Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mxyzplk" data-source="post: 5433319" data-attributes="member: 16450">I agree with everyone on the &quot;make it a full game with enough to really play (chars, monsters, equipment) not just three levels&quot; but the simplification factor is important.What the Intro game should NOT be is something that all existing Pathfinder customers buy.&nbsp; That's a waste of time and effort.&nbsp; Heck, we Paizo faithful will buy *whatever* it is that Paizo puts out this week.&nbsp; The gap, what a product like this should address, is the new player, the OSR player, the alienated 4e player, the player that wants less rules.&nbsp; Even doing &quot;feats as class powers,&quot; when combined with the large number of class powers in Pathfinder, kinda makes for a big ass character sheet.Because BECMI and AD&amp;D were compatible enough.&nbsp; Why do I say that?&nbsp; Because millions of Red Box buyers went on to play AD&amp;D.&nbsp; Quod erat demonstrandum.&nbsp; And &quot;let's take the same complex rules and try to bundle them a little more simply&quot; has been tried in the form of D&amp;D Essentials and seems to have been a failure, as I think the collapse of D&amp;D as a book-based tabletop RPG demonstrates.Follow the successful example, not the unsuccessful one!That having been said, I do think DM prep time and run complexity are the two biggest enemies, not necessarily PC complexity, though obviously those are linked for NPCs.&nbsp; Simplify, but NOT by immersion-breaking &quot;minions/elites&quot; kinds of constructs.&nbsp; The original Red Box was very clever about getting you into the world of immersion before even breaking out many rules, with the solo adventure and that bastard Bargle wasting the hot Elmore-drawn cleric you were with.&nbsp; It sent a very clear message to my young brain that this isn't a board game, the motivation isn't &quot;power leveling,&quot; the motivation is hunting that guy down and making him pay.&nbsp; And that's what launches decades of success.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mxyzplk, post: 5433319, member: 16450"] I agree with everyone on the "make it a full game with enough to really play (chars, monsters, equipment) not just three levels" but the simplification factor is important. What the Intro game should NOT be is something that all existing Pathfinder customers buy. That's a waste of time and effort. Heck, we Paizo faithful will buy *whatever* it is that Paizo puts out this week. The gap, what a product like this should address, is the new player, the OSR player, the alienated 4e player, the player that wants less rules. Even doing "feats as class powers," when combined with the large number of class powers in Pathfinder, kinda makes for a big ass character sheet. Because BECMI and AD&D were compatible enough. Why do I say that? Because millions of Red Box buyers went on to play AD&D. Quod erat demonstrandum. And "let's take the same complex rules and try to bundle them a little more simply" has been tried in the form of D&D Essentials and seems to have been a failure, as I think the collapse of D&D as a book-based tabletop RPG demonstrates. Follow the successful example, not the unsuccessful one! That having been said, I do think DM prep time and run complexity are the two biggest enemies, not necessarily PC complexity, though obviously those are linked for NPCs. Simplify, but NOT by immersion-breaking "minions/elites" kinds of constructs. The original Red Box was very clever about getting you into the world of immersion before even breaking out many rules, with the solo adventure and that bastard Bargle wasting the hot Elmore-drawn cleric you were with. It sent a very clear message to my young brain that this isn't a board game, the motivation isn't "power leveling," the motivation is hunting that guy down and making him pay. And that's what launches decades of success. [/QUOTE]

Verification