D&D 5E Starter Set Contents Teaser

[MartyW]

Sure, of course you can sell different packages at different prices. They decided that $20 was the price point they wanted, not $25, and which they believe will shift more product.

Hey, maybe your analysis is right and theirs is wrong. I imagine plenty of market research went into that price point though.

I totally get the $20 price point (seriously... read the blog post). There is a psychology with that number. Look in your wallet. There's the $20 sitting right there... Want, want. The bean counters probably decreed that should be the target (or Target) price.

But, there is a flip-side to this kind of decision. I can't recall the author now, but there was a well know car executive who wrote a book on how the auto industry lost a lot of its way because the accountants would take an awesome design and then try to maximize for profit. Corners would be cut or features reduced because they wanted to save a few pennies here or a dollar there on production. The problem was that once one of these awesome designs went through the budget analysis, the cooler-than-cool design was now a watered down shell of its former self and the consumers punished this lack of innovation with poorer sales.

My fear is that the Hasbro accountants want to make an additional $0.50 (or less) per unit sold instead of saying "Let's ship the best $%*ing box set we can while still making a modest profit." The goal of the Starter needs to be getting new players into the game so you can sell the *other* books and supplements.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I don't see a legitimate argument for maps/tokens. The purpose of the starter set is an entry point for non-D&D-people to give it a try. That means having a really low price point. That means cutting out anything that's not absolutely necessary. What's necessary? Rules, dice, characters, an adventure. I mean, they cut out character creation. That's how bare-bones it is.

They also have a goal of showing how RPGs are different from other kinds of games, and I think a huge part of that is that the game takes place in your imagination. There's no board, no cards, etc.

 

[GSHamster]

I think no tokens/map is a good idea. It says that the game can be played without those things. It makes it easier for the new DM to make up her own adventure and keep going.

If the game included tokens and a map, a new DM might think she needs them for her next adventure. Since she doesn't have them, it's either a stopping point or a point where she has to shell out more money.

 

[WotC_Trevor]

Basicaly, this is a bigger shot of the artwork, and it doesn't disappoint.

We have a few other shots of the artwork coming later - with even more detail. Muahahaha!

...Not sure why I did the evil laugh there. Deemed appropriate.

Though I hope one of these excerpts is the character sheet -- really interested in what they're doing with the design of that!

Maybe.... ...maybe.

 

[GX.Sigma]

You know it's about to get intense when [MENTION=82759]WotC_Trevor[/MENTION] shows up on ENWorld.

 

[Mistwell]

I am really glad they are not including maps and tokens. The strength of D&D is that it's a role playing game as a distinct type of game from a board game, and including elements of a board game distracts from that distinction. For the introductory product you want to highlight the distinction, not blur it. Leave maps and tokens for more advanced players who know the difference already between an RPG and a board game.

Second, 5th Edition needs to capture 4e players as well as old school players. There will be a *lot* of buyers who want to have the combat grid available.

The Starter Set is not intended for existing RPG players, it's just intended for new players. The Basic edition is aimed at existing players.

 

[Dausuul]

My recollection of the original Red Box was that there were neither pawns nor maps included. You had--well, you had exactly what we've got here: Player book, DM book, and dice. Seemed to work all right for Mentzer and Moldvay.

And I agree with the general sentiment that theater of the mind is preferable as an intro to D&D. Minis are great if you've got a highly tactical combat with a lot of moving parts to keep track of. I love my giant mini collection and have no intention of getting rid of it. But where TotM excels is fast, creative, free-flowing play, and that kind of play is the one thing D&D can offer that video games can't. I see minis and battlemats as more of an advanced option, for players and DMs who are willing to slow things down a bit in exchange for greater tactical depth.

 

[MartyW]

The Starter Set is not intended for existing RPG players, it's just intended for new players. The Basic edition is aimed at existing players.

Not entirely true. The Basic Set does not come with an adventure. The Starter Set does.

Let's say I'm a 4e player who has never played earlier editions. Not only am I interested in the rules, but I may want to have an introductory adventure as well. I may have run primarily pre-fab content from WotC in the past and I want to know what to expect out of the new system... or maybe I'm a 3e player that want to try 5e with a low introductory price. I'm looking for rules and an intro adventure.

Heck -- look at the back of the Stater Set box:
enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=61776&d=1400773985

What do you see in the corner? Gridded combat map. If WotC is really trying to sell "Theater of the Mind", why are they putting a grid map on the box art? Or... why not put in a poster map with no grid? How much are you willing to bet that those gridded map bits come directly from the adventure book? (I'd bet on it.) This is where the TotM argument falls down.

We're going to disagree, so we can probably stop beating the dead horse. I just think that if WotC doesn't look more closely at the beginner box presentation of their competition (i.e. - Paizo, FFG, etc), the competition will continue eating their lunch.

 

[marleykat]

Not entirely true. The Basic Set does not come with an adventure. The Starter Set does.

Let's say I'm a 4e player who has never played earlier editions. Not only am I interested in the rules, but I may want to have an introductory adventure as well. I may have run primarily pre-fab content from WotC in the past and I want to know what to expect out of the new system... or maybe I'm a 3e player that want to try 5e with a low introductory price. I'm looking for rules and an intro adventure.

Heck -- look at the back of the Stater Set box:
enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=61776&d=1400773985

What do you see in the corner? Gridded combat map. If WotC is really trying to sell "Theater of the Mind", why are they putting a grid map on the box art? Or... why not put in a poster map with no grid? How much are you willing to bet that those gridded map bits come directly from the adventure book? (I'd bet on it.) This is where the TotM argument falls down.

We're going to disagree, so we can probably stop beating the dead horse. I just think that if WotC doesn't look more closely at the beginner box presentation of their competition (i.e. - Paizo, FFG, etc), the competition will continue eating their lunch.

If you have roleplayed any game let alone DND then making up an adventure should be old hat to you especially since you have all the rules/monsters/treasure/equipment needed. I don't get your reasoning.

 

[MartyW]

If you were using maps and tokens then it wasn't TotM. It may not be as tactical as 3/4e but it wasn't TotM either IMO.

You weren't there, so you don't really don't have a basis of opinion on what we were playing.

Theater of the Mind does not preclude the use of graph paper map sketches and lead minis (yes, they were LEAD back in my day). Theater of the Mind means that you describe your actions and movement thought the use of words, not by counting squares and moving your pawn. We didn't do map-based actions/movement. AD&D groups back then would just place our lead avatars on the table with descriptions like "Well, you are over here [marks on the paper] and Fy-Tor is about 20 feet away over here... and the monster [places lego mini-fig] is standing about here near this stalagmite... [draws on paper]..."

The minis and drawings were to provide illustrative clarity, not tactical play.