Good for you even if it's in no way relevant?As previously posted, I am a teacher, and I run the D&D Club at my school, as well as D&D camp in the summer. I've run D&D pro-D sessions for other teachers who wanted to know what the game is all about.
Not a philosophy teacher though, trying to appeal to a fallacy right after an ad hominem (on top of earlier little jabs I ignored)You don't know what you are talking about, and your argument is almost entirely a straw man.
Not on this thread, but I wouldn't say it if I hadn't heard it.Nobody has claimed that D&D requires exceptional intellect. No one has claimed that new players can't grasp the rage mechanic.
"You don't know what you're talking about" ~ the pot calling the copper kettle black a couple of sentences ago.So calling ideas "toxic" that literally no one has put forward in this discussion is just a means of substituting ad hominem attack for actual argument.
Chess is an extremely complicated game. An yet we manage not to gate knights behind an experience wall.D&D is an extremely complicated game. You may have noted, for example, that there are many rulebooks together totalling hundreds, nay thousands of pages of text. But to a truly new player, even concepts that seem obvious to us veterans are not. None of them individually are particularly hard. But in aggregate, they are a lot. When I want to teach the basic concept of an RPG to a large group, I don't use D&D at all. I use Dread, because everyone already understands Jenga.
And if you don't even use D&D to teach RPGs, why put roadblocks in the game to make it 'easier' to teach?
1) I'm sure plenty of people say the same for chess. Just because something isn't for everyone doesn't mean you make it not for other people to accommodate.There are a great many new players who are interested in D&D, try it, and decide it's not for them. For some, it's just the entire nature of the game. Maybe roleplaying makes them uncomfortable. But there are some who have point blank told me that the amount of rules and new concepts just seemed overwhelming.
2) Do you think the very simple addition of a subclass ability is the issue and not the subsystems/subconcepts we drop into for skills and species and magic. You can get spells straight up at 1st level; each one a little packet of all new rules, but no one's trying to screw people out of that at level 1.
But just on this one part of the whole because (wait for it)People learn at different paces and in different styles. But any experienced teacher will tell you that it is good teaching to scaffold learning so that students can develop incremental mastery by building on what they learn in logical steps.
But magic is okay, fighting styles are okay, bardic inspiration is okay, the ranger's woefully ineffectual front-loading is okay, expertise and sneak attack are okay.My actual arguments against doing sub-classes at level 1 are straightforward:
1. It adds further complication to an already complicated task - not only does a new player have to understand the basic concepts of D&D (weird dice! hit points! saving throws! armour class! etc.), PLUS the basic differences between 12 different classes, they then have to further understand those classes enough to make an informed choice between many different sub-classes for each, all before even playing the game.
No, it's just this one grain of sand that breaks the whole thing.
Boom.2. Many veteran players, such as me, don't want to be forced into a sub-class right away. We see character creation as an ongoing process rather than something that is complete before the first game, and enjoy seeing how the journey unfolds. Learning what choice feels best for a new character is a fun part of early levelling.
Told you to wait for it and here it is.
It's about enforcing a playstyle. It's about starting at level zero with as few powers as possible and making sure that's the default. Making people 'earn' their character like in the good old days.
It's nothing that would be effectively changed by them actually printing level 0 rules that would actually fulfil those asperations in a way that would actually satisfy that desire... except then it wouldn't be the default; people starting with their character concept in full wouldn't be made the outliers who are going outside the rules and the norms.
Newbie friendliness to me is just a stalking horse.