Anyone got the Dummies book?

[woodelf]

One of my players has it. It does give a lot of advice to help newby's get up to speed. For begineers I think it could make a real difference. Given the results of the various "age, when you started playing, date of birth" polls around here, I think something like this could be very usefull for the hobby.

I'm a bit disappointed that it's so tightly tied to D&D3E in particular. A book like this, while primarily about D&D, could've been a general intro to RPGs, quite easily. As is, it didn't look like there was anything of use to the prospective RPer who's not getting into D&D. At a glance, even the intro to terminology was pretty D&D-centric.

I think i'll just format nice PDF versions of Uncle Figgy's guides, and print and bind those and put them on my shelf. (And given their length, that means that D&D for Dummies could've included a general RPG intro with only a ~16pp increase or edit--maybe lose the more egregiously-marketing-driven Top 10 lists?)

 

[woodelf]

Wow, that's pretty ridiculous. Hopefully the rest of the book isn't as blatant.

I wonder what criteria they used for picking out the '10 best X,' if any?

Criteria One: must be currently published by WotC
Criteria Two: there is no criteria two

At least, that's what it looked like to me. It seemed like they just listed everything that's current for players, frex, having to include a not-yet-printed book just to get it up to 10.

 

[Captain Tagon]

I'm a bit disappointed that it's so tightly tied to D&D3E in particular. A book like this, while primarily about D&D, could've been a general intro to RPGs, quite easily. As is, it didn't look like there was anything of use to the prospective RPer who's not getting into D&D. At a glance, even the intro to terminology was pretty D&D-centric.

And that is why it is D&D for Dummies. Marketing choice by Wizards there which in all honesty makes a lot of sense.

 

[wingsandsword]

I'm a bit disappointed that it's so tightly tied to D&D3E in particular. A book like this, while primarily about D&D, could've been a general intro to RPGs, quite easily. As is, it didn't look like there was anything of use to the prospective RPer who's not getting into D&D. At a glance, even the intro to terminology was pretty D&D-centric.

How is this a surprise? It is "Dungeons and Dragons for Dummies" not "Fantasy Roleplaying Games for Dummies".

Maybe an "Roleplaying for Dummies" book would be good, but Dungeons and Dragons has the name recognition, and for somebody who's first getting into RPG's, name recognition counts for a lot. To a lot of people outside the hobby, it's all D&D. This is a licensed product and supported by WotC, and they're not exactly likely to want to share space in "D&D for Dummies" with information about their competition or old products that are out-of-print and extremely unlikely to see print again. When you buy "Windows XP for Dummies" you don't get a broad introduction to operating systems and info about Linux and DOS or a chapter on Windows 98, and "D&D for Dummies" doesn't have info about other RPG systems or older editions.

Prior editions of D&D have no commercial support, you can't walk into most FLGS and pick up a 1e or 2e PHB (maybe in a used game bin, if you're lucky), much less a Rules Cyclopedia and very much less OD&D Booklets, and all that goes triple for mainstream, mass-market bookstores where newbies probably shop and where they'll buy D&D for Dummies. Somebody first getting into gaming is going to have more problems down the line if they first learn to play an edition that's not widely played (people on Dragonsfoot and ENWorld aside, 3e is the vastly dominant version in terms of player base). Everything they learn they'll probably have to un-learn the first time they actually meet a group.

This is a "Dummies" book. It's meant to give somebody who only has the faintest clue what the subject matter is about a basic introduction and introduce them to the matter, getting them started and simplfying the complex material needed to start off. Earlier editions and competing games really don't belong in one. If people buy this game, get into D&D and meet other gamers, they'll be exposed to a wider variety of roleplaying and editions in time, but for their first time out, 3.5 Edition will do.

 

[Li Shenron]

Man, the point of this Dummies book is beyond obvious to almost be insulting.

Well, It's "D&D for dummies", so it is supposed that only dummies buy it

If the writing has an ironic feeling, then I can understand the point of this book: to provide a comic relief to people who already play D&D. Otherwise, I think it's really lame...

Who isn't able to start playing D&D from the Player's Handbook? Everyone I know has either (1) started from the PHB or (2) started with nothing and followed the other's people teaching. Only a very young kid *perhaps* may find the PHB too difficult, but a very young kid isn't likely to read a whole D&D for dummies either, he would just want to play NOW or forget about it. He needs a DM, not a book.

If I wanted to teach the game to someone, I would invite him to play with us and let him learn by doing.
If I wanted to spark an interest to someone who won't come to play yet, I'd lend him my own PHB or buy him one.
A book like D&D for dummies doesn't seem to me able at all to encourage people to play D&D. At best, it satisfies someone's need to believe that the game is "difficult" and we're "smart" because we play it with ease, while the others need to study 2 books just to speak with us... bleah!

"Dummies" series books are often intended for people who don't want to learn something but they have to learn it, for work or school reasons, and therefore they don't care about understanding how things work, they just want to be able to write down something in a programming language (for instance) and pass a school assignment quickly.
The other purpose of a dummy book is to help someone who doesn't have background knowledge on the topic, and can't afford to get it. But come on, there is _no_ background knowledge you need to play a RPG!

 

[Joshua Randall]

Folks, this is big. The ... For Dummies series covers everything from real-estate to marriage planning to specific types of pets.

And now it covers D&D.

Think about that: the same company that publishes books called Chess for Dummies and Poker for Dummies now publishes a book called D&D for Dummies. That's a huge example of D&D's shift from "fringe activity, only played by weirdos" to "fun pasttime, played by normal people."

If I wanted to evangelize the game in a big way, I would buy a copy of D&D for Dummies for everyone I know. Not only does it help dispel many common misconceptions about the game, it's a solid intro to the D&D 3.5 rules.

 

[woodelf]

How is this a surprise? It is "Dungeons and Dragons for Dummies" not "Fantasy Roleplaying Games for Dummies".

Maybe an "Roleplaying for Dummies" book would be good, but Dungeons and Dragons has the name recognition, and for somebody who's first getting into RPG's, name recognition counts for a lot. To a lot of people outside the hobby, it's all D&D. This is a licensed product and supported by WotC, and they're not exactly likely to want to share space in "D&D for Dummies" with information about their competition or old products that are out-of-print and extremely unlikely to see print again. When you buy "Windows XP for Dummies" you don't get a broad introduction to operating systems and info about Linux and DOS or a chapter on Windows 98, and "D&D for Dummies" doesn't have info about other RPG systems or older editions.

You actually are supporting my point. It's precisely because D&D == RPG to a lot of non-RPer that a D&D for Dummies book shouldn't assume that everyone that picks it up is necessarily interested in D&D3E.

As for it being WotC-driven: i was not aware of this. Looking at the Top 10 lists, i'm not surprised to learn this, however. I, perhaps foolishly, thought that it would be a good general intro, that it was pushed by the For Dummies folks, and that it would therefore take a useful, yet objective, view on matters--not be an ad for WotC. I was expecting an updated version of The Adventurer's Handbook, and with the name recognition and market penetration of the For Dummies line. Of course the title is gonna be "D&D For Dummies" not "RPGs For Dummies"--that's a given regardless of the focus of the writing. Would you expect a Champagne For Dummies book to not even mention the existence of California champagnes, just because they are legally "sparkling wines", and the champagne makers of France bankrolled the book?

As for WotC's best interests: their own marketing survey, prior to the advent of D&D3E, showed that (1) most RPers played more than one game system, and (2) those who played more than one game system RPed for longer before giving up the hobby. Moreover, we all know that a fair fraction of RPers don't like D20 System, and many RPers eventually get tired of whatever system they are playing and want to try something else, if only for a while. And, of course, for most RPers their first system will be D20 System so if they're of the psychology to burn out, that'll be the system they burn out on. Now, when you get sick of the RPG you've been playing, there're basically two possibilities: switch, or give up RPGs. If you either don't know that other RPGs exist, or are under the impression that it'd take an inordinate amount of time and effort to learn a new one, you'll likely just stop gaming. And i think it is safe to say that the person who gives up RPGs is much less likely to pick them up again in the future, than is the person who continues RPing with a different system likely to return to their old system. Keeping gamers in the hobby, at all, is in WotC's best interests. And that's where (1) acknowledging that other RPGs exist (even if "there are hundreds of RPGs out there, tackling all different genres and settings, and with all sorts of different rules; this book will just deal with one, the most popular, Dungeons & Dragons" were the only mention in the entire book, it'd be sufficient), and (2) providing a good solid grounding in the part that is common to all RPGs--the roleplaying--come in.

Prior editions of D&D have no commercial support, you can't walk into most FLGS and pick up a 1e or 2e PHB (maybe in a used game bin, if you're lucky), much less a Rules Cyclopedia and very much less OD&D Booklets, and all that goes triple for mainstream, mass-market bookstores where newbies probably shop and where they'll buy D&D for Dummies. Somebody first getting into gaming is going to have more problems down the line if they first learn to play an edition that's not widely played (people on Dragonsfoot and ENWorld aside, 3e is the vastly dominant version in terms of player base). Everything they learn they'll probably have to un-learn the first time they actually meet a group.

That was an unintentional red herring on my part. No, i don't expect them to give specific advice for previous editions of D&D--i was just being [overly-]specific in my writing. I don't expect specific advice for other RPGs. I expect some basic background in RPing, which would, of necessity, be general enough to apply regardless of what RPG you're playing.

This is a "Dummies" book. It's meant to give somebody who only has the faintest clue what the subject matter is about a basic introduction and introduce them to the matter, getting them started and simplfying the complex material needed to start off. Earlier editions and competing games really don't belong in one. If people buy this game, get into D&D and meet other gamers, they'll be exposed to a wider variety of roleplaying and editions in time, but for their first time out, 3.5 Edition will do.

Exactly. And part of that faintest clue is how to roleplay. How to roleplay has nothing to do with what system you're using, or even, to a large extent, what genre. I was hoping for a section like Uncle Figgy's Guide to Good Roleplaying (http://www.dragondogpress.com/unclefiggy/rp/index.html) and/or Uncle Figgy's Guide to Roleplaying for Non-Roleplayers (http://www.dragondogpress.com/unclefiggy/rp4nrp/index.html). Now, at least a little bit of that sort of material is there. But, from hearing people talk, and from my cursory look in the store, not enough of it. [If I'm mistaken, and it covers those sorts of topics to roughly that depth, then i retract my complaint.] As an introductory how-to book, it should start with the basics. And, frankly, once you're ready for feat-choice advice and optimal class picks, you're already beyond the basics of RPing (though not very far beyond, of course).

As someone else said, i suspect this book is most useful for the prospective gamer who doesn't have a game group. As such, it should specifically include advice, etc., on those aspects that the rulebooks don't include, and that most of us learned from other gamers: how to roleplay. I'm not suggesting any of the existing content not be there (except maybe the less-helpful Top 10 lists), only that there also be content on the non-mechanical side of RPing.

 

[diaglo]

If I wanted to evangelize the game in a big way, I would buy a copy of D&D for Dummies for everyone I know.

quoted for troof.

 

[wingsandsword]

Who isn't able to start playing D&D from the Player's Handbook? Everyone I know has either (1) started from the PHB or (2) started with nothing and followed the other's people teaching. Only a very young kid *perhaps* may find the PHB too difficult, but a very young kid isn't likely to read a whole D&D for dummies either, he would just want to play NOW or forget about it. He needs a DM, not a book.

One thing I think the Dummies book is good for is expanding the game to people who might not know to start. Joe Average on the street, has probably heard of D&D, but even if he was interested in playing wouldn't know where to start. Most newbies don't know to find a FLGS, they'll go to Barnes & Noble or Waldenbooks and see a wide array of books. They probably don't even know where to begin, and it could all be daunting. Seeing "D&D for Dummies" is an unambiguous and trusted sign of "Begin here if you don't know what you're doing".

There are "Dummies" books on a wide variety of subjects, including things most people wouldn't call very complex or could eventually figure out on their own (there is a Sex for Dummies book too), but some people still want a little help with.

As others pointed out, it's a good thing to help non-players clear up misconceptions about D&D. The Players Handbook may seem simple to us, but to an outsider it can be pages of strange tables, odd lists, and generally daunting approaches. An enthusiastic 12 year old could figure out a PHB, but the mother who wonders what that 12 year old is doing would probably rather look at the Dummies book (and understand it more).

 

[woodelf]

As for it being WotC-driven: i was not aware of this. Looking at the Top 10 lists, i'm not surprised to learn this, however. I, perhaps foolishly, thought that it would be a good general intro, that it was pushed by the For Dummies folks, and that it would therefore take a useful, yet objective, view on matters--not be an ad for WotC. I was expecting an updated version of The Adventurer's Handbook, and with the name recognition and market penetration of the For Dummies line. Of course the title is gonna be "D&D For Dummies" not "RPGs For Dummies"--that's a given regardless of the focus of the writing. Would you expect a Champagne For Dummies book to not even mention the existence of California champagnes, just because they are legally "sparkling wines", and the champagne makers of France bankrolled the book?

I thought of a much better way of saying this over the weekend:

I trust a good intro line of books to be beholden, first and foremost, to the reader. They should answer the reader's questions, even (or perhaps especially) those the reader isn't aware she should ask. And it should strive to be objective, regardless of what any manufacturers [of any products or services being introduced] might want.

In the realm of "D&D For Dummies", one of those questions should be "What genre is D&D for? What if i want a science fiction game?" It's fine to plug a manufacturer's products, if the writer sincerely thinks those are good products. Though how a book that the writers can't possibly have read (since it's not out) could be known to be one of the top 10 products, i'm not sure. What if a book on running talked only about Nike products, and didn't even acknowledge that other running shoes existed? If it were titled "Nike's Guide To Running For Beginners", maybe that'd be ok, but if it's titled "Running For Dummies", and carries with it the implication of objectivity of that brand, i expect better.