Roll Initiative!

[Felon]

It's also possible that those assumptions are actually correct and it is you and I that a different from the typical player.

Perhaps, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. As far as fast-paced, run-n'-gun combat goes, electronic games have had D&D beat cold for some time (especially if you have good set of subwoofers heh).

 

[Gold Roger]

It's also possible that those assumptions are actually correct and it is you and I that a different from the typical player. Really, only WotC would be in a position to know that, via suveys and research. What you and I do in our home campaigns may not be way the game is played by the majority and therefore don't matter enough to get a mention. People that care about storytelling and versimilitude and consistency might make up 1% of D&D players. If that were the case, there really wouldn't be much motivation on the part of WotC writers, designers and developers to even bring those things up, let alone dedicate resources to them.

Just by way of example -- if EN World was representative of the D&D buying public in general, there'd be official 3.5 versions of Planescape, Dark Sun and Birthright on the shelves.

Now, I don't have acurate data (nor does wotc though-online surveys only reach a certain amount of people and those paper slips are neither very telling, nor did I ever send one of, as I guess many don't as well), but I very much doubt your aplication. Even the wotc board, which I'd say has the largest amount of hack and slashers has a large enough amount of people that do care about these things.

 

[Reynard]

Perhaps, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.

I would.

As far as fast-paced, run-n'-gun combat goes, electronic games have had D&D beat cold for some time (especially if you have good set of subwoofers heh).

Absolutely untrue. They are entirely different forms of entertainment. While there is some crossover in the two types of "gamer", those people are the exception.

 

[Felon]

Absolutely untrue. They are entirely different forms of entertainment. While there is some crossover in the two types of "gamer", those people are the exception.

My post left no room for this kind of equivocation. They are different forms of games. As stated, electronic games are superior when it comes to delivering high-speed, flamboyant action. Which happens to be the very crowd that this whole "Roll initiative! In your face!" mentality is designed to appeal to.

Note that your last sentence contradicts your earlier assertion that we have no way of knowing what type of player is the rule and what type is the exception.

 

[Reynard]

My post left no room for this kind of equivocation. They are different forms of games. Electronic games are superior when it comes to delivering high-speed, flamboyant action, appealing to the very crowd that this whole "Roll Initiative" mentality is designed to appeal to.

That is a strange assertion to make. What makes you think that people that want to start sessions off high octane are the same people that want to play video games. The two have nothing to do with one another that I can see.

Note that your last sentence contradicts your earlier assertion that we have no way of knowing what type of player is the rule and what type is the exception.

Huh?

 

[Felon]

Huh?

Good retort there.

Assertion #1:

It's also possible that those assumptions are actually correct and it is you and I that a different from the typical player. Really, only WotC would be in a position to know that, via suveys and research. What you and I do in our home campaigns may not be way the game is played by the majority and therefore don't matter enough to get a mention.

Assertion #2:

They are entirely different forms of entertainment. While there is some crossover in the two types of "gamer", those people are the exception.

Now in assertion number one, you posit that the "typical player" is an unknowable quantity to you and I. But in assertion number two, you feel quite comfortable in stating matter-of-factly that the type of gamer who enjoys both electronic and tabletop games is exceptional. It does indeed smack of a double-standard.

 

[Reynard]

Assertion #1:

wasn't an assertion at all. Note the use of lots "may" and "might" in there.

Assertion #2:

I feel pretty safe in that assertion given the galactic level of difference between the size of the two industries, especially given that the per-product cost is almost identical.

 

[Felon]

That is a strange assertion to make. What makes you think that people that want to start sessions off high octane are the same people that want to play video games. The two have nothing to do with one another that I can see.

By it's very nature, tabletop combat is not remotely as fast-paced as the combat in an electronic game. It just doesn't command as much patience. This is, after all, a major reason why MMOG's have taken their toll on RPG'ers and it's way anyone who keeps their eyes peeled sees threads about players who lost their group to World of Warcraft or what have you.

Now, grasping that, it really shouldn't be too hard to correlate that somebody with a low-attention span, minimal desire for exposition, and a hunger to kill something NOW, is going to find that the console or computer has a distinct advantage over the table.

 

[Wik]

Alright, I skipped a few replies, but I think I get the basic gist.

First off, starting off with a "Bang" is a great way to get the players into the game. In Media Res is an EXCELLENT game starter, and I highly recommend it for starting off adventures.... it doesn't always work for individual sessions (my sessions are usually fairly short, so I'm not always able to "start with a band"), but for adventures? Hell, yeah.

Old school D&D adventures did this very well.... "You're at the dungeon's mouth... let's start" sort of set-up. For those who seem to think that "modern" D&D is built towards "action, action, action", I suggest they take a closer look at how simply old-school adventures were set up.

Finally, for those who say "It would never work in my game" (and there are a lot of you): I fully agree. You know your players better than I do, and if you seem to think that they'd get their knickers in a knot if you started things off with a fight (in my group,the response would be "hey,easy XP!", but whatever), then don't do it.

That being said, there's a very easy way to capture that episodic TV feel of "starting with a bang" without ruffling the PC's feathers - have it happen "off-stage".

The old d6 Star Wars game suggested that the GM write a script, and have the various players read it out. Why not do something similar? You could have all the players temporarily take the roles of minor NPCs in a fight that is somehow related to the adventure at hand. You could even suggest that they gain bonus XP if they achieve some role or another.

As an example, imagine a simple "rescue the princess" scenario. In "typical" D&D Fashion, the Players would be summoned by the king the day after it happened. The PCs would be offered some sort of financial incentive ("here's 1,000 GP, go save her!"), and maybe a few relevant details would be foreshadowed ("The villain is a knight indark armour with an evil-looking sword").

Yee haw.

Now, the "roll initiative" technique could be applied here, and it can be a LOT OF FUN. At the start of the game, as the players are getting their character sheets ready, say "Here's your temporary characters. Players #1 and #2 - you'll be playing the villains... your goal is to capture the princess. The rest of you guys... you're playing mid-level warrior NPCs, and your goal is to protect her. Players 1 & 2 will get a bonus XP award if you can kidnap the princess while suffering no losses, and the rest of you will receive an XP bonus if you're able to hold the princess for more than five rounds against the evil onslaught. Have at it, boys".

So, we have a fight, and the Players even get a chance tosee what the big villain is capable of (though I suggest using a simplified character sheet, so that there's surprises waiting for the group when they encounter him later on). And, when the king approaches the PCs with his task, the group is already charged (and involved, at least emotionally) and ready to go.

Just my two cents. But, to summarize - "roll initiative" is an excellent way to start any game. Period.

 

[Felon]

I feel pretty safe in that assertion given the galactic level of difference between the size of the two industries, especially given that the per-product cost is almost identical.

I guess we're not even close to being on the same page. What does the scale of the industries and per-product cost have to do with the discussion at hand, and in particular with the suggestion that the people who enjoy a faster mode of entertainment would not gravitate towards the slower mode?

If you don't like to wait for your food, you use the drive-through. If you want to take time to consider your order, you go inside and stand in line. If you enjoy bright explosions and non-stop kills, you go electronic. If you enjoy subplots and exposition, you go tabletop.