New Campaign Conundrum

[JediSoth]

Since there isn't an all-encompassing D&D/Pathfinder forum, I'm posting this here.

For the sake of argument, say you had 3 players. You wanted to make a D&D campaign. One that is friendly to a new player (new to RPGs in general; a true newbie), but with complex enough character customization to also appeal to veterans. You cannot count on a perfectly balanced party. You may be missing either an arcane caster or a divine caster, perhaps both.

Which edition and/or campaign setting would you choose? (Saying "I wouldn't play D&D isn't a valid response.")

I cross-posted this to several forums, so if you go to more than one place you might see it.

 

[slobster]

I'd actually really consider the D&D 5E playtest. Not a whole lot of customization options for the veterans, but then it's all new so they still have some unfamiliar toys to size up and begin exploiting. And it's fantastically new-user friendly.

For a group that's looking for a long term game, though, I can understand why you'd want to use an actual, finished product.

3.x and 4E both have things to recommend them, especially 4E Essentials. Those classes tend to be fairly user-friendly while still being effective, fun, and evocative of particular fantasy tropes and archetypes. The down side of 4E is that combat tracking on a round-by-round basis gets tedious, and might turn off a new player.

I can't speak to anything before them, as I never played enough to form a strong opinion.

In the end, if you're looking for a single answer from me, I would recommend 3.5 using the Core 3 books only. If your veterans want to bring in something from one of the splats, tell them that you are looking for a simple game and may approve other sources on a case by case basis. With material limited in that way, the most intimidating excesses of 3.5 character building are kept in check and your newbie shouldn't have too much trouble (with your help, of course) settling on a character that appeals and avoids the common chargen traps.

 

[Yora]

Don't make the campaign about killing monsters and taking their stuff. I've run a couple of games that had no arcane or divine caster and those worked just fine.

Instead make it about exploring places, making allies, escaping from dangerous locations, searching for treasure. If sometimes killing monsters and enemies is the best solution to get what they want or need that's perfectly fine, but those situations are some of the obstacles they have to overcome in the story, not the whole story by themselves. Even fighters are not completely useless outside of combat, still have strength and a few skills, which are not so bad when they are not running around in full plate but maybe masterwork breastplate or a chain shirt. And a lot of the times, it's really the player who comes up with ideas what to do and isn't so much about the character who uses an ability to actually do it. Barbarians and Rangers do even better in that regard with more skills.
Low- and mid-level works of course best for such a thing, which you should do anyway with a new player. Start at 1st to 3rd level and then stay at each level for a couple of play sessions before advancing to new levels and getting new abilities.
If you have spontaneous spellcasters, they probably won't be much of a problem since they don't have a lot of spells. If a sorcerer learns spider climb, it will probably be much smarter to cast it on a rogue or fighter rather than himself. Prepared spellcasters have more opportunities to have the right spell for every situation, but they can only cast it once or twice before obstacles have to be overcome with good old fashioned using your arms and legs. It's not a problem with most groups, but when players who play spellcasters tend to be ultra prepared for everything, strongly limit the access to scrolls and wands. A wizard with a wand of knock does not need to prepare knock and has it available all the time, and when needed to he can cast 50 times in a single day. That's what's making rogues and fighters redundant. But if he prepares it only once and does not have a wand and maybe only a single scroll, that he will want to keep it for a situation where it's really needed and the rogue just can't do it.

 

[slobster]

I missed that you were asking for a setting!

I only have experience with a few, but they all had their ups and downs. Since choosing a setting is even more a matter of taste than choosing a system, I'll just say what I liked and disliked about each.

Forgotten Realms: Almost anyone with even a passing knowledge of fantasy can dive in and feel familiar here. Halflings act like you think they'd act, elves are ancient and enigmatic and retreating from the world, etc. There is always always excitement for the PCs to get up to, and if you are the kind of GM that likes running published modules, this setting is your best bet. On the down side, that same massive glut of published material makes the realms feel crowded and illogical, with hundreds of races rubbing shoulders and massively powerful NPCs that inexplicably have little effect on day-to-day affairs. I't D&D in microcosm, really.

Golarion: I have limited experience with this world, but the main thing recommending it is the very high quality and quantity of 3.x compatible modules available for it. If you aren't planning on running modules, or plan on running something other than 3.x, skip it. Other than that it is much like the Realms (but not nearly so iconic, IMO).

Greyhawk: Another recognizable fantasy setting at which most players will easily feel at home. Not nearly as gonzo as FR, but some people feel it lacks character as a result. Not a lot of recent material for it, but it's a good place to play if you want a loosely defined canvas where you are free to fill in the blanks. Another benefit is that the 3.x core books assume Greyhawk when they talk about gods and such, so your players may already have some knowledge of it.

Eberron: My personal favorite, but your group needs to know what they are getting into. A little more effort is spent in making the world "make sense", but it makes sense in an action-packed pulp heroes-vs-Nazi-airships sort of way. Magic is everywhere, but not nearly as world-shatteringly powerful as it is in FR. It resembles the industrial revolution more than a world filled with superheroes. Fun and intrigue abound, but it is a niche and you need to make sure your players will fit in it.

Rokugan (aka 3.x Oriental Adventures): If your group has a Japan fetish, as mine did for a while, this will be a tempting option. The importance of social standing, culturally acceptable behavior, and roleplaying really cannot be overstated in this setting. The culture is alien and exotic and alluring and you can lose your campaign for whole sessions in deadly intrigues to determine arcane points of honor and responsibility. You can also run it as more of an eastern action setting of course. Again, a niche setting requiring some player buy-in.

Dark Sun: Post-apocalyptic wasteland filled with mutants and despair. Says it all, really. If that's your bag you should certainly check it out.

Ravenloft: Hell of a good setting emphasizing gothic horror and daily struggles against the darkness that may never be won. If your group loves vampires and werewolves fantasy, think about looking at this world. Also has some legendarily awesome modules from the pre-3E days.

Hope that helps!

 

[JediSoth]

Some background on the question, since it seems like I should've put it in the post to begin with:

2 of the 3 players have a preference for a particular version of D&D (not the same one, naturally). The only player that doesn't already have a preference is the new person (OK, she's my wife, which is one reason I'm not going to take a hard-nosed approach with what we're playing and things like that and I am going to acquiesce to her request to teach her D&D BY NAME).

I have a current campaign that's going to cycle through all the editions in which she participates (see the DoctorStrangeRoll link in my sig), but attendance isn't regular enough for us to play it often enough for either of our tastes. I'm not going to abandon that game, but I'm also not going to push forward with half the group absent (these two things are non-negotiable right now for reason I won't go into), so this will be a second game the three regular players can play and actually make progress in so my wife can learn the game and learn RPGs*.

I own pretty much every edition of D&D, as well as 15-20 other RPGs, so I'm well versed in most of them. I'm just trying to get a variety of opinions, mostly to A) validate my own thoughts and B) possibly awaken my mind to new ideas since us old grognards can sometimes not see the bleedin' obvious.

*Yes, I know there are better games for 3 people and better games for learning all about how to play RPGs, but she wants to learn on D&D and she who bought my Geek Chic table gets at least 3 or 4 votes on this matter, in my opinion.

 

[Razjah]

I think 3.5/Pathfinder E6 would work pretty well. The veterans can have fun with feat intensive build while New players need to learn a lot less and many "trap" feats can still be decent and if the game goes long enough they get enough feats to overcome one poor choice.

Eberron is a pretty nice starting setting. The common magic would allow potions and wands to help cover bases for the party such as healing after combat. If you keep if E6, a wand of cure light goes a long way with d8 healing.

I think having expeditions into Xendrik would work well for a smaller party (more loot for each pc). "Fantasy Indiana Jones" should give new players a decent idea of what is going on for levels 1-2. After that you can introduce them to Sharn for a "Fantasy Metropolis with skyscrapers" for some intrigue (a murder mystery perhaps? or have some cultists attack them). Once that mystery is solved they could be levels 3-4 which would let you send them into the Mournland for the "World's Largest Open Air Dungeon" here they can encounter horror elements and Things Man Was Not Meant to Know. After that they can deal with the Lord of Dust (same area, but this time some helpful NPC can help them get there) and fight (probably not kill) one of Eberron's biggest baddies. I think that would work really well for introducing a new player.

Oh, for the above I assume new to all RPGs so these adventures mix genres to show the possibilities of RPGs and not get a new player super involved in any one style before finding what he or she likes.

 

[Yora]

Yes, E6. It's the thinking mans D&D. Same rules, but you work with much less material and characters have much less options. People who know the rules very well can still get a huge amount of customization, but the game will still be simple enough for new players.

 

[Desdichado]

Play whichever edition and setting appeals to you the most. Since you can't fall back on the crutch of assuming a balanced party can solve any problem you throw at them without tweaking, and you especially want the experience to be a good one for the new player (especially if it's your wife!) then run whatever's most comfortable to you so you can focus more on making the game itself a good one.

 

[Desdichado]

That said, my preference is for E6 too. But that's because it's my favorite, not because I necessarily think it's "better" than any other option.

 

[Quickleaf]

Since there isn't an all-encompassing D&D/Pathfinder forum, I'm posting this here.

For the sake of argument, say you had 3 players. You wanted to make a D&D campaign. One that is friendly to a new player (new to RPGs in general; a true newbie), but with complex enough character customization to also appeal to veterans. You cannot count on a perfectly balanced party. You may be missing either an arcane caster or a divine caster, perhaps both.

Which edition and/or campaign setting would you choose? (Saying "I wouldn't play D&D isn't a valid response.")

I cross-posted this to several forums, so if you go to more than one place you might see it.

I second the suggestion to run the 5th edition playtest. It feels kind of like old school D&D to me but with streamlined mechanics, without the eccentric rules of Basic/1e and without the character fiddly bits overwhelm of 3e & 4e.

At least that's that's my take reading through the latest playtest packet and sitting in on an early playtest game.