Can we go back to smaller books?

[Celebrim]

Not only could you produce a 'complete' D&D in under 300 pages, I would argue that it must be done. As things stand, the buy in to start up a campaign of one of the recent editions is just too much - before you get to play, someone has to read through 832 (4e), 960 (3.5e) or 896 (Pathfinder) pages of core rules.

Put that in front of a new player, and it's just too much. They'll go play WoW instead. (I have literally seen the enthusiasm die in the eyes of new players when they saw the 3.0e core rules. "Do we have to read all that before we play?" they asked me.)

I find that totally ridiculous. I've got people in to the game on several occassions having put before them that they need not read any rules.

New players don't need to know the rules. Heck, players - new or old - don't need to know the rules at all. It's quite concievable to play an RPG where you don't even know what system the referee is using, much less how to play it. When I first started playing Chill, I didn't know anything about the rules. I probably played for 4 or 5 sessions before I had a clue how the combat system worked. I wasn't even completely sure on character creation. I just said, "I'm want to play a British Papparazzo/Private Investigator, is that cool?.", and went from there building a fast talking streetwise evidence gatherer.

The only person who has to know the rules is the person running the game. In some cases, the only person in the world who knows the rules is the person running the game and in some cases many of those rules aren't even written down. System mastery on the part of the players is as much a bug as a feature.

 

[Rechan]

Except there is going to be a rules compendium for 4e.

 

[delericho]

I find that totally ridiculous. I've got people in to the game on several occassions having put before them that they need not read any rules.

Ridiculous or not, that was the reaction I got.

In any case, it doesn't matter if the players don't need to read all those rules; someone has to read all that. And if the game can't attract new DMs, it's dead just as surely as if it can't find new players. Besides, do we really want to be fostering a situation where the vast majority of players never bother to learn the rules of the game? How can that be a good thing?

 

[Celebrim]

Ridiculous or not, that was the reaction I got.

I'm not arguing against the reaction you got. You got the reaction I would expect you to get under those circumstances. What I'm arguing against is the claim:

"I would argue that it must be done..."

No, it doesn't. Teaching a player the rules is a terrible way to get them into the game, and is in my opinion a terrible approach to teaching a player to role play. If you want to bring new players into the game, the thing you have to do is tap into that instinctive inner child that used to play house, cowboys and indians, princess, cops and robbers, or whatever it is that kids play these days. The rules will always get in the way of that, no matter how simple or complex that they are. The rules really aren't for the players benefit. The rules are really there for the game master, because rules make a game master's life easier in much the same way that books filled with random tables and monster manuals make a game master's life easier.

In any case, it doesn't matter if the players don't need to read all those rules; someone has to read all that.

Well, maybe. If the DM isn't a rules geek though, he's unlikely to want to be a DM. And if he isn't a rules geek but still a DM, he's likely to play a very off the cuff rules light version of any game system regardless of the actual rules.

Besides, do we really want to be fostering a situation where the vast majority of players never bother to learn the rules of the game? How can that be a good thing?

Because in my experience the players are much more likely to learn to roleplay well than they are if the approach games from the perspective that the game is all about learning system mastery.

 

[Ariosto]

No edition of D&D can be condensed to under 300 pages. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.

Treating one side of a letter-sized sheet as a consistent "page" ...
Original Books 1-3 and Supplements 1-3 = approx. 145 pp. (approx. 290 half-sized)
or
B/X (Moldvay/Cook/Marsh) = 132 pp.
Add Best of The Dragon = another 76 pp.
Add Chainmail or Swords & Spells = approx. another 22 pp.
Add Supplement IV (Gods, Demigods & Heroes) = approx. another 36 pp.
Altogether, about:
266 pp. to 279 pp.

 

[delericho]

I'm not arguing against the reaction you got. You got the reaction I would expect you to get under those circumstances.

Note that I didn't tell them to read the rules, or even a single word of them. I got that reaction as soon as they saw them. And this was from a group of kids who otherwise would have been ideal gaming converts.

"I would argue that it must be done..."

No, it doesn't. Teaching a player the rules is a terrible way to get them into the game, and is in my opinion a terrible approach to teaching a player to role play.

That works if there's an experienced DM on hand to help ease them in. It doesn't help completely new gamers come to the hobby. I came in to the hobby via the Red Box with almost no prior gaming experience - I had to assimilate the rules and make a lot of things up as I went.

If I'd been presented the 832 pages of the 4e core rules as an 11-year-old, there is no way I would now be gaming. And back then D&D didn't have to compete with all the distractions we have now - computer gaming was laughable compared with what we have now, and there were a grand total of 4 channels on TV.

Well, maybe. If the DM isn't a rules geek though, he's unlikely to want to be a DM. And if he isn't a rules geek but still a DM, he's likely to play a very off the cuff rules light version of any game system regardless of the actual rules.

He has to get to the point of being a DM first, before considerations of whether he's using the "actual rules" or some "off-the-cuff" version of them. Before he gets to that point, he has an 800+ page barrier to cross.

How many DM's does that lose us? It has to be at least some, and I suspect the numbers are quite significant. And if each of those DMs represent five potential players lost (which, over the playing career of a DM is likely an understatement), then that's a major drag on the success of the game. How long can D&D continue to support such a drag factor?

Because in my experience the players are much more likely to learn to roleplay well than they are if the approach games from the perspective that the game is all about learning system mastery.

Again, WotC would be well advised to get them playing at all, and then worry about getting them to play "well".

I think it's very easy for us to underestimate just how intimidating it can be to get involved in these games. Having game store shelves heaving with book after book after book, all claiming to be a "must have" accessory, and with no clear indication that you should start with the PHB (or, better, a good basic set) is not a good thing. Especially since staff in game stores are of uneven quality at best. Giving the impression that you have to read 800+ pages of core rules before you even start to play is not a good thing.

And if you don't read those rules, but instead join a new group, jumping in at the deep end, you get confronted by a group of individuals all wrapped up in an imaginary world (that you have no basis for understanding), and all throwing out jargon here, there and everywhere (none of which you have any basis for understanding). Which would be fine, if you could ask questions and get good answers, but too many roleplayers have poor social skills, meaning you may not even get a civil answer. And if you do, rather than getting one, clear answer, you'll probably get five partial and overlapping answers, all rife with exceptions and special cases all over the place.

Hell, faced with that I think I would rather play WoW!

 

[delericho]

So in total that's 77 pages. That is the type of book I think 4E players could do exceedingly well with. Fully updated with errata, add in 5 pages for a complete glossary with all the keywords (basically the final entry in PHB 3). Instead we get this, "a quick and handy rules reference" which clocks in at 320 pages of reduced page size, and will fall apart after frequent page flipping thanks to softcover binding. It's dead cheap, which I'm grateful for, but I'd rather shell out $30 and have a solid rules reference that comes in handy for many years to come, lies flat on the table so I can hold cards&snacks and roll dice while I'm reading it and allows me to gather the information I need at the table in a heartbeat.

Your approach is interesting. Truth be told, if you're cutting the rules down to 77 pages, they might do well turn it into a free PDF, and make their money selling the cards that are then required to play the game.

Of course, I'm very wary of putting the powers on to cards - that opens the door to the possibility of doing collectable card expansions, which is a really bad idea.

 

[Ariosto]

Cut down the B/X above by about 16 pp. if you replace Moldvay with Holmes.

It depends very much on what you mean by complete.

The only TSR material specifically for OD&D that (as far as I recall) was left out above was some from the magazines, as well as the Dungeon and Town Geomorphs, Monster and Treasure Assortments, and the character sheets.

(One could of course choose to take both sets of miniatures rules, and theoretically run to 301 pages. However, even with the blank pages, ads, etc., that I have skipped there is certainly still at least another two pages' worth of excess were one simply doing a new layout, more with a rewrite.)

Judges Guild's Ready Ref Sheets include a summary of all the 'official' monsters, including those from magazine issues.

"No more searching through stacks of books and magazines to find out what you need to know! The Players Handbook puts it all at your fingertips ..." until the next issue.

 

[Windjammer]

Of course, I'm very wary of putting the powers on to cards - that opens the door to the possibility of doing collectable card expansions, which is a really bad idea.

?? WotC are doing this already. I proudly own the complete PH2 set of Power Cards, all 4 of Divine Power, and 2 sets each released for Arcane and Martial Power.

What you mean I guess is that you're worried what might happen if WotC stopped their plan so as to exclusively release new powers on cards (and not repeat them in print product). You're quite right that they are sorely tempted to go for a collectible format on such occasions, if Gamma World is any indication of which directions they are testing the market.

@Rechan: except that my link was to the 4E "Rules Compendium". My point was that I'm hesitant to believe that a single product can serve double duty to both be a good way to ease new players into the game AND serve as a "handy table reference". Look at 3.5 PHB and Rules Compendium and you'll see the divergent constraints on the product fully at work (not that the former is very good at "easing in new players" ).

 

[delericho]

?? WotC are doing this already. I proudly own the complete PH2 set of Power Cards, all 4 of Divine Power, and 2 sets each released for Arcane and Martial Power.

What you mean I guess is that you're worried what might happen if WotC stopped their plan so as to exclusively release new powers on cards (and not repeat them in print product).

Yep, that's what I meant.