Tuesday, October 12, 2010

D&D and a geek confession

Last week while browsing through Wargames Supply here in Wellington, I picked up a copy of Wizards of the Coast's (WOTC) new starter box for Dungeons & Dragons. This is designed as an introduction to the game for new players and is modelled specifically on the famous 'red box'(right down to the design) of earlier fame. I grabbed a copy due to the fact it is disgustingly cheap and because I am it's target market.

That's right, I have a geek confession to make. I have never really played D&D (or any derivative) before, or had much interest in doing so. Although this means I cannot make a fully informed review of the product, I can add a few thoughts from that fresh perspective.

But first a little background on the lack of D&D in my gaming life. I entered the hobby in the early 1990s through a gateway drug called Warhammer 40,000 and, unlike a lot of other gamers, my first RPG love was not D&D but R. Talsorian Game's Cyberpunk 2020 (which deserves it own write up). I was of course aware of D&D being around (how could I not as it dominated our local comic store), but to be honest it didn't really grab me, in part due to the seemingly impenetrable rules and the overwhelming number of products required ("so wait, I need to buy how many rulebooks?"). The nineties was also the time when that behemoth of the RPG world TSR was going through the doldrums creatively and was taking a huge hit financially trying to compete with WOTC in the collectible card game market (anyone remember Spellfire?)

D&D took a further hit in my development with the emergence of White Wolf's 'World of Darkness' series of games. White Wolf set itself up in opposition to TSR in many ways with its dark focus on edgy, mature themes and preference (at least in theory) for story and narrative over mechanics (this also deserves a post of its own). It seemed far more interesting, vivid and exciting than what I perceived as the formulaic, overly mechanistic and predictable features of D&D.

My friends and I consumed veraciously everything put out by White Wold in the mid-to-late nineties as TSR stumbled and fell, although it is interesting to note how many of the accusations brought against TSR started to become 'business as usual' for White Wolf as its market share grew (more on this another day). 

In hindsight, it is interesting how this experience has shaped me as a gamer. I still prefer strong narrative based games that are character driven, and always put a great deal of stock in the 'mood'(including ambiance and scene painting) of a game. I am also pretty awful at learning new systems and, to be honest, to this day I still have a slight suspicion of anything involving a D20. So as a result of all this, I have tended to avoid D&D as a game. The few experiences I have had have been either unsatisfying or confusing (or both). 

However, the buzz about D&D fourth edition has been positive in some quarters and I have been encouraged to try it, even though I am suspicious of its 'wargamey' feel. But I'm not one to hold a grudge, so I thought I would have a crack in this instance.

So enough history and on to the product itself. The starter box is part of WOTC's D&D 'Essentials' line which is designed to hark back to a simpler, arguably purer form of the game. I can't make a full judgement about product (or the line) given I haven't read it all, but from the little I have looked over, it's good. 

Character creation is pitched like a 'choose your own adventure' game, so it doesn't get bogged town in technical terminology, and it also takes the reader through a basic combat to familiarise him or her (most likely him) with that side of the rules. It also comes with some quite neat extras, like maps, tokens, dice and cards. Although, as one would expect, it focuses heavily on combat, it also provides some options for non-combat related actions during the game and even a little roleplaying.

I plan to keep posting some thoughts here as I (slowly) work my way through it, but I think there is enough here to inflict a night's entertainment on my friends. It may even be enough for me to give D&D a second chance, though I still have my suspicions. 

Any of you out there have any thoughts on the 'red box' or D&D in general? What about formative roleplaying experiences? This is something I think I could write a lot more about...

6 comments:

  1. Like you D&D wasn't an early roleplaying influence for me, so when I played my first games of a heavily house-ruled 2nd ed. around 15 years ago I found it a steep learning curve. The idea that every player should have at least one players handbook, and probably other books as well seemed entirely alien and strange, and frankly not something I'd have pursued if not for my respect for the DM and group.

    I don't particularly like the system (any edition), nor the premise of 'heroic fantasy' that it draws upon, but I must admit that there is quite some fun to be had in the tactical nature of the game when embraced, and the many options in character building.

    I think that playing it taught me quite a lot, and I recognise a number of skills and tricks in my GM's toolbox originate in the many D&D games I've played.

    I play regularly with a group of people, all bar one of whom have never really played anything else for the last 20+ years, and while I admire their purity and dedication, I can't help but think they are missing out on a lot from the hobby more broadly, but each to their own I guess...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I fixed most of the perceived problems with D&D by ignoring the xp for encounters and only awarding any for story advancement and roleplaying. All of a sudden no-one was interested in harvesting xp from combat, and the focus was put on character development, non-combat solutions to encounters (because combat could get your character killed) and exploring the game world in more detail in order to advance the story.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dale - yeah the system has always bothered me too. And I have never been a huge fan of the genre either, probably something to do with like Star Wars more than Lord of the Rings as a kid!

    Calum - nice idea. If I adopted it, I would drop the XP for encounters so they still got something, but give big bonuses to role playing and non-combat encounters.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Taking away experience from combat would be interesting, although, in my opinion, combat is the main driver of D&D, particularly in 4e where almost every aspect of the game is based around deploying short-term combat powers.

    For my money Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (2e) balances the roleplay and combat a bit better in a more interesting and gritty setting, although it's not without it's own flaws. I'm also a huge fan of Elric from Chaosium for dark fantasy gaming.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah totally doesnt work for 4th Ed. That edition is pretty much just a wargame with narrative.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 4th edition is what you make it. You can role play as much as you want, but when it's time for combat, you have a very structured system at hand.

    It really comes down to if they players want to RP, or play a combat only game.

    ReplyDelete