D&D General Who is this made for (Not Beginners) - the New D&D Starter Set

[Micah Sweet]

Of course it isn't, but you tend to have a tone to your posts that often comes off as an attempt to suggest an objective truth - even when you point out that you're only speaking to your own needs and opinions!

I've learned to read your posts as you intend, and I enjoy talking to you, but: 1) It took a lot of work on my part, and 2) I still find myself arguing with you sometimes, in spite of myself!

So telling people I'm not presenting my opinion as objective truth isn't enough? I somehow have to convey this subtextually (but in text)? How can I have an objectionable tone in a medium notoriously bad at conveying tone?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

My opinion is that a starter set is not worth equal cash outlay to a core book.

My opinion is that it depends on the interior.

It generally contains little to nothing I want that isn't also in the core, and I can teach the game just fine from the core books.

As I said, I also see no value buying an english version of that.

The things that all of you seem to think make it worth the price of a core book are of lesser value to me.

Which I understand.

Is that clear enough? Can you just disagree with me and move on?

Of course. That is a totally understandable position.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It is overpriced for what I want out of starter boxes and core books.

Ok. But it is not objectively overpriced...

I think that word is misplaced here. Just my opinion.

But now I know what you want to say with that:

"Although the price is totally fine from a neutral point of view (comparing it to previous boxed sets), it has no value for me."

Yeah. I can get behind that. Totally valid position, hidden behind the simple phrase: "overpriced for me".

 

[definiteFreakyFishGuy]

TLDR: I am convinced that the Starter Set is worth the cost and now am considering getting it for myself.

I was initially skeptical about the $50 price tag, but this post by @Whizbang Dustyboots completely changed the way I think about this set.

D&D 5E (2024) Post in thread '2024 D&D Starter Set - Your turn to design'

Yesterday at 12:22 AM

Like if this is something to get the buyer learn or teach the game to some friends, it'll likely never get used again once that group learns to play. So I don't know how much value there is to have nicely laminated cards or sturdy tokens. It's not like a board game that'll get used over-and-over again, for which having nice pieces makes sense.

I think it depends on the person. WotC's main audience is the newbies who will then graduate to buying $150 in core books and, ideally, remain inspired to keep shelling out $50 a pop for supplements and big adventure books.

I already have...

• Whizbang Dustyboots

• 

Rather than seeing it soley as a learning/teaching tool or a stepping stone for the PHB, I can now see it as a mostly self-contained set of tools for getting a game started quickly with whoever is around. For example, one could pull out the starter set for a weekly board game night.

Having low level character is great—the game will go a lot quicker. It could be a one-shot that ends with everyone still at level-1. Or a multi-session that just goes up to level-3. If after getting to level-3, people want to go further, then there are options to do that.

EDIT: My initial skepticism about the $50 price tag was more about "Shouldn't a Starter Set be cheaper than the PHB?" and not "This Starter Set is overpriced," and this was a result of me seeing the Starter Set as something that would get used once or twice then never again, kind of like the Essential Kit I got years back. Given that some fancy board games cost well-over $50, I'd say this is a great deal.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

So telling people I'm not presenting my opinion as objective truth isn't enough? I somehow have to convey this subtextually (but in text)? How can I have an objectionable tone in a medium notoriously bad at conveying tone?

It's a case-by-case thing, but in this case it's kind of like what @UngeheuerLich says above. If you say "It's overpriced", you're going to get pushback, because, like I told you in an earlier post - It's a LOSS LEADER. It costs WotC more than most other products to produce! It's factually underpriced.

OTOH, had you said, "I wouldn't want to pay as much as they are asking" or "I don't think it's worth it for me" then no one would ever think to argue with you.

I mean, you eventually explained much of that, sure - but you started from a firm statement of (incorrect) fact.

The OP (in particular the Thread Title) has the same issue. Who is the Starter made for? It most certainly IS made for New Players, but also anyone who wants to use it. Had the thread been titled, "I used HotB to teach D&D. It did not go well." And went on to tell much of the same story, we might have had a different tone here.

It still would have been pointed out that the group missed a whole bunch of things that seem like they should have caught, but we'd all have been a lot more sympathetic!

​

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

My opinion is that a starter set is not worth equal cash outlay to a core book. It generally contains little to nothing I want that isn't also in the core, and I can teach the game just fine from the core books. The things that all of you seem to think make it worth the price of a core book are of lesser value to me. Is that clear enough? Can you just disagree with me and move on?

For sure. But if it's not of value for you doesn't mean it's not of value for the game in the greater scheme of things. That seems to be a hole in the position you're taking. It kind of feels like you're putting your own needs, desires and biases ahead of everyone else's. Actually, more than that: replacing everyone else's with your own.

I respect your equanimity in the face of folks reacting to you. You'd get less of that reaction though if you would contemplate both horns of the dilemma.

 

[Hussar]

They aren't defined in the Read this first booklet which tells you to punch tokens and gather them up and stuff.

They do not have a Section which is labeled about Hitpoints, and they do not have it in the Glossary as a term in case you don't know what they are.

They are discussed in combat (finally) after you've put together your character.

... Isn't that how it's always been done? The PHB doesn't really discuss HP until after you make your character. This is how it's been done in every single version of D&D in existence? Why would you define HP before you need to know?

 

[dave2008]

Sure, but is that the generic one you want to present? I ask because all their published adventures seem to lean in other directions.

I don't have the product nor the knowledge of the product to discuss that.

 

[dave2008]

I might be wrong, but there's no way you could know for sure. I certainly hope I'm wrong.

Oh I think it is always safe to assume we are wrong about the intentions of D&D

 

[dave2008]

My opinion is that a starter set is not worth equal cash outlay to a core book. It generally contains little to nothing I want that isn't also in the core, and I can teach the game just fine from the core books. The things that all of you seem to think make it worth the price of a core book are of lesser value to me. Is that clear enough? Can you just disagree with me and move on?

Basically me too. I would only but a starter set as a gift for someone else. Of course I don't need the adventure either so it has really 0 use for me! But I would never discuss its worth/value to me as I am not the market for this product.