DMG to include a "starter town".

[BryonD]

After all, with very few exceptions, nobody who would have bought the first DMG is going to decide not to due to a few pages devoted to a sample town.

But we can not keep ignoring the big picture.
It seems that hand holding is showing to be a major driving force of 4E design.
And that could very easily drive a lot of the established base away.
From talk I hear, I'm far from the only person who feels that he may be part of the "fired" old guard.

 

[TwinBahamut]

As a DM who had to learn D&D pretty much on his own, I am all for having a starting town in the DMG. I am glad I bought what must have been the very last basic 2E D&D game before 3E started, because the starting town and early adventures in that game was very useful for me in getting started with 3E. I can't imagine being able to DM for 3E without that experience with the 2E basic game.

Also, I hate the idea that new players should have to learn the game from older players. I hate the idea that the DM is supposed to be the "experienced gamer" who run games for the "inexperienced gamer" players. I also hate the assumption that DMs and players are different people who don't read the same books, but that is a different topic.

I say there should be lots of sample campaign and setting stuff in the DMG. Sample starting towns and sample adventures, along with sample pantheons or NPCs, should be the bulk of the DMG, not a minor footnote. The DMG should be full of useable examples to guide new DMs, not full of empty advice and redundant tables.

Edit: After seeing Mousferatu's mention of a DM shortage... I agree completely. At my college gaming club, groups of 6-8 or more people was the norm. I vastly prefer smaller groups, but there were simply not enough people willing to DM for that to happen.

 

[BryonD]

Which is why I expounded on my previous post while you were typing.

It's not so much about attracting new players, in this case, as it is about attracting, and keeping, new DMs from among the player (or potential player) pool.

IME a major majority of gamers are either DMs or players.
No doubt at all that both will switch roles from time to time.
But I honestly can't think of anyone I've ever met who really wanted to be a DM but decided that it was too hard. And certainly not anyone who thought DMing was too hard but "you know, if they had a starter town.... "

I'm not saying there are not people who find DMing to be more trouble than it is worth. But I am saying that those people have no interest in DMing period.

I think it is a terrible case of wishful thinking that something like this would have any impact at all there.

Bottom line: if you want more DMs you have to attract more non-gamers into gaming. This won't do that.

 

[Vigilance]

Please.

Giving you a detailed town in the DMG isn't hand-holding Bryon.

It's a starting town that you can use, or draw inspiration from.

It's NOT just for newbies.

Based on what I've seen in this thread, the dividing line on whether or not you like the idea of a starting town has nothing to do with being a "noob", therefor you can't really infer anything about Wizards "motive" for including it, other than they think it's a cool idea that folks liked in the DMG II last time.

So you can feel free to "quit", but claiming you've been "fired" by this starting town seems to be a little silly.

And I find this whole "Wizards is firing their fans!" business to be really questionable, over-emotional hyperbole.

 

[Imaro]

I sort of see this as wasteful too. If it's geared towards a new DM...then it can be in the $30(I think) module that WotC is putting out, since this would be a better package for a beginning DM...and at $30 it should have a fleshed out town in it anyway. I really think if anything the DM guide would be better served by a short introductory adventure as opposed to a starting town. Yeah the more I think about it the less practical it seems. But then again they'll probably be holding something back (like in the MM and PHB) to get us to buy DMG 2...oh well.

 

[Mouseferatu]

It seems that hand holding is showing to be a major driving force of 4E design.
And that could very easily drive a lot of the established base away.

It seems to me I've heard that exact same concern expressed a lot at some point in the fast. Some time around, oh, early 2000, I believe it was...

Seriously, as long as the game still allows for growing complexity as people master it--and I've seen nothing to suggest to me that 4E won't--than I cannot comprehend any objection to making the initial process of learning the game, or learning to run the game, any easier.

(And this not an idea unique to 4E, or late 3E, either. The exact same arguments against spending some page count on a sample city in the DMG could have been leveled against including a sample adventure in the red box Basic set.)

 

[BryonD]

Please.

Giving you a detailed town in the DMG isn't hand-holding Bryon.

It's a starting town that you can use, or draw inspiration from.

It's NOT just for newbies.

Based on what I've seen in this thread, the dividing line on whether or not you like the idea of a starting town has nothing to do with being a "noob", therefor you can't really infer anything about Wizards "motive" for including it, other than they think it's a cool idea that folks liked in the DMG II last time.

So you can feel free to "quit", but claiming you've been "fired" by this starting town seems to be a little silly.

And I find this whole "Wizards is firing their fans!" business to be really questionable, over-emotional hyperbole.

Feeling that way won't sell books.

And you are again forcing this into a single issue and ignoring that it is part of a bigger picture. Insults won't change that.

 

[Mouseferatu]

IME a major majority of gamers are either DMs or players.
No doubt at all that both will switch roles from time to time.
But I honestly can't think of anyone I've ever met who really wanted to be a DM but decided that it was too hard. And certainly not anyone who thought DMing was too hard but "you know, if they had a starter town.... "

Ah, it's anecdote time.

All right. Out of two separate gaming groups with a combined rotating population of about 15, I know of at least two who would like to DM, and/or have DMed other games, but who are intimidated about DMing D&D, and have chosen not to do so because it's too difficult. I know of at least two others who have DMed D&D once, and chosen not to do so again, also because of complexity issues.

Will the inclusion of a sample town make a difference to them by itself? No, probably not. But if, as you suggest, it's one element of a push to make the DM's life easier? Then yes, it may very well make a difference.

 

[BryonD]

It seems to me I've heard that exact same concern expressed a lot at some point in the fast. Some time around, oh, early 2000, I believe it was...

Seriously, as long as the game still allows for growing complexity as people master it--and I've seen nothing to suggest to me that 4E won't--than I cannot comprehend any objection to making the initial process of learning the game, or learning to run the game, any easier.

(And this not an idea unique to 4E, or late 3E, either. The exact same arguments against spending some page count on a sample city in the DMG could have been leveled against including a sample adventure in the red box Basic set.)

So your just going to hand wave away the points?

If you have seen nothing then I must conclude that you are looking with biased eyes.

 

[Vigilance]

Feeling that way won't sell books.

And you are again forcing this into a single issue and ignoring that it is part of a bigger picture. Insults won't change that.

Wow, you think I insulted you?

I was talking about your point, and disagreeing with it.

For the record, nothing I said was directed at you personally.

I can see not liking the new edition, but the idea that Wizards is consciously trying to drive older fans away, that makes no sense to me.