D&D Family Problems (and the Impenetrability of the Game for Newbies)

[DEFCON 1]

I completely agree, but if anything I believe having a simple core game better facilitates this than starting at a higher complexity level. The "soul", as you say, has less to do with the rules themselves and more to do with aesthetic aspects - the feel of the game, its presentation, etc. Many people who dislike(d) 4E have admitted that a lot of it comes down to presentation first, "video gamey" rules second. We could say that WotC simply put the cart before the horse with 4E and lost their priorities.

The question we need to ask is... "what parts are 'Core', what parts are 'Modules' but should be presented up-front (if any), and what parts a 'Modules' and should be held off for either later chapters in the PH, or held off to second PH altogether"?

Because this presentation of the rules is what will make or break the game... the exact same way (as you mentioned, Merc) that 4E's presentation turned a lot of people off.

Would we consider Backgrounds/skills a part of "Core"? Most BECMIs would absolutely say 'No they are not'. I think Mearls and company would also say that they were not a part of the "simple core", because the simple core is based on Ability Checks, and Backgrounds/skills get layered on top of the Ability Checks.

But let's be honest with ourselves here... what percentage of the 5E populace won't use Backgrounds? They'll stick with the "simple core"? In this day and age... I suspect that that group will be very small. Most players will probably use the "Backgrounds module", because most of the players will last have played 3E, 4E, or a whole host of other RPGs where having skills is the norm. So using Backgrounds in 5E will be seen as the norm as well.

But how then does it get presented to us in the Player's Handbook?

The "Simple core" enthusiasts would say the best way to do it is to hold off ALL modules for further back in the book (if not shunted to another book altogether). But if a so-called "Module" like Backgrounds are incorporated to MOST people's games... what's the real point of shunting them off anywhere? Just to service the 5% of experienced players (of the BECMI variety) who actually won't play anything other than the simple core, and to theoretically present the most basic rules of the game for the theoretically "new player" who is trying to learn the game for the very first time by him or herself just by reading the book? Are those two segments of the populace combined really worth annoying the other 90% of the player base who have to go flipping all across the Player's Handbook to use the rules which, granted, are not part of the "simple core", but ARE a part of most players REGULAR game?

A "simple core" presentation is nice in theory... but shouldn't that really be its own book or boxed set? One that can be JUST that? Nice, short, easy to read, easy to put together? But then leave the Player's Handbook presentation to give us all the rules like we've come to expect right up front, so that the 90% of players who won't just use "simple core" won't have to get pissed off trying to find all the different parts of the game throughout the book?

In my opinion, the first chapter in the first Player's Handbook could certainly have a couple paragraphs that say explicitly "The game can be built in many different ways, from simple to complex. Here are the Core rules and/or modules you can select and incorporate into your game to replicate the feeling of BECMI/AD&D/2E/3E/4E..." but then after that... in each chapter you give the full group of options so that you don't have to chase others down. So the Races chapter has not only Human, Halfling, Dwarf, Elf... but also Half-Elf, Half-Orc, Gnome, Dragonborn etc. The Classes chapter has not only Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard... but also Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Sorcerer, Warlock etc.

If the player has read Chapter 1, they'll have a pretty good idea of what they want to use (non core races and classes and/or Backgrounds and/or Specialties/feats and/or style of spellcasting and/or healing & hit point models etc.) and will know enough to just skip over those rules that come up in each chapter that they don't plan to use.

That makes the most sense to me in terms of presentation. And does the least harm to anyone's ego, thinking that WotC isn't concerned with how they themselves play their Dungeons & Dragons game.

 

[Mercurius]

I'm curious actually, how you can categorically state this. How can you simply state that they lost more gamers than they gained? How do you know? How do you define "gamer"? I mean, how many thousands of people are now playing Encounters or ... what's that other one they've got running... Dungeon Crawl, or whatever?

The only thing we "know" is that at brick and mortar stores, Paizo is selling better than WOTC. Everything else is conjecture and guesswork. You, I and anyone else have zero clue how many 4e, 3e or whatever gamers there are out there. Never mind whether that number has gone up, down or stayed constant over time.

These kinds of threads always make me shake my head. Hey, you could be right. I dunno. But, at least I haven't made up my mind on the "state of the industry" based on pretty much zero evidence.

I think the problem here, Hussar, is that you are projecting more certainty on my part than I feel (or intend to communicate). I don't "know" anything - but there is also nothing wrong with speculating based upon some degree of solid reasoning.

For instance, I think we can safely say that 4E today - or pretty much at any time, except for the first few months, is far less popular than 3.5 was at its heyday. Do I "know" that for sure? No, but I also don't know that you're not a Brazilian supermodel or a web-bot.

What I think we can safely say with some degree of certainty is that 4E wasn't nearly as successful as WotC hoped it would be; but I'd go further and say that it was, at least financially speaking and in terms of long-term sustainability, an almost complete flop. Why? Well, look at the market - it is splintered into dozens of pieces. Now there are basically only two big pieces, but one - perhaps even the biggest - isn't even owned by WotC. Pathfinder is living proof that 4E isn't as popular as WotC had hoped it would be. And let's not kid ourselves into thinking that Pathfinder's gaming populace are largely new gamers - most of the original gang, and I imagine many of the later "converts," are disillusioned ex-WotC D&D players that wanted to keep playing (or go back to) 3.5, but as a living game.

Now the question might be: do we really want D&D to be popular, or do we want it to be an elitists hobby? [Note that from a business point of view, the answer it not really obvious at all, which one is more profitable depends on a lot of factors]

This is a really good and important question that I think gets overlooked a bit (and I love your post). I think it deserves its own thread.

But the real issue here is: How is
game presented to all of us? Both the basic and the advanced versions?

.....

But please don't demand the actual hardcover Player's Handbook use that format too.

Don't worry, I won't! My plan would be simple: Have two core lines that roughly emulate BECMI and AD&D, but as one compatible game of different complexity levels. Beyond that you could still have "Modular Options" that can be added on to either version, although more likely the advanced one.

On one hand you'd have a few box sets that present the basic version of the game, and then you'd have a series of hardcovers that present more advanced options. You release them pretty much together, with only a small lag (that is, the introductory box set might come out a month before the three hardcovers to acclimate people to the basic game).

The introductory box set would be a complete, playable game - maybe even up to level 10 for the iconic classes and races (maybe 4-6 classes and 3-4 races). The second box set might be an "expansion pack" with more monsters, adventures, races and classes, and the third box set would be levels 11-20, with further possible expansions after that. So someone could stay the basic version of the game simply through 1-3+ box sets. In other words, D&D would be perfectly playable through 10 levels for the price of a $30-35 box set.

Then you'd have the line of hardcovers which would include the basic rules of the game, but with layers of further complexity, more races and classes, more details about running a game, etc.

Monster Manuals would be usable for both versions because they could be formatted with a basic/core text block, and then advanced options below.

I think the so-called "complexity dial" can be simpler than it sounds because in a way it would really come down to two levels of complexity, with two modifications:

Basic RAW - box sets only
Basic modified - box sets with bits and pieces from other books
Advanced RAW - hardcovers only
Advanced modified - hardcovers with modular options

That's what comes to mind, at least!

 

[Mercurius]

The question we need to ask is... "what parts are 'Core', what parts are 'Modules' but should be presented up-front (if any), and what parts a 'Modules' and should be held off for either later chapters in the PH, or held off to second PH altogether"?

Because this presentation of the rules is what will make or break the game... the exact same way (as you mentioned, Merc) that 4E's presentation turned a lot of people off.

I think we were writing these posts at the same time, so I missed it - but hopefully I addressed your question in the last post.

I agree with you, but think this is best accomplished with two lines - one through box sets and one through hardcovers and other supplements.

But to go further into some of your specifics, I think my previous post somewhat answers them in that things like Backgrounds would be part of the "Advanced" game (hardcovers) but not the "Basic" (box sets). The Basic game would likely be relatively similar to the original D&D Next playtest - a stripped down d20 game that is very versatile and allows the "Advanced" game to be played over it, sort of like a suit of a suit of plate armor over leather.

The key, of course, would be designing a Basic game that is complete in itself AND can form the basis of a more Advanced game that in turn is still compatible with the Basic game. Easier said than done, but I think it is possible.

 

[Roland55]

Yep, pretty long.

I think they are fully aware of these issues...and Next is meant to address them. Though there is and has been a big tension between at least part of the "serious fan base" and potential new players.

(And of course, I think they were fully aware of these issues when the new Red Box and Essentials were released...its good they are not rushing things this time around).

Long, but interesting.

I'm a scientist and an engineer. I have a natural inclination for complex, deep sets of rules -- and even I think it's best to keep the core of next as simple as possible (but no simpler).

 

[DEFCON 1]

I agree with you, but think this is best accomplished with two lines - one through box sets and one through hardcovers and other supplements.

Well, then I'm right there with you. I've believed and said the same thing elsewhere as well. Boxed sets for basic game / beginner's game, hardcovers for normal PH/DMG/MM allotment. That would serve both audiences well.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I understand your point, but my main point is to refute the idea that 3E and 4E were too complex (thus necessitating an even simpler game.) It's my belief that the game players of today are sophisticated with game playing enough that you don't HAVE to go even "more basic" in order for the game to be successful in acquiring new players.

I can only speak for myself:

I started playing D&D in 2008 (the free Keep on the Shadowfell download), and the complexity was absolutely a barrier to me. I had played Magic: The Gathering for years, and I think I was a Rules Advisor by then (i.e., the guy who knows all the rules that nobody is expected to know because they're way too complicated and never come up in most games), and even to me 4e's complexity was a huge turn-off.

It took an entire day to make a character, the book was full of rules that made no sense and I wasn't sure if I needed to remember--like Action Points. I'll just use that as an example. The concept is easy enough (well, not when you're layering it upon a complex game where you already have tons of things to remember), but it's not just a thing you can do whenever you want: using an Action Point is a free action that you can use once per encounter (even though you'll pretty much never have more than one at a time). That means you can't use it while dazed or in a surprise round. Seriously, I.. what? Why would you make it that complicated?

Not only was it a struggle playing it for the first time, but explaining the rules to my friends was hopeless. One of my friends in particular was a big nerd and casual gamer (I think she was into Final Fantasy, so not afraid of complex games either) who was kinda interested in the idea of pretending to be an elf. I could see her eyes glaze over as I tried to teach her about action points and encounter powers and minor actions and healing surges and fortitude defenses. She probably thought the same thing I did: "Why do I have to learn all these stupid rules? I thought this was a game about imagination and storytelling!" I'm positive that, if the game was simpler and easier to learn, she'd be a RPG fan today.

Well, then I'm right there with you. I've believed and said the same thing elsewhere as well. Boxed sets for basic game / beginner's game, hardcovers for normal PH/DMG/MM allotment. That would serve both audiences well.

I like this as well--but they can't do it like 3e and 4e. Remember, 3e and 4e came out in 3 hardcovers, with a boxed "Starter Set" or "Basic Game" or whatever.

For D&D Next, I would like to see a little red box that just says Dungeons & Dragons: Fantasy Roleplaying Game on it. Not "Basic Set" or "Beginner Box," just Dungeons & Dragons. You could go to a store (Toys 'R' Us, Target) and buy Dungeons & Dragons. Take it home, open it up, and now you own the game of Dungeons & Dragons.

Then you could have the "Advanced Player's Handbook" and the "Advanced Dungeon Master's Guide" in hardback form at hobby game stores.