Some Improvements for the Red Box!

[JohnSnow]

Okay, since there's already a stickied thread charting errors here, I won't delve into that.

What I'd like to use this thread for is compiling suggestions to WotC for improvements in the next version of the set. What did you like about the box, what didn't you like? I'll start.

I love the solo adventure combining character creation and rules instruction. I think the box provides a great intro to the game. BUT, I would like to see some things added.

The most successful starter versions of D&D in the past have let you create and play 4 races and 4 classes (granted in the D&D Basic version, 3 of those races basically WERE classes). The starter adventure idea is great, but I think the game suffers for the lack of comprehensive character creation rules. I realize that there might be a page limit problem, but this is a glaring omission. A supplemental "creating a character" cheatsheet wouldn't go totally amiss.

There's no equipment list! This is a BIG faux pas in my opinion. Having your equipment pre-chosen for you makes the character feel far less organic. It's great as a starter ONCE, but it wouldn't be bad to have some point in the middle where you can spend some loot. For those who don't recall and can't look it up, the original Mentzer Red Box did precisely this.

The power cards are too customized. This ties into the character-creation rules. The power cards are useful only for characters built precisely the way the Red Box adventure builds them. Even assuming there's no shopping, what stops the rogue player from wanting to take short sword off one of the goblins and using that instead of his dagger. He knows he's proficient with it, and it is an objectively better weapon. Sure, it works fine for the solo adventure, but by the time the players pull a party together (to go on the Adventure in the DM book), there should be some opportunity for customization.

The level limit is (a little) too low. I understand that limiting the levels encourages people to buy more books (like the Heroes of... line), however, both of the old Dungeons & Dragons Basic Sets went to level 3. That's even a natural breakpoint in 4e - 4th-level is where you get your first ability score improvements. I realize it takes an extra sheet of power cards (and an extra line in each character advancement chart) to add another level, but it's not THAT hard. I feel the Red Box doesn't quite have the magical "you can play forever with just this box" factor of the original game. And that's a shame. If you're worried, you can reassure Marketing that nobody WOULD, but the fact that they COULD would be a HUGE selling point.

Finally, the Red Box should use the same rules as the rest of the Essentials line. It would be particularly jarring for a new player to have to rebuild his character after adventuring for a while because the Red Box uses slightly different rules. Consistency is important for new gamers. It also speaks of a certain level of professionalism.

Overall, these are minor quibbles with what is an otherwise excellent product. So, in summary, I suggest making the following changes to the next version:

1) Include full character creation rules (4 classes and 4 races).
2) Offer more customization, specifically cards that explain their math and equipment lists.
3) Include rules for advancing characters as far as 3rd-level.
4) Make the rules consistent with the rest of the Essentials line.

That would make for a truly magical Starter Set. Just my two cents.

 

[GRStrayton]

I'd like to see:

5) A table of contents for the DM's book so that during play you can quickly look something up if you need to rather than flip through to find it.

 

[hopeless]

Well okay...

6) I'd like the option of an intro adventure where the fighter can elect what weapon they're going to use and by that I mean;

Fighter: I leap off the wagon into the middle of the charging goblins and employ my improved unarmed attack!
Dm: Stunned silence

And

7)have the cleric berate the goblins into fleeing courtesy of being able to speak the language and more importantly have Intimidation as a trained skill!

 

[ExploderWizard]

Just one single thing would make the box worth having.


Make the contents useful for creating level 1-2 characters (limited selections notwithstanding), and create/run adventures for them.

Is that so difficult?

 

[ppaladin123]

I'd like to see:

5) A table of contents for the DM's book so that during play you can quickly look something up if you need to rather than flip through to find it.

Now that is a rather serious oversight. Did they "beta" test this with gamers?

 

[nnms]

A starter set where the characters you make in it don't require rebuilding to continue your campaign with Heroes of the Fallen Lands.

 

[JohnSnow]

Okay, since I feel there were some good comments that got deleted after the errata thread became errata only, I suggest people voice them in this thread...

I just want to clarify some of the points I made above. I understand what the new Red Box is. I'm just disappointed based on what it could have been. What we got this time was yet another Starter Set that is, basically, a teaser intro to the game.

I'm sure the WotC guys are patting themselves on the back for finally doing a set with character creation rules. But it seems to me that the "Red Box" character creation is...suspect. Forget, for a moment, that there are some discrepancies between the "Red Box" classes and what we've seen of the full versions in Heroes of the Fallen Lands. That's the province of the errata thread.

What I want to discuss is the extent the Red Box really has "character creation" rules. I grant that you can make a fighter, cleric, rogue or wizard of any of 4 races. But in many ways, one Red Box fighter will be the same as another. 16 pre-gens would probably have been a better use of space. Not counting the power descriptors, the Ampersand previews of the warpriest cleric, slayer fighter, thief rogue, and mage wizard took 2 pages each. Condensed race descriptions should take about another page each. That's 12 pages for full class and race descriptions. Equipment tables for mundane stuff could be handled in 4 more pages. That's 16 pages. Given that all the attributes use the same table, I'm thinking you could give the default array and describe all the stats in under 2 pages (about what it takes in the PHB).

That's less than 20 pages added to the PHB. Given that, there's probably enough room to include powers up to 2nd, or even 3rd level for every class. Another 32 pages in the Player's Book would be (I think) a pretty minimal increase in cost, but the value added to the set would be immeasurable. In fact, it's so immeasurable that I feel it would be worth limiting the solo adventure to only include the full path for 2 classes (fighter and wizard, say) if you absolutely had to keep the book shorter. Or raise the price by five dollars if you must.

The other thing the set needs to be fully usable is more magic items. The "Red Box" only includes 7 distinct items. The Moldvay and Mentzer sets had 48 and 53 respectively (I still have mine, so I counted). By comparison, that's pretty pathetic.

Replayability is a huge issue pertaining to the potential impact this set could have. Every starter set since WotC took over has been the same - nothing but a limited intro set intended to tease people into buying "the real game." That makes it hard for someone "in the know" to give the "Red Box" as a present - because we know it's not enough to really play. So guess what? It doesn't sell well.

The Basic D&D boxes were different. Yes, they were for Levels 1-3 only, but they were everything you needed to play several 3-level long campaigns. I think WotC is nervous that they'll sell someone a "Red Box" and nothing else, but is that really a serious concern? People that cheap aren't going to jump on more products ANYWAY. But if you've never played, it takes a while to get the hang of D&D. The original "Red Box" did a really good job at exposing people to the experience and making D&D accessible. Lots of people who played it got "hooked." By contrast, every starter set in the WotC days has failed miserably at attracting new players, even though the game is more sophisticated and the system is, in many ways, "easier." Doesn't that tell you something?

I thought when I saw the "Red Box" trade dress on the new Dungeons & Dragons Starter Set that WotC had made a real 4e version of that venerable product. Sadly, while it's good by the standards of the recent "Starter Sets," this set falls woefully short when it's compared to the old "Red Box."

I'm confused. Does WotC not want to sell tens of millions of "Red Box" sets? Because it sure seems that way.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Some of the improvements above would add a level of unnecessary complexity for the target audience of the red box.

The starter set red box is directed towards those who probably don't even know what a role playing game is about.

The later books in the series is probably better to start with for those who already know what role playing is.

Can it use some improvement? Definitely. But I think the suggestions should take into account what's best for the target audience and realize that perhaps the target audience might not be them.

 

[Korgoth]

I also think that they should have included a very brief conventional character creation section. I don't think it would have added too many pages to the back of the player's book and it would make the whole thrust of the game much more clear. They could have even basically limited it to the options given; just to have it laid out in conventional fashion and with a rudimentary equipment section would have been most sensible.

 

[JohnSnow]

Some of the improvements above would add a level of unnecessary complexity for the target audience of the red box.

The starter set red box is directed towards those who probably don't even know what a role playing game is about.

The later books in the series is probably better to start with for those who already know what role playing is.

Can it use some improvement? Definitely. But I think the suggestions should take into account what's best for the target audience and realize that perhaps the target audience might not be them.

The original Mentzer "Red Box" had the exact same target audience. Actually, the audience was harder back then, in that the majority had nothing to even compare it to.

And yet, they managed to explain it very well. And include character creation rules and enough stuff to keep you adventuring for months. The rules were also less mechanically straight forward. They had to include "to-hit" tables, saving throw tables, and the like for every class, as well as the thief's special ability tables. By contrast, the core mechanic is MUCH easier to explain.

I hardly think people are stupider now than they were in the 80's. And the "Red Box" did a pretty good of introducing the game to newbies back then.