Quote from: SeanchaiIn other words, apples and oranges.

It isn't that AD&D was simplier, didn't require a book to play, or didn't require things to be looked up - few played AD&D as written. People ignored whole swaths of the game. You're not comparing AD&D 1st edition with 3e, you're comparing an idealized, half-remembered less rule intensive variant of AD&D 1st edition with 3e as written.

Seanchai

1st Edition lent itself to groups being able to not include many of the rules without it adversely affecting play.  It's been said that a lot of people weren't really playind AD&D -- they were playing B/X or BECMI D&D with some of the extra spells, monsters, and item from the Advanced game.

3rd Edition by comparison is a much better integrated game.  The advantage to this is that there's standardization in play between groups.  The disadvantage would be that you can't easily drop things from the game (say, Feats) without everything starting to unravel.

Quote from: RSDanceyTo reiterate:  I'd have studied them then if I knew then what I know now.

Ryan

That makes sense, now for a followup question.

Do you think that a marketable demographic for gamers are those gamers who are now parents of children who are interested in tabletop RPGs? A demographic which would be interested in a game that is simple enough to teach the kids while also being complex enough to keep the interest of the parents?

Quote from: SeanchaiIt's stuff like this that makes me certain you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Yes, skills and Feats are new. But AD&D had stuff like THAC0 charts, 18/00 Strength, racial ability caps, differing XP charts, weapon proficiencies, weapon speeds, weapon sizes/space required, damage versus opponents, etc. Clearly, back in the day, all the player had to know back in the day was which die to roll for damage...

Looks like you're the one who never actually played AD&D. Because nobody, including Gygax himself, used most of that shit. And if you did, I feel sorry for you, and can understand why you're such a bitter fuck.

We can do a poll here to find out how many people who played AD&D used weapon speed, verbal-somatic-material spellcasting, etc., and how many considered half the stuff in the core books to be optional. Then we can ask how many dropped skills, feats, and tactical combat options from 3E. But that would derail this thread even further into the edition war you're itching to start.

Here's a personal experience that illustrates where I'm coming from: One of my players, who never cracked the PHB back in the day except to look up his STR bonus and racial modifiers, tried to join a 3E group a few years ago. As is his custom, he just showed up to play and assumed the DM would explain anything he needed to know verbally. Eventually, the other players got tired of having to hand-hold him and look up his feats, explain tactical options, etc., and they kicked him out of the group. After 20 years of playing D&D without referring to the PHB, he found he couldn't do that any longer.

Look, the designers of 3E themselves have said 3E was intended to be:

a) for older players than the assumed audience for earlier editions, and

b) a game that rewarded player mastery

So what does that tell you? It tells you that 3/3.5 is a game that encourages players to invest more time in character generation and tactical optimization than earlier editions. Why is it so hard to admit that players get rewarded from learning and mastering the system in 3E, when that's the whole fucking point of 3E in the eyes of the designers themselves?

Quote from: StuartKeep in mind the survey data was from the pre-3ed days. Now that we have a 3ed with it's focus on older gamers the numbers are certain to be different.  There are probably a lot of people in their 20s / 30s who got back into D&D with 3ed.

Yes, I am one of those.  That was my point.

Quote from: SeanchaiYou're not comparing AD&D 1st edition with 3e, you're comparing an idealized, half-remembered less rule intensive variant of AD&D 1st edition with 3e as written.

Seanchai

No, I'm comparing AD&D as it was actually played, with 3E as it is actually played. Which is the only comparison worth making.

Quote from: HaffrungBecause nobody, including Gygax himself, used most of that shit.

Then stop your bullshit comparisons. Stop spouting off about AD&D 1st edition rules as if you used them.

Quote from: HaffrungAnd if you did, I feel sorry for you, and can understand why you're such a bitter fuck.

You're confusing exasperation and incredulity with bitterness. I'm sitting here listening to a bunch of dipshits talk about how simple AD&D 1st edition is compared to 3e when they readily admit they just ignored rules they didn't like. You found AD&D 1st edition to simple and intuitive? Like, duh. Again, try actually playing the game.

Quote from: HaffrungWhy is it so hard to admit that players get rewarded from learning and mastering the system in 3E...

Where, again, did I deny that?

Here's what I will say on that subject: AD&D 1st edition was built by wargamers for wargamers. Players in the day were expected to know the rules and use them. And abuse them. People metagamed AD&D 1st edition less than they do with 3e? Riiiigght. Let's talk about sword selection...

Seanchai

Quote from: HaffrungNo, I'm comparing AD&D as it was actually played, with 3E as it is actually played. Which is the only comparison worth making.

You've said some dumb stuff, but c'mon...Not only is this dumb, it's revisionist.

Moreover, your side is arguing that people cherry picked their AD&D rules and slavishly follow the 3e rules.

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiStop spouting off about AD&D 1st edition rules as if you used them.

How dim are you? That is my whole point; you didn't need a PHB for each player back in the 1E days because players weren't expected to learn and master the whole ruleset, whereas 3E was designed specifically with the intent of rewarding players who take the PHB home, learn it, and tweak their PCs. You can learn everything you need to know to optimize a dwarf fighter in 1E in about five minutes of browsing the PHB. That simply isn't the case with 3E, and that reward for mastering options is why 3E is regarded as an improvement by so many players.

I´m amazed about how much we have learned about the new Story-D20!

Isn´t that something?

Quote from: SeanchaiHere's what I will say on that subject: AD&D 1st edition was built by wargamers for wargamers. Players in the day were expected to know the rules and use them.

If you played strictly by the book, then...no.

QuoteWhat follows herein is strictly for the eyes of you, the campaign referee. [...] As this book is the exclusive precinct of the DM, you must view any non-DM player possessing it as something less than worthy of honorable death. Peeping players there will undoubtedly be, but they are simply lessening their own enjoyment of the game by taking away some of the sense of wonder that otherwise arises from a game that has rules hidden from participants.

Quote from: jeff37923That makes sense, now for a followup question.

Do you think that a marketable demographic for gamers are those gamers who are now parents of children who are interested in tabletop RPGs? A demographic which would be interested in a game that is simple enough to teach the kids while also being complex enough to keep the interest of the parents?

From the trenches of a game store in the Mid-West :


 YES!....


 In the now late & lamented "Tales From A Game store" thread that was on another forum......
I told of several parents who got interested or re-interested in D&D because their Junior-High age kids were getting interested in it.

 One mother even said that if her kids couldn't find a good DM  - then she would be the DM for their games. Appare ntly this mom had run games when she was in college...but her kids never knew that till the day she was in the game store.

Several parents read through the open DEMO copies we had of the boxed introductory versions of the gasme, a few parents grabbed copies of GURPS :Lite 4/e that I had on-hand to get an idea of what RPS in general were.  (WotC, take a hint ...do a similiar FREE version that game stores can hand out)

 Many, many of these parents are VERY normal-looking folks, their kids were not the geek/nerd stereotypes.

- Ed C.

Quote from: jeff37923Do you think that a marketable demographic for gamers are those gamers who are now parents of children who are interested in tabletop RPGs? A demographic which would be interested in a game that is simple enough to teach the kids while also being complex enough to keep the interest of the parents?

I think there are a couple of questions here.  Let me try to segment them.

First, I think that tabletop roleplaying can be a really fun way to entertain the young 'uns.  I had the pleasure of watching the WotC R&D team iterate through several versions of the Pokemon Jr. Adventure Game, and the last version (which we published) was a lot of fun to play, and I think parents & kids had a great time playing it.

I have very fond memories of playing board & card games with my mom when I was very young, and I'm sure that if something like the PJAG had been sold where she shopped we would have tried it out.

Second, do I think that some kids who play D&D could get mom & dad into playing?  No, I don't think so, at least not in any meaningful success rate.  I don't know of any hobbies that kids between 12 and 18 tend to transmit to parents, instead of vice versa.

Third, do I think there are inter-generational games?  Yes, I do.  I think that there are some groups where the parents end up with the kids in the games.  With D&D I think we may even have grandparents playing with grandkids.  But I think that when that happens you have people who were likely to be playing anyway, and the family connection was just a very short & strong link in the player network, so I don't necessarily think such games generate very many new players.

Well worth study though. There could be surprises galore.

Ryan

Quote from: RSDanceyThis could be done with today's technology, easily.  The problem is that you'd have to have an MMORPG budget to do it, and there is no way WotC (or any other TRPG publisher) has $10 million + to invest in it.  So this is one of those places where I am hopeful that the MMORPG technology eventually "trickles down" to the TRPG, without the TRPG having to do R&D.

While the kind of computer assistance you are talking about is quite involved, I can't help but wonder at what point would you consider the investment worthwhile?

Your own numbers, through the years, seem to suggest there is a huge pool of roleplayers, many of which are attracted by the D&D brand, d20, etc...

How many more millions of gamers do you need to give that kind of support, which if well done, might garner more interest and create more gamers?

I ask because, for all the great things WotC did to rejuvenate D&D with the advent of 3e, software tools were fucking shitty, almost non-existent. To the point where actually, AD&D2nd was more of a success in that respect, in a time where computer success was absolutely not vital.

It seems like WotC, circa 3rd edition, completely neglected GM and player-assistance through software tools. As if it was too ambitious. It's really not, and it's a sound investment. Particularly when your system has a lot of details and crunch.

Even considering that not every roleplayer has a computer, and that not every computer-owning roleplayer will be interested, there has to be a market. I'm part of it and feel WotC has missed the boat for almost a decade. And I sure as hell hope they get a clue soon.

Quote from: RSDanceyWell worth study though. There could be surprises galore.

Ryan

Thanks for the answer. I've seen quite a few people in my over 35 year old age bracket who have teenage kids who are getting into tabletop gaming. My own daughter got into it when she saw one of her dates eyeballing my game library. I've got two married friends whose teenage boys game in the same group, and they were all gamers in high school and college back in the day.

I think it helps that just about every MMORPG can trace its conceptual origins back to D&D.

Quote from: Consonant DudeWhile the kind of computer assistance you are talking about is quite involved, I can't help but wonder at what point would you consider the investment worthwhile?
... [snip for brevity]
Even considering that not every roleplayer has a computer, and that not every computer-owning roleplayer will be interested, there has to be a market. I'm part of it and feel WotC has missed the boat for almost a decade. And I sure as hell hope they get a clue soon.

What about NeverWinter Nights?

- Mark