Why the Modern D&D variants will not attract new players

[prosfilaes]

c) That assumption, if applied at my table, would likely get you the player in a lot of trouble in the long run. While I don't feel any need to keep my falling rules secret, assuming you didn't know them, you'd actually be better off with the assumption that jumping off a house occasionally means a broken leg than with the assumption that, "Since this is D&D, I can exploit known limitations in the rules to jump off houses without breaking my leg." And indeed, I feel this is true regardless of what the rules happen to be.

I'd say that's exactly the complaint. Is this a known limitation in the rules, or a design feature? No sane person is going to charge enemies with a rocket launcher across an open field. D&D characters charge enemies with fireballs all the time, knowing that the damage is going to be inconsiderable. I wouldn't jump off a ten feet wall; should my character be equally terrified of doing so? If no, then how tall should the wall be?

There are all sorts of complaints where DMs and players had different expectations; one of the repeated ones on the board is a bridge across lava. If you kill my character because I should have known that running across a bridge five feet above lava would be fatal, or kill my character because he stood and fought instead of run across a bridge that was obviously perfectly safe, I'm going to be annoyed, and rightfully so in my opinion.

Ok, sure, but you don't need to know the rules in order to do that. It's perfectly possible to separate rules for chargen from the resolution rules.

There's problems, both big and small. You want to make a monk that can fall/float down a wall safely. Is this going to be a useful ability in game? What about a kit that reduces damage to 1d4 per 10', max. 20d4? Is that close enough? Should your first-level ranger in D&D 3.x pick Dragons as a favored enemy? The fact that dragons are a rare enemy for a party of less than fifth level is not chargen knowledge, but a player who doesn't know that and picks dragons as a favored enemy at first level is going to be less happy then one who made a good choice.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Encounters leaves dedicated DMs in the lurch. Stuck in a series of one offs, with the same repetitive 2 dimensional casts and mechanics, and with no ability to make meaningful changes the published encounters or events... can you imagine? How boring. How uninspiring. How unfulfilling. Encounters may be attractive to casual players, but actually DMing it sounds repulsive to me.

So you don't personally enjoy the play style or the edition. Fair enough. But the evidence from where I'm sitting (and I organized the launch and first three seasons of Encounters for the entire UK market, which included all the play data) is that Encounters is a runaway success. Far and away the most successful OP and public-play program for D&D ever. And terrific at bringing in new players.

Is it the end-all and be-all of the RPG experience? Hell no. But as a method for connecting new players to experienced DMs, it is undeniably working.

(And while DMing that sort of event may sound as boring to you as it does to me, Encounters offers a different thrill which is unresistible to many hardcore DMs: the joy of teaching the game and seeing new players get into it.)

But then I guess the renown points system just seems like a gimmick to me, so that might be part of it.

I'm with you there. If I were to prognosticate, I'd guess that this will eventually fall by the wayside. It's extraneous and doesn't really add anything to the experience. Maybe it works as a hook to encourage players to attend every session instead of some sessions, but my guess is that the activity itself is a far stronger hook.

 

[Maggan]

... it is undeniably working.

Mr. Ryan, your choice of words indicate that your are new to the concept of Internet discussion.

Therefore I would advise you to prepare for the unevitable denial of the success of the D&D Encounters. But don't feel that as a personal failure of yours! As you grow accustomed to the discourse found on this new fangled Internet, you will discover that there is nothing that can't be denied when discussing just about anything.

And the success of anything D&D is, I believe ranked as number 3 in things that are popular to deny, ranking only after the actual validity of the moon landing in 1969 and the theory of the ball-shaped Earth.



/M

 

[nedjer]

Among the various steps WoTC seem to be taking towards making their game more accessible, Encounters is the toffee apple

Makes new players, makes new connections, makes new GMs - doesn't get much stickier

And no they're not going to be ninja GMs after a few games, but I've been working on that for years and there's some way to go yet

 

[Camelot]

I coincedentally came across this article. It's at least funny, if not somewhat relevant.

Killjoy_Cooking

 

[Stormonu]

I have quite a few cook books. The ones that get the most use are the ones which make me want to cook the things in them. There are two ways they do this. Either they have good pictures of the food, or they have some sort of narrative or facts about the food, telling me what it goes good with, what its history is, things like that. The cook books that have recipes with no commentary or pictures simply don't get used as much.

Sadly, all my cookbooks call for infinite oregano.

Wait...erm, what were we talking about?

Overall, I've grown disillusioned with the current D&D, I think because it feels like the game has become a law text. I've found myself longing to play BE(CMI) D&D and 2E (something I'd sworn never to touch after a year of playing 3E), though I've really been taken by the likes of the Savage Worlds game. It feels to me that the game has been become lost in the mechanics over the actual play of the game.

 

[Chrono22]

So you don't personally enjoy the play style or the edition. Fair enough. But the evidence from where I'm sitting (and I organized the launch and first three seasons of Encounters for the entire UK market, which included all the play data) is that Encounters is a runaway success. Far and away the most successful OP and public-play program for D&D ever. And terrific at bringing in new players.

Is it the end-all and be-all of the RPG experience? Hell no. But as a method for connecting new players to experienced DMs, it is undeniably working.

I'm kind of curious now. Where are you sitting, exactly? Virginia? That's kind of distant from Europe, isn't it? Understand that none of us have the information you have at your disposal... and unless you're planning on sharing, the rest of us are in the dark.

See, I'm not contending that is isn't a success... on your terms. The thing is, I'm looking at the success of the hobby as a whole, not just as a money-making venture.
So, to reiterate: as a way to advertise product, encounters is a great success. As a way of bringing long-term players into the fold, I don't think so. It's a good tactic in a losing strategy... because D&D is trying to compete in an arena where it cannot win.

In any case, I really don't have a reason to believe anything you say, simply on the basis that you have been employed to organize some events in Europe (never mind I can't really verify your identity or your claims). You have a vested interest in having this venture seen as a success by the wider gaming community, so it's not like you can claim any kind of impartiality on the subject. If you would be willing to supply this data you are referring to, I'm sure the rest of the community would appreciate it. If we all see the information that is backing up your claims, we wouldn't have to rely on your word alone.

EDIT: I've scaled back and edited my warning below, under the assumption that Chrono22 wasn't deliberately trying to be rude.

Admin here. Chrono22, Charles Ryan was brand manager of D&D for several years (Scott Rouse's position before he left WotC) and was WotC's main point of contact for D&D in England and the UK. It's cool if you ask people to back up facts, but please be sure to do so in a manner that isn't rude. Your post here definitely didn't come off that way. - Piratecat

 

[Gimby]

See, I'm not contending that is isn't a success... on your terms. The thing is, I'm looking at the success of the hobby as a whole, not just as a money-making venture.
So, to reiterate: as a way to advertise product, encounters is a great success. As a way of bringing long-term players into the fold, I don't think so. It's a good tactic in a losing strategy... because D&D is trying to compete in an arena where it cannot win.

Is speed dating a substitute for a commited relationship?

This is what I'm seeing Encounters as. Something you can pop in and do on a whim with a low level of commitment that puts you in contact with like minded people. I don't think that the idea is that people play Encounters and only Encounters - part of it is to introduce people to groups and to lower the barrier of entry to DMing.

-edit And calling the chap a liar is really beyond the pale.

 

[Chrono22]

Since when has asking for proof equated to an accusation of lying?

 

[Wicht]

In any case, I really don't have a reason to believe anything you say, simply on the basis that you have been employed to organize some events in Europe (never mind I can't really verify your identity or your claims). You have a vested interest in having this venture seen as a success by the wider gaming community, so it's not like you can claim any kind of impartiality on the subject.

Mr. Ryan is a long time member of the Gaming industry. You can find his face book page here. He is pretty well known as being who he says he is, and as he is no longer employed in the UK, arranging D&D events, he does not have a present vested interest other than the interest that comes from wanting to see a personal endeavor continue to succeed once it is out of one's own hands.