D&D 4E Why no beginner boxed set for 4E? [Set Confirmed in post 10]

[Monkey Boy]

Does the DM not own the DMG and MM?

Yeah the DM was me. I didn't need the DMG at all. I did have a monster manual. I ran Return to Temple of Elemental Evil for the better part of a year. I didn't need the DMG.

I think that apart from magic items and the XP chart the DMG offers very little of value to an experienced DM.

I got by on the XP front by simply levelling them at the appropriate times for the adventure. Given I've played DnD for decades I already have an idea about what a portable hole does, plus there was the SRD if I wanted to brush up on the items in the module.

I got the DMG as a present last year from one of the gamers who couldn't believe I'd Dm'd all those years without it.

 

[Korgoth]

I think a successful, useful "Basic Box" for 4E would include character creation, levels up to 3 at least (5 is better, 10 is excellent), monsters and magic items, as well as a couple sample adventures and tips on creating more. It should stand on its own as a viable, independent product supporting low level play.

This gets younger players into the game and keeps them playing. The irony is, if the box is a useful and viable game without ever getting the hardbacks, then most people who enjoy the box will get the hardbacks. If the box is lacking, most of them won't get the hardbacks.

It probably doesn't need pregens, but it must absolutely stay away from that "fast play" nonsense where it isn't really the D&D game. The old school Basic Sets were great because it allowed you to make your own characters and really play D&D. It was a gateway product but that's not all it was: it had integrity.

 

[Monkey Boy]

Basic DnD ruleset viable with OGL and DDI?

Why don't they build a game similar to old red box and make it OGL so that 3rd parties can generate furhter adventures for it without WOTC making a substantial monetary commitment.

I could see it as being a viable line of introductory DnD products. Why not have a Red Box, then if it is successful launch a blue box, and green box later on down the line?

I think the OGL coupled with DDI support makes this viable and profitable and would be a great way to introduce the game to a new generation. (Though I worry about the future of FLGS where the OGL products would likely be available).

Bring back a version of Basic DnD and let 3rd parties and the DDI support it.

 

[Reynard]

I think a successful, useful "Basic Box" for 4E would include character creation, levels up to 3 at least (5 is better, 10 is excellent), monsters and magic items, as well as a couple sample adventures and tips on creating more. It should stand on its own as a viable, independent product supporting low level play.

This gets younger players into the game and keeps them playing. The irony is, if the box is a useful and viable game without ever getting the hardbacks, then most people who enjoy the box will get the hardbacks. If the box is lacking, most of them won't get the hardbacks.

It probably doesn't need pregens, but it must absolutely stay away from that "fast play" nonsense where it isn't really the D&D game. The old school Basic Sets were great because it allowed you to make your own characters and really play D&D. It was a gateway product but that's not all it was: it had integrity.

Maybe we can meet WotC in the middle on this: if they promise to make it worthwhile, we'll promise to pimp it to all out kids, nephews, students or what-have-you. Heck, they can even use good images of the minis to illustrate the combat rules and monster section, so long as they promise to give enough possibilities that a gaggle of 12 year olds can play it for 6 months.

 

[RFisher]

IMHO, I would make it a complete but stripped down version of D&D. Something along the lines of the old Basic plus Expert, in one package. It has fewer levels (though maybe even up to 10 on the 4e scale), fewer spells, fewer feats, &c. Maybe the classes have pre-picked talents. It's not just an introduction. It's D&D, merely simpler & with fewer options.

Many players will eventually decide they want more & start buying the core hardbacks, supplements, accessories, &c.

Many may be happy with this stripped down set, but those people weren't going to buy all the supplements & accessories anyway. At most they might have bought the core books, but how many of them wouldn't have even done that.

Maybe.

Personally, I think including counters or minis is a mistake. To people unfamiliar with RPGs, you want to emphasize the differences between an RPG & board/miniature games. Call me idealistic, but I think you sell more D&D minis by selling people on D&D first. Position the minis as a premium rather than as an essential.

 

[hong]

Personally, I think including counters or minis is a mistake. To people unfamiliar with RPGs, you want to emphasize the differences between an RPG & board/miniature games. Call me idealistic, but I think you sell more D&D minis by selling people on D&D first. Position the minis as a premium rather than as an essential.

No way, mang. It's all about the accessorisation.

 

[thalmin]

I guess I disagree with most of the posts here. I think the 3.5 Basic Set was the best intro to D&D yet. A group of kids can pick up the set and start playing actual D&D in little more time than it takes to learn most toy-store board games, without needing any outside help. The brevity of the rules makes the game less intimidating. I agree that another adventure or two should have been included, and play up through third level would be an improvement.
The pregenned characters are a must to start playing right away. Learn how to make characters after you understand how the abilities and numbers work.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Got to agree with thalmin here on the pre-genned characters...they are a great tool to get the kids to play the first adventure without the hassle of going through character creation. After that first adventure, you can still present them with the next batch of rules, i.e. character generation, and who knows, they might like their characters so much they decide to keep and level them instead. I remember the old Basic Set that is mentioned here so often (and with fond memories ) having a pre-genned fighter for the first two solo adventures in the Player's Book before it would give you the other classes and rules to create new characters. Was a great introduction, in my opinion.

 

[delericho]

Yeah the DM was me. I didn't need the DMG at all. I did have a monster manual. I ran Return to Temple of Elemental Evil for the better part of a year. I didn't need the DMG.

Um... that's still a three book buy-in: PHB, MM, adventure. Granted, either the MM or the adventure was probably superfluous in your case.

Rather more relevant, though:

Given I've played DnD for decades I already have an idea about what a portable hole does, plus there was the SRD if I wanted to brush up on the items in the module.

There are two key advantages that you had that our theoretical new gamer didn't: years of experience, and a knowledge that the SRD exists. Coming to the game without either of these, you have a much different view. I strongly suspect that most people would take the PHB at its word when it states that someone (the DM) needs to read both the DMG and the MM in order to run the game.

I think that apart from magic items and the XP chart the DMG offers very little of value to an experienced DM.

There are also a bunch of sample traps, pre-statted characters of all levels, the Wealth-by-Level guidelines, and the discussions of the planar traits. Oh, and the glossary covers a lot of situations that might come up, which is useful. It does have a fair amount more that is of use for new DMs, although even there I suspect a lot of that space would be better used assigned to the DM advice found in the DMG2, a sample town and sample adventure, and things of that ilk.

If only there were a new edition coming, where the designers could look at the assignment of subjects in the DMG...

 

[Imaro]

No way, mang. It's all about the accessorisation.

I agree with this statement only in so far as the accessorisation doesn't trump actual gameplay. I feel like the most recent Basic sets didn't rely on the actual game play to pull people in and ionstead went for flash to pull people in (minis, tiles, etc.).

Personally I'd like to see a combination of all the basic sets...

A set that takes characters from at least 1st to 5th level (since we now have a 30 lvl range), Pre-gens but also character gen rules up to 5th (could be paired down though ie 4 races, four classes). The reversible Dungeon Tiles are a good idea and I would keep those or include a laminated mini-battlemat that could be dry-erased. I would have PC minis (one male & one female of each class included), but use counters for monsters (You would be able to include more at a cheaper price, which would facilitate a wider range of adventures). A small village pamphelet and a few starting adventures. A how-to DM guide with tables to create your own adventures and populate dungeons for 5 levels.

For me the recent Basic Sets missed the mark by holding too much gameplay back. You're trying to hook gamers, so you have to give them enough to get them invested in the game enough to graduate to the core books. Going from level 1 to level 2 a the rate of 3.5 was, IMHO, just not enough.

If WotC did bring out a basic set like the one above I would buy it for my son, C&C is offering a basic set that is a complete game but built from the ground up to facilitate introductory play. This will definitely be competing for my dollars with the 4e basic set. I don't necessarily need alot of flash for my son, I want a concise simple introduction to the game that my son can run for his family and friends, but that also has enough in it for him to have fun with over more than two or three adventures.