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

[Imaro]

There's no 3-book buy-in for D&D. I've played for years with nothing but a PH and my imagination. That said, I might consider a DMG this time around, cause it sounds a bit more useful. But newbies don't need it, and they certainly don't need a Monster Manual.

You've played, but have you ever run a game? I think saying there isn't a 3 book buy in is kind of disingenuous. Someone, usually the DM (funny how the guy who has to devote the most time to the game also has to devote the most money) has to buy the three books in order for a group to play D&D. Does every player need the DMG? No, but again this is just another barrier to getting more people to be DM's instead of just players.

Thanks, Scott, for the reply.

Given that you obviously have a long lead time on this, I would strongly urge you and the rest of the design team to not just go for a paired down, half-assed game in order to suck players into the game. Give new, young players a complete and exceptional experience and you won't have to "trick" them into buying the product. it will be good, and they'll want it, and they'll move on to the full version when they are ready.

Go dig out the Red Box and really look at it. Play the solo adventure again. Have someone who has never played before be the DM and see how easy it is for that to work.

That is the model a 4E basic/intro set should use, not a glorified board game or minis starter set.

All I can say is this sums up my feelings exactly. The 3e set went to level 2 and then you had to buy the core rulebooks...when you think about the boardgames it's competing with you really should go for a longer play time, especially at a cost of $25. I would argue you could go up to 3rd to 5th level without a significant reduction in those who will shell out for the complete game (up to level 30). I feel the 3e basic set was alot of pretty style with very little substance and hopefully this won't be the case with the 4e version.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

I don't think it's too far from the norm. In the last group I played in, only me and the DM owned any books other than the Player's Handbook and there were 7 of us.

The DMG and Monster Manual are really only needed if you plan on running the game, instead of just playing in it.

I'll back this. I own a metric ton of books, but the next closest person in our group only has about 2 bookshelves covering d&d through all editons, plus other game systems. The rest of our approx 12 players...borrow books. Don't even own them because they can always look up something at the table.

 

[delericho]

The DMG and Monster Manual are really only needed if you plan on running the game, instead of just playing in it.

But that's just it: in order to play the game someone has to get and read the three books. That's a $90 and 1,000 page investment before you even get to start having fun.

My contention is that that is a barrier to entry for a great many people who would otherwise be DMs. And without new DMs, then we're limited to groups spawned by people who already play the game, which vastly limits the ability of the game to foster whole new groups.

 

[Firebeetle]

Thanks, Scott, for the reply.

Given that you obviously have a long lead time on this, I would strongly urge you and the rest of the design team to not just go for a paired down, half-assed game in order to suck players into the game. Give new, young players a complete and exceptional experience and you won't have to "trick" them into buying the product. it will be good, and they'll want it, and they'll move on to the full version when they are ready.

Go dig out the Red Box and really look at it. Play the solo adventure again. Have someone who has never played before be the DM and see how easy it is for that to work.

That is the model a 4E basic/intro set should use, not a glorified board game or minis starter set.

I found myself quite pleased with the Basic game for 3.5, I felt it really help guide the players through the rules via an adventure. My son used it and it worked well for him.

 

[Scribble]

My Intro...

The Book from the red boxed set... Then purchased the black boxed set... Then the rules cyclopedia... Man that was one of my favorite gaming books ever... It also tmpted me into buying various gazetteers and Hollow World.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

To WotC:

Please consider designing the 4e beginner box to take characters higher than 2nd level like the 3e versions.

Also, the Red Box was designed for ages 10+. The 3e Basic game was 12+. Please consider bringing the 4e beginner game back to the 10+ age range.

 

[Melan]

Keep on the Shadowfell will be an intro product for existing players to help transition to 4e rules.

In the fall of 2008 we have a product planed that will be a starter for new RPG players that will teach the basics.

That's very cool, and I say it as someone who doesn't even like the idea of 4e.

 

[WSmith]

As someone that had started on the Holmes Blue Book Basic set, I can tell you that by not putting out some kind of Basic set in the vein of the old red Basic D&D sets, WotC are missing out big time on one heck of a marketing masterpiece.

The Basic set I started with, for those that don't remember or are too young, covered levels 1-3, at which time you were to progress to the 1st edition AD&D rulebooks. It also had, in that same paragraph of where to go for levels 4+, a brief description of additional races and classes that were not presented in the Basic set, (it had the classic 4 classes - 4 races.) I remember reading about the ranger thinking about how I couldn't wait to advance beyond level 3 to try out the new classes. It also mentioned higher and more spells. More goodies. It was, however, completely playable on its own. You could even expand on it yourself for higher levels. You could buy the Monster Manual itself and use that, as it was compatible. I can say from experience that with the right presentation, a 4e Basic Set would be a far more enticing "gateway" to the whole shabang!

Two things I would change right off the bat if I were doing a basic set for 4e:

1. I would take it to maybe 5th or 6th level. The 3e boxed basic sets were too expensive to send someone off to level 3 that soon. Plus I really don't think that 2 level is enough time to soak in the experience.

2. I think this is the single biggest flaw of the 3e boxed sets: no rules for character generation. Making your own characters gives the player a taste of the customization available in D&D.

Granted those two things might keep the players playing a lot longer with the set before getting the 3 core books, (and some might never upgrade.) However, but there would be a whole lot more players that stick with D&D in the long run if given a better introduction. The rules would not have to different. They could be the same 4e rules, just don't present so many of them. Keep some options limited, like classes, races, spells, weapons, equipment, etc.

My 2 cents.

 

[Maggan]

2. I think this is the single biggest flaw of the 3e boxed sets: no rules for character generation. Making your own characters gives the player a taste of the customization available in D&D.

It's not much of a flaw, since it is included. Quoting from an EN World review:

The book then goes into some of the stuff that makes Dungeons and Dragons an icon of fantasy gaming. It provides a blank character sheet, explanation of ability scores, information on how to roll ability scores (good old four d6), skills (a very reduced list with no knowledge, healing, profession or survival skills), racial stats (abbreviated of course), and at this point, I note that the simplification includes knocking out the gnome, half-elf and half-orc.

I've read some comments about other people not finding character generation in the Basic Set. One time it turned out that the Advanced Rulebook was missing. Maybe your Basic Set has the same flaw?

/M

 

[Imaro]

It's not much of a flaw, since it is included. Quoting from an EN World review:



I've read some comments about other people not finding character generation in the Basic Set. One time it turned out that the Advanced Rulebook was missing. Maybe your Basic Set has the same flaw?

/M

I think the disconnect is that the 3e basic set did not include character creation rules while the 3.5 set did. At least that's what I remeber.