Is old school a good way to introduce younger players to D&D?

[MerricB]

I'd use Wrath of Ashardalon to introduce him to D&D. Then go to D&D Essentials.

Exactly what system do you use yourself?

When I look at introducing new players to D&D, there are two factors that are uppermost in my mind:

* What system am I using myself?
* Who will they be playing with?

If the answer to the second question is "me", then the answer to the first question is the system I'll probably introduce them to. Yes, I might strip it down a little (essentials does that nicely for 4e), but using the system I use will allow them to get into my games easier.

If the answer to the second question is "their friends", then you need to pay more attention to what game their friends are likely to play: and that's often going to be one that is readily available. It's all very well to suggest an Out-of-Print game, but if you're the only person who has copies of that game (or can get them), then it's a roadblock in terms of getting other people to play with the new player.

Five is young, very young. At this point, things like "too complex" apply to even the simpler games: much hand-holding is required.

Really, the question is much more at this stage: what game do you want to play with him?

Cheers!

 

[Azgulor]

I'll echo Umbran's opinion about underestimating children's capacity to pick up the game. The trick, if you learned the game, at a young age is remembering how to break the game down into digestable pieces.

I also agree that you should pick a game you enjoy running. Once the kids learn the system, they may not be in a hurry to "graduate" to another system anytime soon.

When I started Pathfinder for my kids, I started with character concept: what do you want to be able to do? I then explained the concept of leveling and that they wouldn't be able to do everything immediately. I gave examples where I could. Harry Potter in movie 5 is more powerful than in movie 1, etc.

After character creation, I used a starter scenario where they started mostly equipment free so they didn't have to spend too much time kitting out.

The first few sessions were spent describing what the PCs saw/experienced/encountered and then prompting "What do you do?" and then explaining how that translated into game mechanics. By the 3rd session, they knew which dice to reach for when making an attack or damage roll.

For my kids, it's about their player characters and the adventure. They remember details in great detail in these areas. Mechanics are a distant secondary concern.

IMO, as it should be.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Some background info on myself:

I play 3e/pathfinder. It's my game of choice, though I've dabbled in a few others including 4e, World of Darkness, and I own and have read perhaps two or three dozen other games/systems. I like all of them for their own virtues.

I am a dissertation shy of a clinical psychology doctorate (I have my master's degree). I do know the limitations of children at various ages, as well as knowing that these are averages, and I know where my son both exceeds and is below averages (better at math and language than average, not as good at paying very close/extended attention compared to average).


My son is not very good at games at this point. Though he can play Memory (and waste both my wife and myself). Apart from that, rules and such don't work out well for him (even Candyland and Chutes and Ladders are a challenge to play with him). On the other hand, we can make up stories together and spend an hour or two discussing who might do what.


Because of his and my interests, and also because of his abilities, I'm definitely more interested in engaging his imagination and developing a story and character for him than playing something akin to a board game (as per Wrath of Ashardalon...but I'll probably get that soon for myself anyway --it sounds awesome). I want to engage him in the world of "pretend" moreso than I want to play games with him.

On the other hand, pretend alone is a bit...childish?...for me. I don't much enjoy pretending to be ninjas or pirates or robots with him beyond 5 minutes (I know, it's an age thing). I need a bit more story to the whole experience, and I think he benefits from and enjoys the story as well...participating in the story makes it that much better.


I guess what I'm really after (and I understand it will take years of experimenting and both my son and myself maturing) is a shared experience of imagination, but one guided by a sense of reality as well. It's the whole basic explanation of why RPGs exist, I guess...the difference between "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha", and rules for "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha".

 

[MerricB]

I guess what I'm really after (and I understand it will take years of experimenting and both my son and myself maturing) is a shared experience of imagination, but one guided by a sense of reality as well. It's the whole basic explanation of why RPGs exist, I guess...the difference between "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha", and rules for "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha".

In that case... whatever system feels right to you. You want something that will provide structure, and there are very few wrong choices in the RPG field, as long as you're comfortable with them.

Cheers!

 

[Azgulor]

Some background info on myself:
Because of his and my interests, and also because of his abilities, I'm definitely more interested in engaging his imagination and developing a story and character for him than playing something akin to a board game (as per Wrath of Ashardalon...but I'll probably get that soon for myself anyway --it sounds awesome). I want to engage him in the world of "pretend" moreso than I want to play games with him.

On the other hand, pretend alone is a bit...childish?...for me. I don't much enjoy pretending to be ninjas or pirates or robots with him beyond 5 minutes (I know, it's an age thing). I need a bit more story to the whole experience, and I think he benefits from and enjoys the story as well...participating in the story makes it that much better.


I guess what I'm really after (and I understand it will take years of experimenting and both my son and myself maturing) is a shared experience of imagination, but one guided by a sense of reality as well. It's the whole basic explanation of why RPGs exist, I guess...the difference between "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha", and rules for "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha".

Thanks for the additional background info. I'd still go with what I recommended previously, encourage the imaginative & role-play side, regardless of the system chosen. Let him roll the dice, but leave the mechanic lingo to your side of the screen.

More:
"I swing my sword at the zombie!"
"Ok, roll the 20-sider.", "Or roll, this die."

Instead of:
"Roll to hit", "Roll a Fort save", etc.

If PF/3.5 is your game of choice, go with that. Given your specific situation & criteria, you definitely don't want get things going and then change gears by switching to a rules set you'd prefer to run/play. Just introduce options and concepts slowly. The old D&D red box walked you through character gen and made your character a fighter. It was meant to be simple and instructional.

Do the same thing. Start with non-casters. When I asked my kids what they wanted to be able to do, the 2 main concepts I got were "An archer" (the older child), and "A Ninja" (the younger). Char-gen resulted in a Level 2 Ranger and a Rogue 1/Monk 1. For my youngest, to this day, his character is a "ninja".

Don't fall into the "standard" rpg tropes/traps we impose on ourselves: don't run NPCs along with the PCs just to round out an adventuring party unless you want to. Borrow subsystems like reserve points, action points, fast healing, etc. Fudge rolls, borrow "cheating death" style rules, etc. Running a game for young kids is a different, yet very rewarding kind of game.

Best of luck!

 

[Thunderfoot]

My son is 21, he began playing 2eAD&D when he was 5. Yes, you read that correctly. The important thing is fun and pacing, not rule set. There are any number of system that could work. But more importantly, are you ready to teach them in a patient and understanding manner. It's easy to forget that many possible role players are lost every year to "overactiveivus nerditis" a truly horrible disease that manifests when well meaning RP vets tend to take control of novice's RP decision telling them that this is way is "better" or "more correct". For a great example of why this isn't a good idea, watch "Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising" when the girlfriend decides to play a fighter.

 

[pawsplay]

I confess, I don't know much about old school D&D.

Then you shouldn't.

 

[pawsplay]

I guess what I'm really after (and I understand it will take years of experimenting and both my son and myself maturing) is a shared experience of imagination, but one guided by a sense of reality as well. It's the whole basic explanation of why RPGs exist, I guess...the difference between "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha", and rules for "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha".

Ever heard of this? My partner and I have played a few times and find it very amusing. It takes a grownup to figure out the rules, but I'm sure a kid could play it.

Once Upon a Time
Atlas Games: Charting New Realms of Imagination

 

[nedjer]

Some background info on myself:


I am a dissertation shy of a clinical psychology doctorate (I have my master's degree). I do know the limitations of children at various ages, as well as knowing that these are averages, and I know where my son both exceeds and is below averages (better at math and language than average, not as good at paying very close/extended attention compared to average).


My son is not very good at games at this point. Though he can play Memory (and waste both my wife and myself). Apart from that, rules and such don't work out well for him (even Candyland and Chutes and Ladders are a challenge to play with him). On the other hand, we can make up stories together and spend an hour or two discussing who might do what.


Because of his and my interests, and also because of his abilities, I'm definitely more interested in engaging his imagination and developing a story and character for him than playing something akin to a board game (as per Wrath of Ashardalon...but I'll probably get that soon for myself anyway --it sounds awesome). I want to engage him in the world of "pretend" moreso than I want to play games with him.

On the other hand, pretend alone is a bit...childish?...for me. I don't much enjoy pretending to be ninjas or pirates or robots with him beyond 5 minutes (I know, it's an age thing). I need a bit more story to the whole experience, and I think he benefits from and enjoys the story as well...participating in the story makes it that much better.


I guess what I'm really after (and I understand it will take years of experimenting and both my son and myself maturing) is a shared experience of imagination, but one guided by a sense of reality as well. It's the whole basic explanation of why RPGs exist, I guess...the difference between "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha", and rules for "pew, pew, pew...I gotcha".

The 'limitations/ below averages' maybe sounds like some of those psychology courses were pitching a 'learning styles' model, where all kids are designated as having relative learning strengths and weaknesses?

The limited focus on procedure and the short attention span, (that don't crop-up when engaged in elaborate imaginative play with an adult), might as easily be indicative of a rather bright and inquiring mind; rather than a socially constructed 'deficit'?

 

[Aberzanzorax]

The 'limitations/ below averages' maybe sounds like some of those psychology courses were pitching a 'learning styles' model, where all kids are designated as having relative learning strengths and weaknesses?

The limited focus on procedure and the short attention span, (that don't crop-up when engaged in elaborate imaginative play with an adult), might as easily be indicative of a rather bright and inquiring mind; rather than a socially constructed 'deficit'?

Agreed. I don't think of it as a deficit per se, just something in terms of averages to easily explain what kind of gaming would suit him best at this age.

I certainly think he's a smartypants, but then, I'm pretty biased.