Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 394114" data-attributes="member: 812">Maybe it's just a bad idea?This idea has been tried a number of times. I'm not sure it was ever very successful and I suspect there may be good reasons as to why.There's only so far you can &quot;dumb down&quot; a game like D&amp;D before the essential qualities of it begin to vanish. This is true with any game, but with D&amp;D I argue that the &quot;dumb point&quot; is much higher than with a game like Monopoly. In fact, I would argue that it's so much higher that it's not going to interest people who wouldn't be interested in D&amp;D in the first place.Kids don't really need the game because they run around playing roles on their own, without any encouragement or rules. Any little kid too dumb to figure out the rules to D&amp;D is probably going to be happier with a toy gun shooting her brother from behind the couch. It's us grown-ups who need to have rules for all this stuff. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />That said, there is certainly a spot between the dumb point and the current level of D&amp;D complexity, and between wee tykes playing &quot;Say&quot; (&quot;Say we're on the moon, and I'm the cat.&quot;) and grown-ups with no imagination -- and maybe that's a spot with enough of a market to make it worthwhile trying to grab it with a targetted product. I personally doubt it, but I have no actual market information to back that up. So I'm just going to spout my uninformed opinion in the smug belief that you'll all find it fascinating. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="barsoomcore, post: 394114, member: 812"] [b]Maybe it's just a bad idea?[/b] This idea has been tried a number of times. I'm not sure it was ever very successful and I suspect there may be good reasons as to why. There's only so far you can "dumb down" a game like D&D before the essential qualities of it begin to vanish. This is true with any game, but with D&D I argue that the "dumb point" is much higher than with a game like Monopoly. In fact, I would argue that it's so much higher that it's not going to interest people who wouldn't be interested in D&D in the first place. Kids don't really need the game because they run around playing roles on their own, without any encouragement or rules. Any little kid too dumb to figure out the rules to D&D is probably going to be happier with a toy gun shooting her brother from behind the couch. It's us grown-ups who need to have rules for all this stuff. ;) That said, there is certainly a spot between the dumb point and the current level of D&D complexity, and between wee tykes playing "Say" ("Say we're on the moon, and I'm the cat.") and grown-ups with no imagination -- and maybe that's a spot with enough of a market to make it worthwhile trying to grab it with a targetted product. I personally doubt it, but I have no actual market information to back that up. So I'm just going to spout my uninformed opinion in the smug belief that you'll all find it fascinating. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification