Should D&D be sold as a boardgame?

[Eternal Knot Games]

In terms of sold, I mean for like family fun. Imagine "selling" D&D as a family game where you bust out some maps, similiar to those found in the basic boxed set, some miniatures, (once again, similiar to the basic boxed set), and get started playing with pregenerated characters.

That would be interesting if aimed at families. I think the Basic D&D game could do it in terms of providing what you need, but I don't think it's aimed that way.

This is where us over this side of the pond know better! We have a D&D board game, even have a couple of add-ons. I've given it a go (the basic, and not with the add-on) and enjoyed it. Tempted to buy it meself, and the extras too, the models that come with it are cool (if unpainted) as well.

 

[Flyspeck23]

Here's a link to the BGG Definitive DungeonCrawl GeekList

This list has it all: Hero Quest, D&D Basic Game, Warhammer Quest...
Note that Dungeon Bash appears on page 4, as does Descent.

 

[Flyspeck23]

This is where us over this side of the pond know better! We have a D&D board game, even have a couple of add-ons. I've given it a go (the basic, and not with the add-on) and enjoyed it. Tempted to buy it meself, and the extras too, the models that come with it are cool (if unpainted) as well.

Yes, the D&D boardgame is fun - although it plays pretty much like Hero Quest (it even got some strange dice), so if you got the latter you could do without it.

Oh, and the minis are indeed cool - my favorite is the bugbear

 

[KB9JMQ]

There must, must, must be a modern equivalent of the old red box Basic set--and I mean not merely in physical form, but in how it's sold and marketed--or the hobby will continue to slowly dwindle.

I agree. The vast majority of us here started with those sets. Why can't it be done again ?

 

[William Ronald]

I agree. The vast majority of us here started with those sets. Why can't it be done again ?

I think there was a concern that TSR was supporting two different versions of essentially the same game: the Dungeons and Dragons game and the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons game. However, it would be possible to have a boxed set to serve as an introduction to the game, cover some levels, and be compatable with D&D 3.5.

Breaking up the rules into different boxed sets would probably compete with the core rules. However, having a "red box set" that covers the basics -- such as character generation, classes, and a few levels -- could work.

 

[Odhanan]

In terms of sold, I mean for like family fun. Imagine "selling" D&D as a family game where you bust out some maps, similiar to those found in the basic boxed set, some miniatures, (once again, similiar to the basic boxed set), and get started playing with pregenerated characters.

So in fact you mean... be sold like the Basic Boxed Set right? In this case, no.

We need a modern red box. Without minis, maps and crap that limitate the game in the first-user's imagination. A box I can offer to my 10-year old cousin without having him pay more money after two games.

 

[Zaukrie]

There are two or three options, only 1 of which is D&D related.

Descent looks amazing, and the serious gamer geeks that work at The Source could not recommend it highly enough - but it cost $80 or something like that.

Heroscape, while not a board game, has great visual appeal - but it is pretty far from D&D.

The fantastic locations products! Look at the thread about the latest announement where Mearls talks about how they are all playing on these maps - not just skirmish, not just the adventures that they come with, but just to play. If WotC wants to do this, make one fantastic locations product each year that is a board, with some minis, and several scenarios. Make maps in other products during the year, like now, some of which tie to the board game map, with additional scenarios on-line. This, to me, is so obvious that it will never be done.

 

[Maggan]

Breaking up the rules into different boxed sets would probably compete with the core rules. However, having a "red box set" that covers the basics -- such as character generation, classes, and a few levels -- could work.

Sorry to sound like a broken record: that's what the current Basic Set does.

It seems to me that it's not mechanics that would sell a Basic Box. It's not a question of minis or no minis, chargen or no chargen, maps or boards and so on. It's more down to packaging, cover, advertising, all that stuff that are seperate from the actual game.

Most of the mechanical stuff that people are looking for in the mythical New Red Box are already in the current Basic Set. So the only thing that's left to focus on in my mind is marketing.

How to market the Basic Set?

/M

 

[jdrakeh]

Sorry to sound like a broken record: that's what the current Basic Set does.

No, it really isn't.

It's not a question of minis or no minis, chargen or no chargen, price and availiability and so on.

That's exactly what it's a question of.

]Most of the mechanical stuff that people are looking for in the mythical New Red Box are already in the current Basic Set.

Obviously, this isn't true. If this were true, numerous people on this thread wouldn't be pointing out things that the current Basic Set lacks and saying that they'd like to see these things in the proposed 'New Red Box' (e.g., character generation rules, etc). Fact is, the mechanical stuff that most people are looking for is not in the current Basic Set.

So the only thing that's left to focus on in my mind is marketing.

Sure, that's the only thing left to focus on - but only if you ignore all of the requests that people have been making to see the current Basic Set rules expanded and its price point lowered. If you ignore all of these requests and simply focus on repackaging the current Basic Set, you aren't actually addressing any of the common complaints about said item that crop up timne and time again.

People don't pop into these threads and say 'Gee! The current Basic Set is sheer genius, but I didn't buy it because of the cover art!' - they critique its lack of character generation rules, its high price point, and its other limitations that make a less than ideal introductory game. Failing to address those concerns and, instead, merely budgeting for some new cover art will not magically fix all of the problems that people have with the current Basic Set.

In fact, it won't fix any of them. Perhaps you've heard the expression "When you polish a turd, you get a polished turd"? Well, that applies here - if all you're doing is cosmetically altering a product that many people consider to be poorly designed, without doing anything to fix the flaws in that design, you're still going to have a product that many people consider to be poorly designed, even if it the cover art is a bit sexier.

I suggest flushing this particular tu... err... product and re-building it from the ground up in accordance with the largely reasonable suggestions of its many detractors.

 

[Maggan]

Obviously, this isn't true. If this were true, numerous people on this thread wouldn't be pointing out things that the current Basic Set lacks and saying that they'd like to see these things in the proposed 'New Red Box' (e.g., character generation rules, etc). Fact is, the mechanical stuff that most people are looking for is not in the current Basic Set.

But ... but ... character generation IS in the current Basic Set. Unless I read the rules completely upside down this weekend. I wanted to check, since I wasn't certain (I don't play using the basic set, so my recollections of the contents are a bit hazy).

So to me, people ARE asking for mechanics that are in the current Basic Set. Sorry, there's no other way I can see this. The basic set does chargen, a few levels, simplified combat, and is a slimmed version of 3.5.

They might not know that there's chargen in the Basic Set, but that's not the same thing as chargen missing. So, if the mechanics people are asking for is already in the Basic Set, there must be something else that's the matter?

Presentation, perhaps?

Ok, if I qualify it with "some people", is that better?

/M