D&D 5E The new Dungeons & Dragons Starter Set - and online tools?

[Mistwell]

Mike's tweet said pretty much exactly that, but in only 140 characters.

I disagree. For example, Mearls did not say anything like, "the Starter set will contain more campaign-level material than pretty much any starter set I've seen, possibly including the original Basic D&D red box. "

 

[Umbran]

It is gimped, though - most groups, let's be real, really most groups running 5E, are going to be using stuff like Feats, and other "optional" elements. So it's low-value to start with.

Setting aside the fact that Mearls has noted the set is actually for GMs, not for players....

"Value" is relative.

To you, a geek so massive he hangs around on RPG message boards, it may be low value, sure.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Setting aside the fact that Mearls has noted the set is actually for GMs, not for players....

"Value" is relative.

To you, a geek so massive he hangs around on RPG message boards, it may be low value, sure.

Sorry, I think we're talking at cross-purposes. I was discussing the theoretical free downloadable product, rather than the starter set, which I think you're meaning. But I could be confused!

The starter set would be of value, I agree (I mean, I presume it will be), but I don't think limited, downloadable rules will do much to propel D&D forwards into the future.

Orrrr do you know something we don't and the starter set will be $20 in print and $0 download? Dun dun DUUUUUUUN!

 

[Blackwarder]

My guess is that there will be a full game downloadable from the WotC site. Like people are saying, it'll be like an updated play test. I think they may call that the "Basic" game. It'll have no feats or anything, but the characters you make with it will be compatible with characters from the "advanced" PHB.

Similarly; there will be a basic set of monsters and the basic information one needs to DM. Mearls mentioned a while ago that he like DMing tutorials to be on the site instead of in a ($50) book, so I think "how to DM" stuff is in this document to.


This is the "Basic Set" of our era—the core rules for free online. It's like WoW letting people play the first 20 levels free.


This is just my own rampant speculation.

Thaumaturge.

You beat me to it, I agree completely, you will have the basic rules online with 4 classes and 4 races no feats or skills or any other optional system and rule, probably up to level 10.

PHB, MM and DMG are for the standard game and advanced game.

Warder

 

[Callahan09]

Crippleware... Crippleware... Hmm...

For me, the Starter Set will be crippleware if and only if I have to "forget" and "relearn" rules in order to start using the Core Three. This was my major issue with the 4e Starter Set: I was presented with a character and rules that could not be reproduced according to the letter of the rules in the "Full Game", thus it was "Crippleware." If I can take everything I learn and utilize in the Starter Set, including any characters I might play with, and apply that stuff, without having to erase and overwrite certain aspects from my memory, to the Full Game, then it is NOT crippleware. In that case, it is a legitimate Introduction to the game, it is a slice that can be expanded upon, as opposed to a poor, illogical, un-meaningful analogy to the full game that doesn't so much help you understand the full game but rather give you something that looks kind of like it, but isn't it and isn't compatible with it. I want an actual piece of the full game.

Based on everything I've read, I am fairly confident that this is what we will get, but, I don't *really* know. Will have to wait and see.

I thought this was a quite interesting statement from the RPGPundit that I didn't see quoted previously in this thread:

https://plus.google.com/108006304228021078063/posts/AEAWuzFiBfz

if you are an old-school gamer that was considering buying some product from the new line, the one you will probably want to get is the Starter.

Doesn't sound like he believes it's crippleware, because if he thought it was, it wouldn't be a recommended option for the "old-school gamer". Right?

 

[thalmin]

The starter set is the first impression product for the game.

Producing an introductory set that fails to be a an actual tabletop rpg tells me that the company producing it really doesn't GET the most basic concept of tabletop rpgs, which is creating characters and having adventures.

I'm not sure that character creation is on everybody's list of "most basic concepts." Playing a character and having adventures, sure. For a beginner, it's not easy to create a character when you don't know what is good, bad, meaningful, or useful.

I will just have to wait and see what comes up on July 3 and 15.

 

[Blackbrrd]

The starter set is the first impression product for the game.

Tabletop rpgs should be playable with only pencil, paper, & dice. When electronic are required, and not supplementary to playing the game (including chargen) the game has ceased to be a tabletop rpg.

Producing an introductory set that fails to be a an actual tabletop rpg tells me that the company producing it really doesn't GET the most basic concept of tabletop rpgs, which is creating characters and having adventures.

The answer to this apparently is to wait for an expensive 3 volume set from a company that proved on its first release, that it doesn't really understand rpgs and what is most essential to include in one?

We will just have to disagree on this one. I haven't been creating characters by hand since 3e in 1998. 90% of the book reading I am doing is on a smartphone/tablet. I see no reason to be tied to paper to play a TTRPG.

 

[Mistwell]

More from Pundit, for what it is worth:

What part of "this will absolutely not be crippleware" is in the least bit 'weasely'?
You could infer that I'm lying, if you think I'm a liar.

Alternately, you could trust me in that I sincerely feel that the starter set is going to be good.

No. My position (again, the ONLY actually INFORMED rather than speculative position here) is that this set will be specifically ideal for bringing new players into the game.

The D&D starter set will in pretty well every respect end up being a better deal than the pathfinder set.

 

[tuxgeo]

More from Pundit, for what it is worth:

Originally Posted by RPGPundit

The D&D starter set will in pretty well every respect end up being a better deal than the pathfinder set.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Thanks for providing the quotes from RPGPundit.

Personally, I'm not sure about it yet. This is not to state that I think he's a liar; but I do wonder how a set without chargen included within it could be better than the Pathfinder set: didn't the latter include chargen?
​

 

[the Jester]

I have to say, the vehemence of the discussion around this topic screams, "They should have character generation in the Starter Set!" Not doing so is only going to alienate a bunch of people, and "aimed at newbs" or not, I would think that WotC wants to sell product.

Now, rpgpundit's words are great and all, and I'm glad that it sounds like there will be some kind of character generation option from the very beginning, but if it's not an online tool, why isn't it in the box?

If it is an online tool, that's fine; but since, at least for the first month or so, it sounds likely to be the only option, I'm not happy with the notion. You absolutely should be able to play D&D with paper, pencil, dice and box or books, and I do include chargen as part of playing the game. To me, character generation is as fundamental to D&D as elves, Strength scores and hit points. I find its omission from the box people are supposed to use to start playing to be baffling and distressing. I just don't see the sense in it. But of course, if WotC would actually tell us what they're doing, I might change my tune. At the moment, two months from release, I'm feeling, for the first time, reluctant to purchase that Starter Set on day 1... which was, until the no-pc-gen news hit, an absolutely sure buy for me.

What