will take five months to reach the final level in the game.

Maybe "length of preview" combined with full compatibility will do it. (Based on TSR's lack of success with similar products, though, I doubt it.)

The problem with the pay-to-preview model is three-fold:

(1) People who research your products will note that it's pay-to-preview and will generally prefer to buy the full version instead of the dead-end product designed to be stuck in a closet and never used again. (People don't buy demos.)

(2) People who don't research your products, buy the product you tell them to buy, and then discover that it's something designed to be completely replaced in X amount of time will generally (albeit not universally) be dissatisfied with being misled.

(3) If you're joining a group that's already playing, you will buy the rules that they're using -- not some other version of the rules.

If Paizo succeeds, it will be because the Beginner Box is treated like a full game and results in a significant number of players running full campaigns using the Beginner Box and not the PFRPG core rulebook.

Given that:

(a) It's called the "Beginner Box"; and
(b) The bulk of Paizo's existing business plan is aimed at play which extends beyond 5th level

I'm skeptical that this will prove true.

But, as I say, I would be happy to be surprised here.

 

[IronWolf]

So the whole purpose of this product, to draw completely new people in, will likely be as small as it has always been. Why? Because people don't like buying a "partial" game. We don't buy introductory versions of Monopoly, or Dungeons and Dragons, etc.... except maybe as a novelty. We all buy and play the full and real deal.

I think more people are willing to spend $35 on a boxed set that has everything they need to play the game from both the GM and player perspective than to spend $50 just to get the core rulebook and still need dice and monster books to get rolling.

We all buy and play the full and real deal? I bet a good many of us got started with one of the classic box sets from back in the TSR days. I know I did. Cause everything came in the box that I needed to play. No one cared it was for levels 1 through 3 or that you could get more options in the AD&D books.

So if they really want this product to be truly different that the previous products, and to provide more sales and new customers base than the previous versions of this product concept, then they need to be truly different.

From the looks of it they are going after the classic basic sets. Not these sets WotC has released in past years that were called basic or starter sets. Those classic basic sets are typically well thought of from what I have seen.

Which is sell the majority of the product to people already playing the game, and get very few truly new people, or groups of people, joining the ranks through this product.

Again - think early basic sets, not what WotC released as a basic or starter set. Lots of people entered this hobby through one of the classic basic sets. People that weren't already playing the game.

Oh well. I'll still be like many of you, give Paizo the vast majority of their sales on this product, read it over, likely pull out the cool gizmo's to use with my real rules set, and put this box with its little rule books up on the book shelf, never to be used.

Instead of buying it and putting it up on the shelf - why not buy it and give it as a gift to a niece or nephew or neighborkid or Toys for Tots. Paizo is going to provide people with a great tool for people new to the hobby - help get it into their hands.

 

[IronWolf]

... which makes it just like roughly half of the other pay-to-preview product that has failed in the last 25 years.

Sure - if the classic basic sets were failures. You know, the ones that a good many gamers started with? WotC has struggled with the basic and starter sets in the recent years. But the early TSR basic sets were entry points for a lot of fantasy RPGers and the description of the set thus far seems much more akin to the classic sets.

But even Holmes was supported with an entirely independent product line.

Why support it with an entirely independent product line? Why not tap into products you already have out in the market or have coming to the market in the future? Why not make it so your Pathfinder Beginner Box character can drop into a PFS game? Splitting the gaming systems you support seems silly when you have product that can work with the Beginner Box.

(1) People who research your products will note that it's pay-to-preview and will generally prefer to buy the full version instead of the dead-end product designed to be stuck in a closet and never used again. (People don't buy demos.)

Except some of these people will be kids who don't have a ton of cash at hand. So a ready to play box with everything you need at a retail price of $35 suddenly makes a whole lot more sense.

Remember - you get dice, flip-mats and tokens with this. Plus enough rules to take you through five levels. With slow XP advancement that is many months of play from a single box. And if you do decide to move on you can still use your dice, tokens and flipmats.

(2) People who don't research your products, buy the product you tell them to buy, and then discover that it's something designed to be completely replaced in X amount of time will generally (albeit not universally) be dissatisfied with being misled.

I obviously can't speak for others, but I never felt misled when I bought a classic D&D Basic set many years ago.

(3) If you're joining a group that's already playing, you will buy the rules that they're using -- not some other version of the rules.

Probably the only point I can agree with you on. Yeah, joining an existing group is a different beast. First, you can likely watch or start playing without the book - so it is a trial run. Then when you do buy you know you will have tutors help you along the way, dice you can borrow if need be, the GM will already have flipmats and monster books, etc. I don't think the boxed set is being targeted for people joining an existing group.

But, as I say, I would be happy to be surprised here.

And I hope you are surprised! I think it is good to see them trying to capture what it was that brought many to the hobby years ago. I think it is good for them to realize the core rulebook can be quite intimidating to a new player (I've seen posters here say it is intimidating to them even as a veteran RPG player).

 

[Mark CMG]

As a further clarification, note that the minis won't be included at all in the beginner's box. They will just be available as a separate product.

Yup. I just think it is nice that they don't jack up the box price by automatically including them since some folks will love getting the simplified rules but don't want or need the minis. Keeping them separate allows those who want them to get them. I think it is a good move on their part.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Sure - if the classic basic sets were failures. You know, the ones that a good many gamers started with?

I've been pretty explicit in what the differences are. I'm not going to waste my time discussing this with someone who can't be bothered to read the thread. Sorry.

 

[enpeze66]

I think it is good to see them trying to capture what it was that brought many to the hobby years ago.

That remains to be seen. While the BECM boxes brought me to the hobby, the last 3x and 4 incarnations of the worlds most "beloved (and hated)" D&D game have done the opposite to me. They brought me to abandon D&D as a game system and to play Savage Worlds or RuneQuest.

I think it is good for them to realize the core rulebook can be quite intimidating to a new player (I've seen posters here say it is intimidating to them even as a veteran RPG player).

This is true. It does not depend on the experience of a player (after playing for nearly 3 decades now, I consider myself as experienced as a player can be) but on several other factors if he likes the overcomplicated D&D versions of the WotC era or not.

The problem is for example that on the internet forums like enworld you most likely find numbercrunching "nerds" or "supernerds" as posters, which have a high tolerance to the last D&D rule editions despite their insane rule volume. I guess many of them even embrace the complexity and react hostile if someone wants to navigate the whole game system to lighter rules. Its like taking away a favorite number crunching nerd toy. But one have to see it in this way: without sailing the boat into shallower waters it will entirely sink sooner or later. The current overcomplicated D&D versions are not a solution to save the p&p hobby. They only serve a nerdy number crunching minority of a customers base which shrinks from year to year.

To reach the millions of older frustated players which gave up on the new edition rules and quit because they didnt care about balancing, miniature-use or a zillion of redundant spells, extensive monster stat blocks write ups of one full page, or 1000p+ rules, or chargen "options" or optimal character builts etc., you have to introduce a full simplified game system with only a few rule pages.

Additionally to state that the new PF basic box is only for beginners is very untrue and a narrow sight of facts. Fact is that many old hands despise the complexity of current D&D incarnations and dont play it anymore because of this. For them a simplified D&D version (like the 64p of the new PF player handbook) would be ideal.

Is the new box this simplified full game version (I hope) or just one more unnecessary teaser to lure people into the normal PF game? (I hope not!) We will see it in some months.

 

[S'mon]

BTW I've just ordered "Crypt of the Everflame"; I have the flipmat for it and it seems like it might be a good intro adventure for new players that I can run with the Beginner box.

 

[IronWolf]

I've been pretty explicit in what the differences are. I'm not going to waste my time discussing this with someone who can't be bothered to read the thread. Sorry.

Er, okay?

I've read the whole thread. I have seen lots of unbacked mentions of how unsuccessful previous sets were and I've seen you drop the phrase "pay-to-preview" as many times as one can in a post. You did break out why the "pay-to-preview" model is doomed to fail to which I replied on each point.

There was this I suppose...

It's not like WotC was the first company to produce these pay-to-preview products. TSR produced something like a dozen of them in a wide variety of formats. All of them reportedly had mediocre sales.

But then that was followed immediately by this:

Separate Basic and Advanced product lines seem to have worked from 1977 until they stopped doing that. Pay-to-preview products? They have apparently never worked in the history of the roleplaying industry. (And I'm unaware of any other industry even trying it.)

Paizo is including two more levels than the original basic sets and has a path forward should you want to do so - just like there used to be when the expert set came out or a person could choose to turn then into the land of AD&D. They really seem geared on recreating the feel of these original sets than anything in recent years.

I don't see the need to make a divergent product line to be successful with this.

In either case - I suspect you and I are just going to have to agree to disagree on much of this. Besides in the end both of us appear to want Paizo to be successful with this. I just have more optimism that they can than you though it does not appear either of us wants them to fail. I am good with that.