D&D Rubbish? Hmmm...

[Man in the Funny Hat]

For the record, I think you are demonstrating an overused technique...

I guess baseless mockery is contagious.

 

[Jhaelen]

If by 'the rules' you mean the core resolution mechanic, then I agree with you. And every edition of D&D qualifies.

I don't disagree. The problem is then: Why isn't it marketed that way?

The reaction I'm seeing if I show any PHB (regardless of edition) to a non-gamer is "Oh, wow, so you have to read all of this to be able to play?"

The problem isn't that the rules are intimidating, it's that they appear to be intimidating.

I guess the 4e Red Box was an attempt to make the idea of learning to play an rpg less intimidating. Was it a success in that regard?

If by 'the rules' you mean 'everything needed to build a group of characters, and a campaign world to run them in, and to run that campaign.' Then, no.

Sure. But it's not actually required to get started. It's more or less a matter of labelling and of presentation.

Having a short intro adventure module, a bunch of pre-gen chars, and a rulebook would be better. In other words, almost exactly what WotC offers as a free download in their 4e Starter Kit!

If you label everything else as 'Advanced' or 'Expert' rules would be better. Selling the expanded game rules in small implements would also work better: E.g. bundle an adventure with a new class and a new bunch of monsters and treasures that introduce new concepts, e.g. some monsters can inflict a new condition type, some of the treasures or class powers have new effects, like forced movement, etc.

After getting, say, five of these game-packs you have (almost) all the rules that would normally have filled a PHB, but by providing them in small increments you made them more palatable.

Imho the important thing is that every pack must contain everything required to immediately play the adventure module that comes with it.

In a way it's similar to the BECMI approach, except it comes in even smaller packages.

 

[Andor]

I don't disagree. The problem is then: Why isn't it marketed that way?

The reaction I'm seeing if I show any PHB (regardless of edition) to a non-gamer is "Oh, wow, so you have to read all of this to be able to play?"

The problem isn't that the rules are intimidating, it's that they appear to be intimidating.

I guess the 4e Red Box was an attempt to make the idea of learning to play an rpg less intimidating. Was it a success in that regard?
Sure. But it's not actually required to get started. It's more or less a matter of labelling and of presentation.

Having a short intro adventure module, a bunch of pre-gen chars, and a rulebook would be better. In other words, almost exactly what WotC offers as a free download in their 4e Starter Kit!

If you label everything else as 'Advanced' or 'Expert' rules would be better. Selling the expanded game rules in small implements would also work better: E.g. bundle an adventure with a new class and a new bunch of monsters and treasures that introduce new concepts, e.g. some monsters can inflict a new condition type, some of the treasures or class powers have new effects, like forced movement, etc.

After getting, say, five of these game-packs you have (almost) all the rules that would normally have filled a PHB, but by providing them in small increments you made them more palatable.

Imho the important thing is that every pack must contain everything required to immediately play the adventure module that comes with it.

In a way it's similar to the BECMI approach, except it comes in even smaller packages.

Is this really needed today though? How many gaming groups are started cold by some kid who spotted the book on a shelf and bought it without prior gaming experience? RPG culture is well into it's second generation, and is firmly imbeded in pop culture at this point. I suspect the vast majority of gaming groups these days have experience with RPGs, probably several of them.

So while you do want ease of access, I don't think you need to spoon feed it to baby gamers incapable of comprehending a saving throw without Gary to hold their hand.

Now when I was a 12 year old gamer (back when we hewed our own dice out of of stone and inked them in with mammoth blood, don't you know) I loved reading through that 1st AD&D Players Handbook and pouring over the spell descriptions and immersing myself in minutia.

Today? Bleh. Who has time? Today trying to read through a hundred pages of spells is mind killingly boring to my middle aged brain.

This is actually one of my issues with 4e. If I were introducing a new player to 3e I could easily build them a non-spellcaster and have teach them everything they needed to know in 5 minutes. In 4e? Everyone is a vancian spellcaster. Even the mule. bleh.

So yes, ease of access, and graduated difficulty is of value. But I don't think you need to worry quite so much about the baby steps with so much institutional knowledge built into the world of gaming today.

 

[delericho]

I guess the 4e Red Box was an attempt to make the idea of learning to play an rpg less intimidating. Was it a success in that regard?

Based on my sample set of one, no.

At our local wargames con, my Meetup group took a table and ran some demo games. During the course of the day we were approached by a father and son pair who were interested in the game. They said they'd tried the Red Box, but hadn't been able to make head nor tail of it.

It turns out that "Castle Ravenloft" is a much better introduction to D&D than D&D itself.

However, that's probably because the Red Box is just not a very good product, rather than that the concept is bad.

In a way it's similar to the BECMI approach, except it comes in even smaller packages.

I've mentioned this before, but if I were in charge I would produce a single "Core Rulebook" on day one, and also a boxed set labelled just "Dungeons & Dragons". The key thing would be that the boxed set should include the same Core Rulebook as everyone else used, in addition to quick-start guides, adventure books, tiles, minis, dice and so on.

I would then produce a "second tier" of products called the "Advanced Player's Handbook", the "Advanced Dungeon Masters Guide", the "Bestiary", the "Tome of Treasures" and so on. These would be strictly supplements to the Core Rulebook, rather than a stand-alone game, but together would form the assumed baseline of the 'real' game.

(I would then do a "third tier" composed of splatbooks, modular additions such as psionics, and so on, but these would be considered even more peripheral than the second tier.)

Is this really needed today though? How many gaming groups are started cold by some kid who spotted the book on a shelf and bought it without prior gaming experience?

If WotC want to significantly expand the market, then it absolutely has to be possible (and as easy as possible) to start a group 'cold'.

Although there are groups out there, finding them can be surprisingly difficult. Additional, many groups are simply closed, or are quite intimidating for one reason or another (jerks at the table, a legacy of too many in-jokes, whatever).

Although the ideal entry route may well be for a kid to make contact with an established gamer, play a few games, and gradually be introduced to the rules that way, I don't think this can be assumed. It really does need to be made as easy as possible to jump in to the game.

One more thing: that kid I mentioned earlier seemed quite keen to get into the game, as was his father. But the truth was that my current group is really not set up to accomodate children - we deal with mature themes, R-rated humour, and the like. So it wasn't really practical for him to join us. That meant I had forty minutes to introduce him to the game and then... what?

I couldn't point him at the Red Box, since he'd tried it and it didn't work. I couldn't point him at any other groups, because I don't know any. And I don't have the time to run a second group suitable for children. So, most likely, he is now not a gamer, and I think that's a real shame.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I guess baseless mockery is contagious.

Sorry, I didn't mean to overstep the mark and become the thng I was warning against!

Cheers

 

[Plane Sailing]

Now when I was a 12 year old gamer (back when we hewed our own dice out of of stone and inked them in with mammoth blood, don't you know) I loved reading through that 1st AD&D Players Handbook and pouring over the spell descriptions and immersing myself in minutia.

That raises an interesting question. Where are the twelve year old gamers now? What happened to the avenues which introduced kids that age to the game back then?

 

[technoextreme]

We could move D&D into this abstract and realistic space any number of ways. For instance, we could make it even less detailed and a bit more realistic by replacing additional hit dice with AC bonuses. Done.

I don't know in a game where you basically have every single weapon type imaginable do you really think you can easily approach something realistic by making it less complicated. D&D all ready assumes that most of the weapons utilize the same tactics which is to hit stuff with.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I'd wager most of them are playing video games. Not that I wasn't at that age, but Zork and Wizardry grab a lot less of the market than WoW.

 

[delericho]

That raises an interesting question. Where are the twelve year old gamers now? What happened to the avenues which introduced kids that age to the game back then?

I was introduced through a school club. We ran sessions during the lunch hour. Try doing that with 4e - one combat and you're done!

(At one point I considered RPG-ising "Castle Ravenloft", with the view to creating a D&D-lite version in which you could run a full adventure in 40 minutes. Alas, I never got around to it. But I think that could be a very strong intro to the game.)

 

[Crazy Jerome]

This is actually one of my issues with 4e. If I were introducing a new player to 3e I could easily build them a non-spellcaster and have teach them everything they needed to know in 5 minutes. In 4e? Everyone is a vancian spellcaster. Even the mule. bleh.

So yes, ease of access, and graduated difficulty is of value. But I don't think you need to worry quite so much about the baby steps with so much institutional knowledge built into the world of gaming today.

I've introduced new gamers to Fantasy Hero, which is much tougher than 4E or any version of D&D to grasp, and got them going in not much more than 15 minutes. (Less than that, per person, when you consider it was multiple people being introduced at the same time. But efficiencies in scale always skew such analysis.) The key thing is, "everything you need to know," is different for every game. I could get someone going in 4E just as fast as 3E, because I know both systems well enough, and I've got lots of experience introducing new people.

A system you don't know as well? Oh yeah, it takes a lot longer. You've got to convey what you know and let them fit it in to what they know, but you don't have the insights yet to get right to the heart of the matter. You don't know to say, "Ignore that section of the character sheet. We'll discuss it later when it matters." Or, "Pick something here that looks good. If you change your mind, I'll let you change it later after you understand better,"--even outside any changes allowed by the rules as written.

However, I do think that some games do a better job than others of teaching you how to get to that point. 3E and 4E are both equally lousy, in that regard, as far as I'm concerned. Mouseguard is an example that is handled far better, but it is a simpler game. The latest edition of BW seems to have improved quite a bit in this area, though I haven't got it yet. (Burning Wheel is very good in that you are told quite firmly to stick to the first 70 pages before you do anything else, and this is important and good advice. It's bad in that the editorial comments are embedded in the text, including that first 70 pages. Supposedly, they are removed or toned down in the new edition.)

D&D really could use one book that dedicated the first N pages, relatively short compared to the rest, where you did that and got started playing. There is such a strong tendency to put this in a separate book, and then to make that book a separate product, that things get confused.