Pramas on 4E and New Gamers
- Thread starter CaptainChaos
- Start date
Imaro
Legend
hong said:
This is just plain nonsense. I have introduced people to rpg's that had no idea what they were. Not everyone plays WoW and not everybody whose heard of it knows how it works and what you do.
hong said:
Uhm...you realize there is a tactics section for DM's right? Is there one for new players to refer to when fighting monsters. Again with the YOUR experiences. Well I've run D&D 4e with two experienced and two new players and I wouldn't say it runs as smooth as silk. As a DM I found myself having to keep track of numerous things (marks, out of turn movement, recharges, combat advantage, etc.) and by necessity having to treat even groups of the same monster as individuals in gameplay.
My players were a little overwhelmed by the numerous abilities they needed to keep track of, let alone coordinating how to use them together, and yes this was at first level. I had 2 TPK's, I reset the last one then had everyone go over everything they could do and how it could be used in combat for an hour (marking, movement, powers, effects, feats, etc.). After this the one fight we got to finish before it was time to go went allright.
Mercule
Adventurer
After 25+ years of playing -- mostly GMing -- various RPGs, I'm under no illusion that I have any true perspective about what is easy for the unassisted tyro. I can say that I haven't found anything in 4e to be too difficult to understand, thus far.
Personally, I think 4e looks to be a much better system than 3.x for teaching new gamers. The powers and pretty much just give you what you need and there isn't a heinous amount of interplay between them, at least at the character level. The new lay out that encourages big, bold, colorful headings for each power is nice, too, because it highlights your options.
I can see where someone who wants to understand the depths of the system might get swamped, but that's true of any game. Teaching new players is different, though. "Pick two of these, one of these, and one of these. If you mess up, you can change them later. If you don't want to choose them all yourself, start with the recommended build."
Personally, I think 4e looks to be a much better system than 3.x for teaching new gamers. The powers and pretty much just give you what you need and there isn't a heinous amount of interplay between them, at least at the character level. The new lay out that encourages big, bold, colorful headings for each power is nice, too, because it highlights your options.
I can see where someone who wants to understand the depths of the system might get swamped, but that's true of any game. Teaching new players is different, though. "Pick two of these, one of these, and one of these. If you mess up, you can change them later. If you don't want to choose them all yourself, start with the recommended build."
Imaro said:
Then you have met some very atypical people. If you choose to ignore the 500 lb gorilla in the corner that is the videogaming industry, that's up to you.
One of the great advantages of p&p gaming over videogaming is the presence of a human DM, who is able to tailor challenges for their individual group. If the DM is finding that the players can't handle good tactics, they are perfectly able to ratchet down the difficulty of encounters. If they choose not to do so, that's up to them.
Accessorisation is where it's at. Cards, markers, and yes, minis all help in visualising the battlefield.
If they really cannot keep track of 4 abilities, and this is a systemic thing rather than something due to unfamiliarity with the system, there probably is no hope.
WayneLigon
Adventurer
xechnao said:
OD&D managed to do it in an atmosphere with far fewer distractions, and it was a unique thing for it's time. Also, it was much smaller. Even with the poor organization and sometimes vague language, you could easily get through the whole thing in a couple hours or so and then start teaching your friends.
Also, since it was sold only to hobby shops, you were selling to a bunch of customers who were already accustomed to sitting down with a thick book of Ancients minis rules or complex boardgame rules and powering through that. It's first blush of success was with college students, people who again were accustomed to delving through really complex material. It wasn't until they starting taking it home that we have 12 year olds playing the game.
You didn't have people picking it up off a shelf at Borders and saying 'Hey, I wonder what this is?', which is probably what needs to happen for the hobby to grow some more. Most people simply are not going to take home 300+ pages of rules at $30-someodd on the hope they'll like it. There should be ONE book at < 200 pages that contains what a person would need to play D&D, and it should say "Dungeons and Dragons" in big bold letters on the cover. A pull out grid map and some cardboard counters by Klaus you'd be ready to go (Of course, I'd also change D&D to work with d6 only, because d6's are cheap and easy to find even in grocery stores but that's neither here nor there).
Something else I've also thought of: One reason the Basic/Expert, etc books were a good idea was that the time it took to go up in levels was so slow. You could play a good three months or more on the Basic tier; certainly enough time to know if you liked it or not.
hong said:
Market or economy expands. It means more people are available to buy your product. People being available does not mean that they automatically buy your product. It could be that a trend loses power along the times even if it sells more than before. Which I doubt is even the case -that is selling more than before (even if market has expanded).
