Got the D&D 4e Starter Set...So whatcha wanna know?

[mmadsen]

Everyone hoping for a product exactly like the old Red Box is perhaps forgetting that the whole reason they dropped the BD&D line was the market fragmentation that occured from having it and AD&D alongside each other.

The problem there was that the Basic D&D line was an entirely separate product line -- Basic Set, Expert Set, etc. -- with its own rules, which were not compatible with the larger Advanced D&D line.

If the Basic Set had simply provided a subset of the Advanced D&D rules -- four races, four classes, three levels of spells, etc. -- it would have worked just as well without fragmenting the audience at all.

 

[Delta]

If the Basic Set had simply provided a subset of the Advanced D&D rules -- four races, four classes, three levels of spells, etc. -- it would have worked just as well without fragmenting the audience at all.

Which is pretty close to the Holmes "Blue Book" Basic set.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The problem there was that the Basic D&D line was an entirely separate product line -- Basic Set, Expert Set, etc. -- with its own rules, which were not compatible with the larger Advanced D&D line.

I dunno about that. I own about 99% of everything Known World/Mystara related and all of the Gazetteers, the Hollow World line as well and numerous other products came with a D&D-to-AD&D conversion page in them. It was a fairly simple conversion at that that I would be inclined to call them "compatible" in a clear but broad sense.

 

[Saben]

Its hard for us on ENWorld to have the perspective of a new player - we are probably the hardcore gamers of the hobby; a lot (most?) of us are probably DMs.

I'm not the typical new player. I was reading on ENWorld before I had purchased a single D&D product. I am DMing before I've ever played a D&D game as a character.

But I am still a new player and the lack of CharGen is not appealing to me or my players. I won't be buying the started set and I will be voting with my dollar.

I have no criticisms of 4e compared to other editions- my experience with them is based on D&D based computer games. I love 4e, I think past editions sound like they would have been boring. But that doesn't mean 4e is perfect- far from it- and the lack of character generation in a starter set seems to be a big flaw to me.

 

[GQuail]

No but it is a cost increase for a product lacking completeness....

...So the "money grab" isn't as much the problem as the digital media should not be required for the old world media format physical product. The fact that DDI will cost something for later use is moot if one cannot even use the digital media at all, thus being the reason they may have purchased the physical product.

As I said in my own post, the issues with the online system's requirements are a much larger kettle of fish which feeds into the DDI in general, and wasn't something I was going to get into (and the size of your post should indicate why ;-) ). I was just trying to correct what seemed to me to be a factual error in your post: you said "this is a money grab" about the DDI being seen as a replacement, when Scott's suggestion (whether we agree it's acceptable or not) involves no more money arriving at WotC.

All the information (though it is hard to get anything much hard and credible information) I’ve seen says that D&D and AD&D synergized rather than fragmented or competed. A good many AD&D players came to the hobby through a Basic Set. AD&D players bought and used D&D products. D&D players bought and used AD&D products. D&D often did better in foreign markets for various reasons.

That may well be the anecdotal evidence on ENWorld, especially considering the age many people here joined D&D (i.e. when the Red Box was in ascendance) but I'm pretty sure one of the central discoveries of Wizard of the Coast's player surveys was that the way TSR had marketed their products (both D&D vs AD&D and the many campaign settings vs each other) had led to pretty heavy market fragmentation & confusion about how products worked together.

Remember that the Red Box era is also the era of D&D's boom due to other factors like the general media buzz caused by stuff like MADD - I' m not saying the Red Box isn't a fine starter set (I own all of the BECMI series, in fact, plus the RC: so I must have some sort of sympathy for it ;-) ) but saying "I know loads of people who started with that box" doesn't prove that it's the obvious perfect path for D&D.

D&D didn’t get dropped until TSR was already run irreversibly into the ground. And I’d argue that the equivalent of the Basic Set that they had at that point had already lost too many of the good features of the Basic Sets.

Certainly, BD&D very much changed in nature over time - changing from a little book aimed at a quick-start D&D game to it's own independant line with supplements specifically for it's pared-down system. Perhaps Wizards are purposefully not aiming for the same sort of product as the red box because they want to prevent it involving into that sort of line which, in a way, can be seen as competition for "real" D&D.

 

[GQuail]

The problem there was that the Basic D&D line was an entirely separate product line -- Basic Set, Expert Set, etc. -- with its own rules, which were not compatible with the larger Advanced D&D line.

If the Basic Set had simply provided a subset of the Advanced D&D rules -- four races, four classes, three levels of spells, etc. -- it would have worked just as well without fragmenting the audience at all.

This is very true. The BD&D game went a very distinct path away from AD&D as time went on, whereas (say) the Black Dragon basic set's character generation rules made totally legal 3.5 characters apart from a couple of pretty minor tweaks. (Mainly, IIRC, that initiative was a fixed number rather than a dice roll.)

Which is pretty close to the Holmes "Blue Book" Basic set.

The way you've mentioned this book before implies it's got a special place in your heart, so I'll try to be kind here: but I don't think the Blue Book is exactly filling the role mmadsen is talking about. I'd class it as less "AD&D lite" and more it's own entity, a sort of distinct branch from OD&D - I mean, heck, wasn't it released before AD&D proper?

Still, as I said in my own reply to you before about the Blue Book, I do find it odd that there's no character generation at all, and there are worse starter sets to mimic than that one.

I dunno about that. I own about 99% of everything Known World/Mystara related and all of the Gazetteers, the Hollow World line as well and numerous other products came with a D&D-to-AD&D conversion page in them. It was a fairly simple conversion at that that I would be inclined to call them "compatible" in a clear but broad sense.

I think the key word there, though, is "conversion". They're clearly closely related systems (I also recall such conversion notes - I think I remember reading in the back of one 2E-era starter set a guide to translating full stat blocks into that edition's rules... Dragon Quest, maybe?) but it's still work, and work that risks confusing and frustrating a starting player. The more work you ask of a starting GM the more you risk scaring them off - although like character generation, you could argue exactly how much is needed to scare them. ;-)

 

[justanobody]

As I said in my own post, the issues with the online system's requirements are a much larger kettle of fish which feeds into the DDI in general, and wasn't something I was going to get into (and the size of your post should indicate why ;-) ). I was just trying to correct what seemed to me to be a factual error in your post: you said "this is a money grab" about the DDI being seen as a replacement, when Scott's suggestion (whether we agree it's acceptable or not) involves no more money arriving at WotC.

No you just inferred money to be the main importance in my post then, while I was talking about the connection to them and why a starter set should not need some accessory to cover for its lacking parts.

Yes accessories cost money, but the point was this accessory was not something just anyone could use, even if free such as the character builder in demo mode.

Physical product is too closely tied to the digital product if one requires the other, then the system is flawed for the end user of either.

 

[MerricB]

The way you've mentioned this book before implies it's got a special place in your heart, so I'll try to be kind here: but I don't think the Blue Book is exactly filling the role mmadsen is talking about. I'd class it as less "AD&D lite" and more it's own entity, a sort of distinct branch from OD&D - I mean, heck, wasn't it released before AD&D proper?

It really is an introduction to a house-ruled oD&D, with a few elements of AD&D having made their way in there.

Cheers!

 

[GQuail]

No you just inferred money to be the main importance in my post then, while I was talking about the connection to them and why a starter set should not need some accessory to cover for its lacking parts.

Yes accessories cost money, but the point was this accessory was not something just anyone could use, even if free such as the character builder in demo mode.

Physical product is too closely tied to the digital product if one requires the other, then the system is flawed for the end user of either.

I'm not contesting the system is flawed: what I'm saying, as I tried to make clear with the bolding in my first reply, was that you were said that WotC were "trying to force a sale" of the DDI through this method, and I wanted to correct a possible misunderstanding. (In the sense that you don't have to buy it to get things to work - it seems you may have meant it more metaphorical, but in a heated discussion topic like one about the DDI, I don't think it's unfair to clarfiy stuff.)

I agree with you (as I think I also mention in my first post) that the character generator is no substitute for proper character generation rules (especially if the starter set doesn't mention it exists!) but you made what seemed to me to be a factual error which I corrected because, well, there's enough ill will in these threads without ill-will about things which just don't exist.

Can anyone who owns the Starter Set confirm if it mentions the wizards website and character generation tools there? Or even what it says about the Core Rules?

 

[Emryys]

Can anyone who owns the Starter Set confirm if it mentions the wizards website and character generation tools there? Or even what it says about the Core Rules?

In the "players book" at the beginning it mentions... "For the complete experience, including chracter creation and the full rules of the game, pick up the D&D PHB, DMG, MM, and check out D&D Insider for even more information.

At the back of the "DM's book" it has the full colour ad for dndinsider, like the ones in the PHB, DMG, etc...