Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5485359" data-attributes="member: 22779">I'm not sure that's true.  I've seen the lists that someone has put out (and I apologize for forgetting the name) that showed just how much material TSR churned out for 2e.  Even counting 3pp, it's a pretty close race as to how much material there was for 2e or 3e.Again, I really don't understand this call for a stripped down Basic game.  In 1980 (ish) when Basic D&D was getting going, that was pretty much the only entry point into RPG's.  There just weren't anything else that really encapsulated what you were doing when playing an RPG - the basic concept of a game that you never really win and all the players should work together was a huge paradigm shift.Today, it's old hat.  There are any number of cooperative video and board games.  There's a list as long as my arm for people of virtually any age starting at about 5 years old.Why do we need a stripped down D&D to induct people into RPG's?  There's a bajillion ways to teach the basics of D&D - creating characters, playing a role, exploring a fictional setting, combat, mechanics, whatever - that don't need a boxed set to do.Thirty years ago, if you told someone you played an RPG, they'd have no idea what you were talking about.  Today, I can tell my 20 year old Japanese students that I play an RPG and, while they might jump to the idea of Japanese JRPG computer games, they absolutely have the basics down.IMO, the point of Basic D&D back in the day was to introduce very new concepts to young players.  Today, those concepts are present in many, many games they play now.Let me turn it around.  What would a basic D&D game teach potential new players that they cannot learn from a host of other sources?</blockquote>

Verification