Why is the original red box so special

[Odhanan]

Yeah I totally agree with that part. At the time the concept of a game without a game board was pretty novel. So definitely worth citing as a distinguishing feature.

Absolutely. I guess now one could say that times have changed, and that the D&D game doesn't try to compete or differentiate itself from boardgames now, but rather from MMOs and other forms of electronic entertainment. But wouldn't the "imagination/no boardgame/no limits" argument be just as valid now as it was then?

In MMOs you don't have a boardgame, but you sure do have limits to a map. You can only go through a wall if the option was programmed in the game in the first place. You can only get that Cow Hat only if it's been put in the game by its graphic designers. Not so in a tabletop game! Whatever you imagine can take place in this game!

That's a fantastic argument to oppose to MMOs, from my POV.

 

[delericho]

It was simple. It was fun. What more do you need?

Certainly, if it wasn't for that set, I would not now be a gamer.

 

[pawsplay]

People who weren't around in that time period just don't understand how infused into pop culture D&D was at that time period.

I had action figures. There was a cartoon. Toys R Us sold not only game books, but modules, lead miniatures (!), illustrated monster cards, and an entire shelf of non-poseable figurines of monsters and folks slightly smaller than most action figures. I had a crew of hill dwarf figures, some skeletons, and some men-at-arms; I swore then and now I lacked the liquidity to purchase an otyugh when I had the chance! My Clash of the Titans figures had many a battle with those skeletons.

In many ways, collecting pre-painted minis is a reincarnation of my lust for collecting monster toys.

... Still working on the otyugh.

 

[Votan]

It was the first complete set of rules that I ever had for any RPG.

Me too. I think I had the AD&D PHB first, but this is the set that taught me how to play the game, admittedly poorly. The low level range (1 to 3) was a feature, as well, as D&D performed very well at these levels and you got used to the game before seeing the complexity of higher levels.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

For me, Red Box was special for the same reason my first kiss was special....

It was my first. I didn't completely understand it, so it was mysterious. It gave me a warm fuzzy, and deep down I knew it was gonna eventually lead something awesome.


Nah, not really. I just thought it was fun as heck, way better than any other game I was playing at the time. It was remarkably complete and came in a size easily manageable for a 10 year old. Crucially, it was also presented well enough to make learning it entertaining.

 

[Deuce Traveler]

The three reasons why the Red Box stood out for me:

1.) It was the first gaming set I was given back in 1984, and I was 8 years old. I was able to read and understand it at this young age. That book and other DnD books taught me how to read in a way, probably to the same effect as the Harry Potter novels had on the young.

2.) The artwork and the language of the adventures inside book was very high-fantasy, making you feel like a hero in an epic. There is a picture of what might be the character from the solo adventure fighting a dragon on the cover. Other pictures of you as this hero are also found throughout the bok.

3.) This was a solo adventure before read-your-own-adventure books were big. Therefore, it had a huge effect as I was immersed into the DnD world and the fight between the protaganist (you), Aleena, and Bargle. ("Aleena! No! Damn you, Bargle! Damn you!") Do a Google search for 'Kill Bargle' to see how much this little solo adventure effected many RPGers today.

 

[Vartan]

Not flamebait, I'm honestly curious.

I was a wee tot when the original Red Box released in '83.

What was it about the product and the time it was released that made it worth recreating almost 30 years later?

I have a copy in my game library, but it's hard to figure out what is so special about it that it's treated with such reverence now. The D&D rules compendium hard cover seems like a better rule book. The earlier D&D products seem more groundbreaking?

Why is the original red box so special? Nostalgia. I started playing in 1990 when I was 11/12 years old and the Basic Rules boxed set was my introduction to the hobby, as I suspect it was for a lot of players between the time of its release 1991 and the publication of the Rules Cyclopedia in 1991. 8 years of service as the de facto gateway product for D&D earned the red box a special place in the hearts of many gamers.

Why was the original red box so special? It was a good way to start playing. The cover art was (and still is) awesome. It came with dice, a "choose your own adventure" thing to get you started, rules for character creation and a lengthy introductory adventure. It was accessible but fairly meaty, and it served as a good "survey" of the D&D/AD&D landscape at the time.

The Rules Cyclopedia is definitely a better core reference for the BECMI rules set. If I hadn't switched over to AD&D 2nd Edition within a few months of my first D&D then game I almost certainly would have used it. As it happens, I was invested in AD&D before the RC ever saw print. A friend of mine plays in a long-running BECMI game and they covet copies of that book.

 

[Jasperak]

Absolutely. I guess now one could say that times have changed, and that the D&D game doesn't try to compete or differentiate itself from boardgames now, but rather from MMOs and other forms of electronic entertainment. But wouldn't the "imagination/no boardgame/no limits" argument be just as valid now as it was then?

In MMOs you don't have a boardgame, but you sure do have limits to a map. You can only go through a wall if the option was programmed in the game in the first place. You can only get that Cow Hat only if it's been put in the game by its graphic designers. Not so in a tabletop game! Whatever you imagine can take place in this game!

That's a fantastic argument to oppose to MMOs, from my POV.

Right, Dungeons & Dragons, no computer or monthly subscription fee needed to play. I wonder if that would compete with the MMO crowd?

 

[Vartan]

Right, Dungeons & Dragons, no computer or monthly subscription fee needed to play. I wonder if that would compete with the MMO crowd?

Sounds accurate to me, except for the part about competing with the MMO crowd: D&D isn't competing with WoW. D&D borrowed from MMOs in the same way that MMOs borrowed from D&D. D&D's developers see MMOs as a source of potential customers--to pretend otherwise would be silly--but D&D is still D&D. If a group of players somehow had no way of accessing the internet then the most recent rules for D&D would still be vastly more accessible than any previous version of the rules, no subscription fee required to play

 

[Jasperak]

Sounds accurate to me, except for the part about competing with the MMO crowd: D&D isn't competing with WoW. D&D borrowed from MMOs in the same way that MMOs borrowed from D&D. D&D's developers see MMOs as a source of potential customers--to pretend otherwise would be silly--but D&D is still D&D. If a group of players somehow had no way of accessing the internet then the most recent rules for D&D would still be vastly more accessible than any previous version of the rules, no subscription fee required to play

I did not mean to imply that D&D was trying to stop people from playing MMOs, just siphon off enough for PnP RPGs to remain viable. There's nothing stopping people from doing both.

CRPGs and MMOs are so prevalent today that I wonder if WOTC (and any other PnP for that matter) would be better served with their product in Game Stop and next to video and computer games instead of in the toy and boardgame sections of Target and Walmart. I vaguely remember some PnP in a Game Stop years ago but it may have just been guides for WOW and the like.