Tell me that D&D 3.0/3.5 isn't really like this

[Templeton580]

And that's your opinion, which is fine. But an opinion is all it is, and you've done a poor job of supporting your points by resorting to snark and vitriol.

When I am posted at in a preachy, patronizing manner, I tend to respond with snark and vitriol. Sorry.

 

[Crothian]

I've taught lots of people to play too. The core ideas are not that complex. Things get bogged down with all the modifiers that arise during play, the need for a battlemat, running NPCs (all with different feats, skills, etc.), and so forth.

Are you treaching new people to play the game or to run the game? Playing D&D is easy, running the game is not. A player only has to know what cocerns their character to begin with the rest they can learn as it comes out. A DM has to learn everything. Someone just learning D&D should proablty not be running the game unless they have the time it takes to learn the rules.

 

[JoeGKushner]

It is interesting to note that the old 'D&D Basic Set' sold a full one-million copies in its final year of publication (1989). It sold an average of 1 million copies every year throughout the 1980s. During its run, that basic set provided a very easy 'entry way' to new players. Nothing comparable exists now (the 3e Basic Set is not a full game).

D&D For Dummies

D&D Basic Boxed Set: The miniatures and tiles make this a very easy sell to a brand new player.

 

[Jim Hague]

When I am posted at in a preachy, patronizing manner, I tend to respond with snark and vitriol. Sorry.

Apology accepted. I wasn't trying to be preachy and patronizing - when I say something like Know Thy Rules, it's not a word from on high, but it's a commandment I follow. Any GM that doesn't know the rules compounds any problems with players that don't know the rules. It's all part of good gaming; if everyone knows what's going on, the game flows more smoothly. And for me, that's part and parcel of being polite at the table.

 

[Templeton580]

Playing D&D is easy.

Sorry to call out one little comment, but what are you basing this on? Belief? Evidence?

People new to RPGs in my group have had a devil of a time figuring out all the bonuses on their own character sheet, even in d20 Modern. One guy in the group was so confused he kept asking what die to roll. "What's the game called?" we'd ask him. "d20 Mod--oh." Extreme example, I know.

I'll grant you that D&D is much easier to play than it is to run, but I don't agree that "playing D&D is easy" is always the case.

 

[Akrasia]

D&D For Dummies

D&D Basic Boxed Set: The miniatures and tiles make this a very easy sell to a brand new player.

Well, the new Boxed Set is a lot more limited than the old Basic Set in terms of providing a real 'game'. (And of course the old Basic and Expert sets provided a 'light' alternative to people instead of, or in addition to, AD&D.)

I'd be interested to see if WotC's Basic Set and/or 'Dummies book' do as well as the old Basic Set did.

I doubt very much that those two products together come close to matching the old Basic Set's 1-million/year figure.

 

[billd91]

...Every time one of these threads comes up (and there are a lot of them, enough to indicate...something), ...

Unfortunately, that something is very indistinct and could indicate pretty much anything including the tendency of gamers to get online and hold forth opinions to inflate their own self worth by trashing something else.

The only way to really settle an issue like this is with real study. Do rule-lookup bottlenecks in D&D 3.x occur with a significantly higher frequency than other game systems, especially once other factors like experience level of the gamers involved, and probably a host of other factors. I suspect you won't see a significant difference between 3.x and previous editions of AD&D or other games like Traveller, Rolemaster, Call of Cthulhu, and Hero.

 

[Akrasia]

The proof is, as they say, in the pudding ...

Actually, the saying is 'the proof is in the putting'. It's a saying made famous by Aristotle, and refers to the 'putting forward of evidence/argument', not a desert.

...
I do offer that D&D 3.0 brought me and half a dozen others back to D&D, and through that to games like Mutants and Masterminds, Spycraft and other d20 variants. One thing you can't argue with is results.

3e made me look at D&D again for the first time in a long time as well. One thing that I found interesting was that so many people in my age group who were initially interested in the 'new D&D' abandoned the game after they found it to be 'too much work'.

My point is not that 3e is doing 'badly'. It is doing 'fine' (in the recent words of a WotC employee on these boards). But it is not doing nearly as well as it could be doing, in my view, and one of the reasons for this is the steep learning curve involved -- especially for players who do not have an 'old hat' to help explain all the endless modifiers, etc., to them.

 

[Jim Hague]

Actually, the saying is 'the proof is in the putting'. It's a saying made famous by Aristotle, and refers to the 'putting forward of evidence/argument', not a desert.

I know. A shameless joke at my expense, referring to the puddings of D&D fame. Trying to add a bit of levity to a somewhat heated debate.

3e made me look at D&D again for the first time in a long time as well. One thing that I found interesting was that so many people in my age group who were initially interested in the 'new D&D' abandoned the game after they found it to be 'too much work'.

My point is not that 3e is doing 'badly'. It is doing 'fine' (in the recent words of a WotC employee on these boards). But it is not doing nearly as well as it could be doing, in my view, and one of the reasons for this is the steep learning curve involved -- especially for players who do not have an 'old hat' to help explain all the endless modifiers, etc., to them.

Sure. I never argued that D&D was doing badly, nor did you. And there's a point to be made on the steep learning curve; perhaps it's that 3.0/3.5 is aimed more at bringing pre-existing gamers who drifted away from 1/2e due to rules incoherence back into the fold? Support for that take comes from WotC/Hasbro marketing (you'd have to be a member to search for it, but there's a thread here somewhere from a WotC line developer discussing the increase of rules versus setting info in FR) - rules sell. And perhaps that marketing-based push is good in the short-term, but harms things in the longer stretch?

 

[Crothian]

Sorry to call out one little comment, but what are you basing this on? Belief? Evidence?

Playing it and introducing people to the game since it came into existance.

People new to RPGs in my group have had a devil of a time figuring out all the bonuses on their own character sheet, even in d20 Modern. One guy in the group was so confused he kept asking what die to roll. "What's the game called?" we'd ask him. "d20 Mod--oh." Extreme example, I know.

I'll grant you that D&D is much easier to play than it is to run, but I don't agree that "playing D&D is easy" is always the case.

First, characters should understand the rules. If they are asking what die to roll, they don't know the rules. As for the little bonuses, that's what the character sheet is for. If it is too complicated for them get one of those auto calcuating ones. But once the character is made all the little bonuses are added up and that's all they need. When they make the character, be there with them and show them where the numbers come from. Again this is teaching them and making sure they know the rules. When they gain a level, watch over them and make sure they are doing it right.

But if in the end they are still having trouble, then find a more simple game for them. The game is not going to be easy for everyone.