Is D&D an entry level game?

[Thia Halmades]

LostSoul: Sure, we can add those things. None of them actually detract from my point; a few minutes nosing in the combat section or the glossary can clear a lot of that up. I would almost submit that the rules arguments you get into early in life prepare you for the ones you'll get into later in life. Had I not gamed, I'd probably lose to the underwriters a lot more often.

Most of the stuff is boiled down to a couple of pages, and anyone with the appropriate mind set and willingness can get it; and if they can't, one of their friends (does any group NOT have a rules lawyer handy?) will. Of all the systems out there, I still submit it is the most accessible & straight forward. Again, I'm not saying the depth or complexity aren't there; I'm saying that as you go up, you'll learn fairly quickly as you try to accomplish things.

C'mon, Sneak Attacks? That one's easy.

 

[Wombat]

Okay, my gut reaction is "No", but I feel there is a longer answer necessary here.

In the general public eye there are either 2 or 3 rpgs commonly available; by "commonly available", I mean not strictly found in specialty gaming stores, but also in non-game stores. The two most common (now found in, I believe, all the big chains) are D&D 3.5 and WoD 2; the third is GURPS, but that is found on a more hit-or-miss basis.

Now GURPS has one big advantage -- it uses only d6. To most of the general public this is still the only "real die" out there. People are used to seeing these, they understand them, and are used to calculating with them. On the other hand few non-gamers that I have talked to know about GURPS or where to start with it once they find out about it -- "are the core books enough?", "what if I want to play a cowboy?", "do all these different things happen in the same place?" So for all of its "universal" appeal, it tend to intimidate a lot of non-gamers.

WoD is the easiest system to grasp. It only uses one kind of die (d10), has a set difficulty level, had comparatively easy character generation, etc. In many ways, it is the most "intuitive" of the three game systems. The subject matter of its books, however, tends to drive off many non-gamers or make them very worried. "Why would anyone want to be a vampire/werewolf/whathaveyou?"

D&D is the McDonald's of systems. Non-gamers know about it. In standard conversation, D&D means rpgs to non-gamers. And many of them look at the requirements (3 books at $30 a pop, multiple dice in strange shapes, lots of charts and tables) and balk; when you add in the miniatures as well, the issue becomes even more complicated, as some people assume that you absolutely need them, thus increasing the expense dramatically. Sure, there is a "For Dummies" book and a boxed set, but many of them see the boxed set, find out it isn't a "complete" set of rules, and find that Junior is asking for more and throw up their hands in despair. (Can you tell I've been dealing with a lot of parents this way recently?) Most people hear the word "rules" and assume they have to memorize them all, much like they do with board and card games -- the notion that many gamers glide over rules or only look them up when absolutely necessary escapes and/or confuses them. Thus D&D (read: rpgs) are "hard", "have too many rules", and "require too much stuff". And the systems itself is less user-friendly to a first time non-gamer than the other two; this in turn makes them nervous about rpgs in general (again, the notion of D&D = rpgs). I personally know of at least 5 households that have returned D&D because "it is way too hard and has too many rules". That's just my own experience.

So I have had an interesting time in game and book stores trying to get parents over rpg fear. Some of them I have moved towards simpler systems; others I have directed to the boxed D&D set. Some I have talked out of the process, simply because they were so freaked out and it just seemed like the safest thing to do. Still, there are always people willing to pick up D&D because it is synonymous with rpgs. Many non-gaming people, even after entering a game store, assume that D&D is the only game and that all the other books are just supplements, campaigns or variants for it.

So, my 2 shekels worth on the topic.

 

[rogueattorney]

My answer is "no" as well. Simply put, I believe the barrier to entry for kids who have no one else to introduce them to the game is way too high both in cost and in terms of amount of material to be digested before play can begin.

There really has been very few single box starter sets that have come out in the last 10+ years that have had enough legs for extensive repeat play. The newest Basic Set for example, is not designed to be a complete game so much as an introduction to the rest of the game. It's not even as much as what you used to get in the old Basic sets, and it's quite a bit different from, say, Star Frontiers or Gamma World or Marvel Super Heroes.

Are there any good starter games out there right now? I don't know. The Castles & Crusades boxed set might be decent. The new editions of Tunnels & Trolls could be good. The Lejendary Adventures Essentials set might do the trick. I have yet to see any of those three on the shelf in a specialty game shop, let alone on the shelf at Toys 'R' Us.

R.A.

 

[Crothian]

It is an entry level game. I just wish it would read and play like an entry level game.

 

[Rasyr]

Entry level? I said no, and I am referring to only the 3 core books. However, there have been attempts to create versions of it as an entry level game (The D&D Basic boxed set, and the Dummies book).

However, D&D is a gateway game (something that is completely different from entry level).

In my opinion, an entry level game is one that is simple enough and easy enough that somebody with no expreience in rpgs could pick up, learn enough, and play in under an hour. This could be through a small set of easy to understand rules, or through teaching the game in steps.

A Gateway game, however, is a game that is often a main entry point into rpgs. D&D fits this, and so does Star Wars and Star Trek, and even LOTR. Notice the pattern here? A gateway game is an entry point because it provide players with a way into the world of rpgs, often through a licensed property (D&D is the exception here, mainly because it has 20+ years of noteriety, both good and bad, and also happens to be the largest, most well known brand).

What are some examples of current "entry-level" RPGs?

Meddling Kids

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

I learned to play 3.0 myself, DMing my two brothers (and eventually two friends, too). I'd previously played one or two one-on-one sessions with pre-gen characters with a friend of mine.

It took me and my siblings a while to get the kinks out; I was surprised, for example, to learn a few weeks in that mage armor didn't stack with physical armor. I didn't use criticals for the first few sessions, either.

It still went pretty smoothly, especially after I started jotting down monster stats so I didn't have to flip through the MM all the time.

 

[ThirdWizard]

A gateway game is an entry point because it provide players with a way into the world of rpgs, often through a licensed property (D&D is the exception here, mainly because it has 20+ years of noteriety, both good and bad, and also happens to be the largest, most well known brand).

So, D&D is an entry point into RPGs, but not an entry level game?

Don't get me wrong, I love arguing semantics, but let me be sure that this is a semantics argument up front.

 

[DonTadow]

I'd say yes. And the author's reasoning for his no is my reasoning for the yes. There is a for dummies book and a basic core set. Neither of these things change hte rules of the game. They only present it in a simpler manor. YOur logic is equivilent to saying "arithmatic" is not for beginners because it has a dummies book and many self-help guides.

Some people need things presented in them in simpler manners. That doesnt make the game complicated.

But lets go further. The dummy guide and the basic set guide did not come out for 2 years after 3.5 debuted. Not only are they simpler games, but they are also both marketing tools to bring in people people whom would not normally pick up a game unless they had visual confirmation that it was easy to learn, even if it already is easy to learn.

Ironically, I find that hte game is more complicated for older players to grasp. Some refuse to give up old concept and others don't like the simplicity.

Now that those arguments are said. Half my group learned 3.5 and believe me some are not genuises in the slightest. I have taught 3.5 to players whom would have never played an rpg and had no exposure to rpg related material (my inner-city friends). The 3.5 version is the least complex of the 3 previous sytems requiring fewer dice rolls.

 

[LostSoul]

LostSoul: Sure, we can add those things. None of them actually detract from my point; a few minutes nosing in the combat section or the glossary can clear a lot of that up. I would almost submit that the rules arguments you get into early in life prepare you for the ones you'll get into later in life. Had I not gamed, I'd probably lose to the underwriters a lot more often.

I probably overstated my case; I don't think D&D is too terribly complex at lower levels. (High levels, though...) But it is still pretty complex; I've been playing 3e since it came out, and I like to think I've got a pretty good sense of the rules, but I get a lot of things confused. (Like how you figure out if someone has cover or not. Just the other night I got Manyshot wrong.)

Every game session I'm always flipping through the PHB. It doesn't take me too much time, since I know where everything is, but for a novice it could slow down play a lot.

Now let's contrast that to Star Wars d6. I rarely cracked open the books. There were only a few things to remember (Difficulty Numbers and what they meant, and the chart that had the effects of Damage) and once you had those down, you didn't need to look into the book (except for maybe the long stat lists of ships - much the same as the monster manual or any NPC sheet).

Compared to D&D, that's a simple system, a lot easier to get into than D&D. It was like D&D if everything in D&D was a simple d20 + mods vs. DC - no feats, no spells, no special attacks, barely any bonuses - just the roll.

So based on my experiences with that system (and I'm sure there are better ones out there these days), D&D seems very complex. Which is good, but in my mind it doesn't make it an entry game.

 

[interwyrm]

I think that a level based system is not entry level. Although it is familiar to many because of crpgs, in a crpg, the computer does most of the work of figuring new stats.

I started playing rpgs with Star Wars d6. That was an entry level game. All of your skills went from 1-6, and all your abilities were 1-4. (If you were a human) You spent xp to raise skills and abilities, and the only die used was a d6. You could pretty much play after reading 10 pages and pulling out some old board game dice.