D&D 5E Street date for D&D Next Starter Game is July 15

[delericho]

No.. from your point of view of their PR it was a bad thing.

And it is your point of view that it's fine. That's no more objective truth than my position.

Especially when the other option is to give potentially incorrect information (if it hasn't been finalized) just to placate a bunch of "I want it now!" people who couldn't even do anything with the information even if they had it.

They could, and in some cases did, make buying decisions based on that information.

 

[fjw70]

And it is your point of view that it's fine. That's no more objective truth than my position.




They could, and in some cases did, make buying decisions based on that information.

The the funny thing about watching you two argue is that in my mind you two are the same poster. It must be the predominantly yellow avatars.

 

[delericho]

The the funny thing about watching you two argue is that in my mind you two are the same poster. It must be the predominantly yellow avatars.

Heh. I have been known to argue with myself, but not today. Nonetheless, I shall endeavour to stop - I doubt anyone is really benefitting from it.

 

[Morrus]

Of course not. That's why I think they haven't succumbed to the "pressure" to release a real date until they're good and ready. Because they have no need or desire to placate anyone complaining about it.

So you've gone from "they're not placating X because X is not statistically relevant" to "they don't have to placate anybody"? Yes, the latter is true; they're just a company selling a thing, not a politician who said something offensive. It ain't your initial statement, though.

 

[Li Shenron]

Hmm. Still holding out hope that the Starter is actually "an adventure box" with pre-gens, starter rules, a 10 level adventure, and some dice.

If newbies like playing the game, they could then pick up the PHB for character creation and the DMG for creating adventures.

Yep, to me, that sounds like an awful starter set- I don't want pregens, I want to make a character. I don't want a single prewritten adventure, I want the tools to make my own. A starter set that is an adventure in disguise is just a nonstarter for me (pun intended).

I don't really think a "Starter Set" is meant for people who played D&D for years and want to "try out 5e" before buying. It's primarily meant for newbies as an introduction to the RPG hobby, that's why it has a truly low price tag.

I can't really say what a newbie needs, because when I bought my first D&D books I had already played in someone else's game so I already knew what the game was all about... and then I bought the 3e core books and I went straight to DM a homebrew game! I don't think the Starter Set will lack character creation rules at all, but it might well have some pregens and an introductory adventure, because that's something potentially useful for newbies.

But experienced gamers definitely don't need a starter set. They already know what the game is all about. They probably already have too many dice and minis and maps. They already spend hundreds of bucks per year on RPG books and materials, so they can buy the PHB and get a better opinion than from a starter set which has only the "Basic" rules. And if they really want to "try out 5e" before spending 50$ for the PHB, they had 2 years and a half of public playtest, they can still find the playtest rules if they want them, and have plenty of trials before buying. The playtest rules aren't going to be that different from the final game in terms of "how 5e works", if the real purpose is truly to just try out the general mechanics of 5e. Also, the starter "Basic" rules definitely give a much more limited view of the whole 5e experience, despite being the final version.

 

[Hutchimus Prime]

So you've gone from "they're not placating X because X is not statistically relevant" to "they don't have to placate anybody"? Yes, the latter is true; they're just a company selling a thing, not a politician who said something offensive. It ain't your initial statement, though.

Why can't it be both?

 

[Morrus]

Why can't it be both?

Because one is false and the other is true. The sample size is statistically significant; and a company selling a thing isn't in the business of placating people.

 

[Hutchimus Prime]

Statistically significant does not mean statistically sound.

Also the PR team assigned to this probably has a vague notion that message boards like these exist but to market to the smallest yet most vocal minority would be crazy.

 

[Morrus]

Statistically significant does not mean statistically sound.

Yes, I said that earlier. You're not contradicting me.

Also the PR team assigned to this probably has a vague notion that message boards like these exist but to market to the smallest yet most vocal minority would be crazy.

Only if you've established that the views espoused in that sample are not representative. Which they may or may not be - I've no idea - but nobody here has any way to establish that.

But WotC thinks us online folks matter, and that our opinions are relevant, even if you don't. That's what that enormous playtest process was all about.

 

[Serendipity]

If there is no creation rules in the starter (rules that SEAMLESSLY transition into the full game), then it is nothing more than crippleware ad copy like the 4e Redbox.

Wait didn't the 4e redbox have chargen? Sort of a solo adventure then a group adventure etc etc. The starter set from 2008 did *not* I know that much. It may have been abbreviated but there was something there as I recall.

Honestly, I'd prefer that such a starter set emulate the 81 Moldvay basic set more than the Mentzer one; i like them both, but half the page count of the 83 basic is useless after using once. And having a whole adventure in the kit would be a plus in my mind.