Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5505580" data-attributes="member: 43283">Hmmm.So first, I'd say that complexity keeps _some_ folks engaged in the game. Not everyone. Which is part of the problem; D&D caters to the hardcore crowd and the "casual" and/or beginner are basically told "you don't belong". What one of the top pieces of advice that I see handed out to people wanting to learn the game? Find someone else somewhere to teach them, because it's overwhelming/too much to try and do it completely cold from the books.It's interesting you bring up chess. I think it's sort of illustrative of the problem. Chess is a complicated enough game actually. A bunch of pieces moving in different ways and then a few odd things like Castling and En Passant. I've known a few folks that played pretty high level chess and after a certain point it's... I'm sure folks would argue with this characterization, but it's sort of a rock/paper/scissors sort of thing. One player will go with a gambit and the other player will try to recognize the gambit and counter with one. It almost seems like it's not really about the "strategy" so much as it is about who's got the better mental database and how quickly they can access it.D&D relies on a boardgamey/poor-wargame approach for a fair chunk of it's complexity. Chop out miniature-based play and the funky rules exceptions given to you by feats and you've got a much more streamlined game. "Simpler" in the context of this conversation.And this is the problem that the OP is talking about... that initial barrier. Chess (and D&D) aren't games you just sit down with and start playing. They require an investment of effort. And it's not just an investment of effort to get started, but it's also an investment of effort and time (and money in the case of D&D) to keep on playing.Or... ok, let's flip things slightly. Magic: the Gathering.I used to play this way back when; I had an almost complete Beta set and a nice chunk of Alphas too. Anyway, the game started with a set of rules that were printed on a piece of paper stuck into a deck of cards. Easy peasy. Time goes on and more and more rules are added. The desire for complexity developed as people's skills improved. Along with that was the development of explicit strategy in the form of deck-building.Last time I looked, the rules for MTG were a book and everything seemed to revolve around what sort of build people were using. A select group of folks actually develop them and a large number of folks rely on it, perhaps with their own customizations.These days, I wouldn't even consider touching a CCG. I don't have the time, money, or inclination to try and develop the skill necessary to "enjoy" the game.One could say that MTG is both "simple" and "complex", but I'd disagree. The rules are relatively coherent (consistent) and there aren't necessarily a large number of them, but it's complex because of the specialized vocabulary, the need to keep track of stacking rules, and everyone's favorite "exception based design" which is so integral to both MTG and D&D.I'm of the opinion that what would really need to happen is that D&D would need to be redesigned from the ground up; one of the explicit goals being simplicity and modularity. You need to basically have the "basic" and "advanced" game and actually support _both_. Continue evolving new rules etc for the hardcore to mess around with, while providing nifty gee-gaws and other bits for the basic game.But that ain't gonna happen.</blockquote>

Verification