First review of the new Red Box

[Remathilis]

This was the moment in the video that turned me right off the Red Box for good. Now I'm sure that even if I do buy this box, I'll never play 4th edition. I mean, holy cow, talk about stat inflation! What's so special anymore about having an eighteen ability score if every character just automatically gets one? Not In My Game, thank you very much. Where I come from, the chance of rolling an 18 on 3d6 is a mere one in two-hundred sixteen (and, although it shouldn't warrant pointing out, players have the same chance of rolling a 3).

I understand that the +7 is not only from the stats, but more than half of it is. That's my disconnect. I come from a time when a Dex 14 thief was ok and got no bonus to attack. Now it's not, and does nothing but force players to build their characters to meet the new standard. That's what I see as stat/math inflation. I hated it in 3e and hate it in 4e. To me it doesn't add anything to the game when every friggin thief is going to have a +3 or +4 bonus from stats. I come from a different time obviously.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't play a whole lot of AD&D (Prime Requisites, % strength, or 17 cha paladins) or 3e (with its +1 stat/4 levels and +6 belts, gloves or cloaks) then, didja?

Heck the last edition of D&D where ability modifiers didn't matter (because they were barely there) was the Holmes Basic Set.

 

[Jasperak]

Ok, I am of the same era but it does not bother me. It is the inevitable result of point buy systems. Not really a fan of point buy systems but I do understand the logic behind them.

I understand the logic and math behind them for modern RPGs as well. But this thread isn't for my pontification. I'll stop derailing the thread concerning the stat bonus stuff.

 

[fuzzlewump]

Not playing a game because of the numbers used for stats??

Well, I was a little turned off by the low 1 for 1 stats in dogs in the vineyard.. I... Uh, guess. There is nothing special about an 18 in point buy.. So use a rolling variant so the first 5 minutes of the game is special again.

 

[Jasperak]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't play a whole lot of AD&D (Prime Requisites, % strength, or 17 cha paladins) or 3e (with its +1 stat/4 levels and +6 belts, gloves or cloaks) then, didja?

Heck the last edition of D&D where ability modifiers didn't matter (because they were barely there) was the Holmes Basic Set.

I failed my Will save.

I hated 18/00 exceptional strength with a passion. There is nothing like rolling a natural 18 and then a 24. One die roll means the difference of two levels to hit and a crap tonne of damage. Hated it with a passion.

My issue isn't with ability score modifiers so much as what they represent. In most of the earlier editions a +4 bonus from Strength equated to a 4 level increase in hit potential for fighters, but that +4 bonus only happened for one out of every 200 times.

And then 1e Cavaliers added % to every score at every level and 3e made it +1 bonus every 8 levels (if you put both points into the same score).

Point-buy systems really kill the Ability score mechanic for me since I believe the math HAD to assume that your best score when into your schtick ability. 4e has even come out and recommended it. At this point, once the game assumes that for math/balance purposes, it defeats the purpose of having the ability to place those scores yourself or even, god-forbid roll them.

The fact that 4e assumes a +7 bonus to hit (in the example from the starter kit) and then designs creatures around that (for balance purposes) seems to me to be the very definition of stat inflation. Especially since that +4 bonus equals the same bonus you would get from 8 friggin class levels. All things being equal that means an 8th-level fighter with a 10 in Strength would have the same hit chances as a 1st-level fighter with an 18 in Strength. It seems totally absurd to me, but I understand it doesn't bother most others.

Sorry for the derail.

 

[Jools]

This post is directed at the people above that didn't like the mathematics of the characters in the boxed set. To them I say: WHAT THE HELL? Now I've only played 4th edition so I admit I don't really know where you guys are coming from, but seriously, what gives? I'd really love to know what it is that you guys get out of the game? What is it that you find enjoyable about D&D 'cause its sure as hell different to me. I play D&D to have a blast with my friends, enjoy the moment, roll some dice and see some monsters die. It really doesn't matter if your playing a game that uses high stat modifiers or low stat modifiers - does it? Is that really important?

 

[Dice4Hire]

This was the moment in the video that turned me right off the Red Box for good. Now I'm sure that even if I do buy this box, I'll never play 4th edition. I mean, holy cow, talk about stat inflation! What's so special anymore about having an eighteen ability score if every character just automatically gets one? Not In My Game, thank you very much. Where I come from, the chance of rolling an 18 on 3d6 is a mere one in two-hundred sixteen (and, although it shouldn't warrant pointing out, players have the same chance of rolling a 3).

That has been gone from D&D for quite a while, at least by RAW. In 3.0, it took a long time to make a mid teens into an 18, but it was possible (stat bumps at 4th, 8th, etc)

In 4E it takes a while, but even a 10 can make the leap, though it takes 28 levels.

At least they are not giving out 20s.

 

[Dice4Hire]

It really doesn't matter if your playing a game that uses high stat modifiers or low stat modifiers - does it? Is that really important?

Depends on how well thousands of posts of barely-civil discussion are important in your world, I guess.

 

[Deuce Traveler]

I must sheepishly admit that I got all excited because I thought WOTC printed the basic set of the old BECMI edition done by Mentzer. I suppose that wouldn't make financial sense and I should have known better, but boy did my eyes perk up at that box.

 

[Fifth Element]

I hated 18/00 exceptional strength with a passion. There is nothing like rolling a natural 18 and then a 24. One die roll means the difference of two levels to hit and a crap tonne of damage. Hated it with a passion.

I thought you preferred random stat generation? In random stat generation, doesn't a single roll have the possibility of producing a great advantage to a character? Even without exceptional strength, an 18 is a big advantage. So is an 18 Con, an 18 Dex, etc.

My issue isn't with ability score modifiers so much as what they represent. In most of the earlier editions a +4 bonus from Strength equated to a 4 level increase in hit potential for fighters, but that +4 bonus only happened for one out of every 200 times.

This is only an issue if you equate one level in an earlier edition to one level in a later one. Levels are very abstract; maybe you're looking at it from the wrong direction. Maybe you should start with the ability modifiers, see how many levels of advancement they represent, and calculate the "equivalent" level in the other edition. If you follow me.

Basically: why assume that one level means exactly the same thing in 4E as it does in AD&D (for example)? You already know that the stats don't mean quite the same thing (IIRC, 18 was the absolute max in some earlier editions, whereas now 20 is fairly common).

Point-buy systems really kill the Ability score mechanic for me since I believe the math HAD to assume that your best score when into your schtick ability. 4e has even come out and recommended it. At this point, once the game assumes that for math/balance purposes, it defeats the purpose of having the ability to place those scores yourself or even, god-forbid roll them.

Do you play much 4E? I played a dwarf fighter with a 14 Strength who was quite effective, because his Con and Wis were correspondingly high. Even though all his attacks relied on Strength to hit, he still dealt good damage, and was impossible to take down.

 

[Dragonblade]

Great review and looks like a fantastic beginner product. As an experienced gamer and D&D player who has played all editions, its definitely not a product marketed to me.

But as a beginner product it looks fantastic. Its well written and really leads you through both your first encounter and character creation at the same time. I thought the production values looked very good for all the stuff you get and the price.

For those who say it looks flimsy compared to the old classic boxed sets, I have say that those are some serious Coke bottle nostalgia glasses you are wearing. I still have the original Red (Basic Rules) and Blue (Expert Rules) box out in my garage and this is ten times those old sets, both in quality in and in all the stuff you get. Power sheet cards, monster tokens, battlemat, fairly decent quality dice etc.

Don't get me wrong. I loved those books and played the hell out of them, but, really it was two black and white books, and some godawful cheap plastic dice with a crayon you had to use yourself to color in the numbers with.

D&D is THE gateway game for the entire industry. If WotC can bring in new players, thats not only good for 4e fans, thats good for all RPGs. Some players will migrate to Pathfinder, some to other systems both d20 and non-d20 systems. Trying to tear down WotC for bringing gamers into the hobby is horribly short-sighted, IMO. Less new 4e players also means less Pathfinder players in the long run. It means less Exalted players, it means less Castles and Crusades players, and so on.

I don't get this whole attitude that WotC has to be torn down and criticized for everything they do by some old school fans. Really? "Stat inflation"? Thats the criticism?

Come on, people! We're all in this together! I don't play Pathfinder, but I love what Paizo is doing with the line and I still buy some Pathfinder products. If Paizo puts out a Pathfinder beginner product I would be 100% behind it. Because in the long run, more Pathfinder players also means some of those players will experiment with Exalted or 4e, or some other game I like.

It really upsets me no end when I see posts on forums that non-gamers frequent, or hear snide edition wars comments in the game or book stores directed at some poor curious kid who wants to know what this whole RPG thing is about. Its disgusting and disturbing that some gamers are so petty and so immature that they would rather turn away a curious kid than god forbid have them start playing an edition or game that they don't. I don't play Pathfinder, but if I saw a curious kid in a store flipping through a Pathfinder book but was hesitant, I would be totally encouraging.

"Great game, you should totally check it out!" is exactly what I would say.

I wouldn't qualify my statement or even mention my own gaming preferences because you know what? IT DOESN'T MATTER. It doesn't matter whether I play 4e, or Pathfinder, or HERO, or whatever. What matters is that kid picks up that first RPG book and takes that first step into a fantastic hobby that will last a lifetime.