Quotethere's this belief that being able to know a whole shitload of (essentially memorized) trivia makes you "intelligent", just like they believe that reading a metric fuckload of cheap b-grade licensed novels makes you "well read"

The first belief is not confined to the nerd community. See: Jeopardy, Trivial Pursuit, etc. etc.

A large percentage of US families have no books at all for casual reading. Reading at all for pleasure makes you something of an anomaly. This percentage does not increase in most of the rest of the world.

Do you guys know people in trailer parks? Tenant farmers? Housing projects? Heck, even people who live their lives in ordinary working-class first world apartment complexes? What are they like, in general?

Don't be too hard on nerds who don't have the right kind of schooling or pedigree. Some of them are actually smart, and even those who aren't are exceptional human beings from a statistical point of view.

This tendency to shit on anyone who's not in the top one percent of the top one percent of any group is not a very good thing IMO.

There's a big difference between being a moderately bright dork who thinks he's really bright and being a lawncrapper, and obscuring that is not very helpful to either, or to those of us who are neither.

I've met LOTS of people in the "working class" (in north and south america) that have made a point of being educated people, who's house has a lot of books.

One of my closest friends is an electrician, has been for 20 years, and he could knock my socks off when it comes to greek philosophy.

I've also met many people from the middle and upper classes that make the kind of erroneous ideas of intelligence that I was talking about as endemic in the nerd community here.

Yes, it happens outside of the nerd "community", but the point is that with the geek kingdom its become so endemic that its caused a direct reprecussion on how RPGs are made.

RPGPundit

Quote from: HaffrungSo to go back to Calithena's original point, I agree with his observation that catering to the crunch-heavy hardcore gamer segment of the hobby has left lots of people who don't like sort of approach out in the cold.

But are those "lots" really that many? Because if that's D&D3.5, well it's pretty fucking popular. Is it the case that a few people love that complexity and just become GMs, and people's dislike of complexity is less than their dislike of GMing, so they put up with it? Or are there genuinely lots of people who love the complexity?

I think lots of people love it. I've seen it many times. You have to go on what they do, not what they say. Lots of people say this and that about gaming, but when they sit down to play it's a different story. That's the same as anything in life - work, friends, lovers, whatever. Figure out what people like from what they do, not what they say.

And lots of people, most gamers in fact, do play complex rpg systems. From which it seems they must like the complexity.

Calithena's comments here I disagree with. It's not the case at all that the stupid gamers just play fighters. It's just that stupidity shows up the most when playing fighters. If your character has a whole swag of complex skills, that can make up for you being a bit dim (whether always dim or just today). The dumb player with a wizard has a list of spells to hide behind. It doesn't take much brains to pick stuff from a list - the players of non-fighters just have fancier lists to pick from, and their picks make them look smart even if they're not.

Quote from: CalithenaP.S. Kyle, it's a great topic, but it almost always starts piefights when you introduce a topic by referring to a thread on another board. Would've done better to just pose the question.

That has some truth in it. But - if the thread went for more than a few posts, someone would ask where the quote came from, and someone would track it down - even if I didn't quote anything. Someone would say, "oh but this thread is inspired by this other thread, and you fucked it up cos -" and so on. With pedantic nitpickers around who will spend hours with google, no thread can stand alone.

Also, it's just more honest to link to the things that have prompted questions and comments.

Quote from: cmagounI have had this particular discussion before years ago and I always wonder about that mysterious bevy of "new players" just waiting to play RPGs as soon as the industry writes the perfect rules-light game. Over the history of RPGs, there have been tons of systems out there, including a couple painfully simple ones with pretty good exposure, such as Basic D&D.

Last count there were 989 rpgs ever printed and in English, and over 600 free rpgs floating about online. That's from John Kim's list - as thorough as he is, he's bound to have missed a few. So at least 1,600 rpgs in all, one a week since OD&D. I think those should cover pretty much any roleplaying game play style you enjoy. I mean, it's more than anyone could ever try.

So if there are already more rpgs than anyone could ever realistically try, isn't that enough? Surely at least one of them is newbie-friendly? And if none of them are newbie-friendly, then how is it that we have any gamers at all? We were all newbies once.

Looking at what actually sells, and at what people are actually playing, here's my theory: newbies like complex systems. They like crunch. They like a level of detail which it takes effort to understand. They want to think, they want a challenge.

Do I like crunch? Not much, really. It can be good with the right GM and players but too often it just slows things down in a boring way, ten dice rolls and three charts to resolve one sword swing. By the time you find out if your character's still alive or not you wish he was dead so it'd be over. But I don't confuse what I like with what is obviously popular and successful. And obviously, going from what's actually played and sells well, people like complexity.

The only important part of a roleplayer is the metallurgical content of his gonads. I'd rather play with a retarded maniac who captures the fecklessness of an RPG character than some fella from the debate team who's gonna lecture me on how because I'm lawful good I can't punch out Caesar and fuck his sis.

QuoteAnd lots of people, most gamers in fact, do play complex rpg systems. From which it seems they must like the complexity.

By that logic, it seems that most people like air polution too! :keke:

Complexity is a "waste product" of interesting game design. Gamers want details: halfings, ur-priests, anti-magic, adamantium hammers and spiderwebs but they pay for all those features with added complexity. So yeah, I could play a simple game but if I want to have super-powers, magic, psionics and an extra-terrestrial insectoid heritage? More books. More complexity.

Complexity isn't all bad though. It gives the memorization guys a chance to shine and the collectors another medium by which to define themselves. But the best thing about complexity is that it hides campaign-ending issues like "who has the strongest character" and "who is the smartest player."

Quote from: cmagounI always wonder about that mysterious bevy of "new players" just waiting to play RPGs as soon as the industry writes the perfect rules-light game. Over the history of RPGs, there have been tons of systems out there, including a couple painfully simple ones with pretty good exposure, such as Basic D&D.
...
WoW is simpler than D&D to get into for the average player, but WoW is certainly not rules-light.

The difference being that WoW does the math for you.  That a big difference.  In fact, that's what makes it easier to pick up.  All you have to do is point and click, and it shows you the results.  No math required on your part whatsoever.   In a P&P game, the opposite is true.

QuoteFrankly, I think RPGs have a big barrier to entry that has little to do with the complexity of the rules used and it is the fact that the concept of roleplaying does not appeal to most people. Yes, I know roleplaying is a natural activity and that we do it as children. I know that many training programs use roleplaying. Still, when it comes to sitting around a table with a group of other people, talking in character, making up character backgrounds, and being personally involved in a game of make believe, most people are uncomfortable.

Excellent point.  The followup question would be, among those for whom it would not be uncomfortable to role play, would a rules light system help them get into Role Playing Games, who otherwise are intimidated by the complexity?  My guess is the answer is yes.

QuoteMy friend's brother in law is a prime example. This guy loves WoW and plays it quite a bit. He enjoys engaging in endless, silly discussions about the role of the paladin in a raid party, how he is looking to PvP for better gear, and the optimal build for his rogue. Really, he would be at home on an ENWorld thread about single round damage builds for D&D. Still, he thinks D&D is silly. Why? Because you are a group of 30-somethings, playing make believe with dice!! He would feel silly doing it, thus to him, it is silly.

Perhaps this is to say that while the current demographic is 30 somethings (and 40 somethings as well), that the ideal demographic for our "new players" is more like high school and middle school kids?  My guess is that a lot of the grognards in fact picked up playing in high school or collage, but not after.   The fact they still play in their 30's and 40's may simply be because once you learn the game, it turns out to be fun.  

QuoteMy wife loves Wizardry and Heroes of Might and Magic. She has played D&D and finds it sort of enjoyable, but I could never get her to actually play in a regular game. Why? Because she is introverted and finds the act of talking in character and expressing her ideas in front of a group of people uncomfortable.

There's gonna be a lot of people like that.  Even in groups of players I've seen some seem to be content to pretty much sit quietly and pretty much watch the action with the occassional "I slash".   As long as there are at least one or two players who are "into it", and expressive and/or clever, and the GM is interesting, they seem to have a good time and come back to play on a regular basis.   There's never been a "you MUST be good at character acting" requirement in the games I've been a part of.   It's just that it helps, and some people really get off on it, and that's fun.

QuoteI think much of our supposed "new gamer" audience falls somewhere into that category, and so won't ever be gamers, regardless of how accessable you make the games. As soon as the make believe or heavy social aspect comes out of it (ala boardgames), it is ok.

Much, possibly, but not all.  So there is a market out there for the proverbial "new gamer".  My guess is that market is sitting in freshman classes of high schools the world over.   The problem is:  They are hooked on WoW and if you tried to sell them on the idea that this stack of rule books and dice is more fun, it might be a hard sell.   However, a rules light, and/or a computer automated rules system, might get them interested.

The thing that is attractive to a lot of players, and was the main thing for me when I started in high school, was the opportunity to be immersed in the fantasy world.   There's reasons why this is attractive to people, and it has to do with the roots of our culture, frankly, and if you want to get really esoteric, it has to do with the nature of being human.   Role Playing Games make for an amazing vehicle for this exploration into other worlds.  This, I think, is the real draw for many, and would probably be the real draw for the ellusive "new player", if we could but find a way to tap into that.

QuoteNow what about those people that ARE interested? Are they put off by the crunch of our gateway game? At the end of the day, I think bringing in new players has more to do with initial exposure to a gaming group than it does with exposure to a particular rules set.

My guess is that it depends.  If the game is marketed through word of mouth and that's the primary source of new entries, then yes, however that doesn't mean that people who do not have that opportunity might not be browsing in a bookstore or online looking for something fun to do with their friends... and stumble on Role Playing Games... take a look at the Websites, Forums etc, and say, "Well, this looks fun but dang it's so complicated.  Where's the simple way to start this?".   Yes, there are rules light systems, but are they easy to find and obvious to the "new player"?   My guess is, no.   That may be where we're missing the boat.   Perhaps.

I think a lot of this has to do with marketing, frankly.  And I think with the right marketing a rules light system might open up new markets.  I also wonder if the kinds of Worlds that can be created for Role Playing Games are also another area of opportunity.   The mythos of a World can have a lot to do with who wants to play it.   Perhaps other audiences would like completely different, unheard of worlds to play in, and that would be a draw for some new market out there?

Quote from: VBWyrdeThe difference being that WoW does the math for you.  That a big difference.  In fact, that's what makes it easier to pick up.  All you have to do is point and click, and it shows you the results.  No math required on your part whatsoever.   In a P&P game, the opposite is true.

True, but that is not the complexity of which I am speaking. I am talking about the amount of research, planning and tweaking that goes into making your character the best it can be. That is a non-trivial amount of work that goes into a "point-and-click" game. And millions of people do it. Now, do millions of people do all of that minmaxing? No, probably not. On the other hand, you really only need one person in a gaming group to fully understand the rules to start. In my mind, this makes the complexity barrier for the two games pretty darn similar.

And frankly, the core of D&D is not that complicated. Roll a d20, add modifiers and compare to a DC. That's it. All of the complexity in D&D is rolled up into feats, spells and powers which are exceptions to the base rules. That is OK because exception-based complexity can be broken into chunks and digested a little at a time. I don't need to have read all of the feats, just the ones I am interested in.

Now, if we are talking about perceived complexity (because of the three rulebooks), then I would argue that that might have as much to do with the cost of buying the three books as much as it does with the bulk of reading material.

Quote from: VBWyrdeExcellent point.  The followup question would be, among those for whom it would not be uncomfortable to role play, would a rules light system help them get into Role Playing Games, who otherwise are intimidated by the complexity?  My guess is the answer is yes.

Sure, I am sure there are some cases in which people dabble in RPGs and then drop them because they are too complicated. I just don't think the number is as large as we make it to be. We are assuming that someone sees the books, makes the hefty cash commitment to buy them and then reads them and decides, "Nope, too complicated."

If that is the case, then any boxed starter kit (of which there has been at least one aimed at getting people into 3.5) should have already brought these people into the hobby... so we're back to the same supposition, the horde of "new gamers" doesn't exist because they are already here.

Quote from: VBWyrdePerhaps this is to say that while the current demographic is 30 somethings (and 40 somethings as well), that the ideal demographic for our "new players" is more like high school and middle school kids?  My guess is that a lot of the grognards in fact picked up playing in high school or collage, but not after.   The fact they still play in their 30's and 40's may simply be because once you learn the game, it turns out to be fun.

I do think you are right here. The new gamer demographic is not my brother in law or wife, but a 11-15 year old kid. But remember, these kids are just as socially conscious as my brother-in-law, if not moreso. You have to get most of them over the hurdle of "this game is for nerds" or "that game is stupid" before you get to "there is no way I am playing because I don't understand whether I should take Cleave or Improved Initiative".

Quote from: VBWyrdeMuch, possibly, but not all.  So there is a market out there for the proverbial "new gamer".  My guess is that market is sitting in freshman classes of high schools the world over.   The problem is:  They are hooked on WoW and if you tried to sell them on the idea that this stack of rule books and dice is more fun, it might be a hard sell.   However, a rules light, and/or a computer automated rules system, might get them interested.

The thing that is attractive to a lot of players, and was the main thing for me when I started in high school, was the opportunity to be immersed in the fantasy world.   There's reasons why this is attractive to people, and it has to do with the roots of our culture, frankly, and if you want to get really esoteric, it has to do with the nature of being human.   Role Playing Games make for an amazing vehicle for this exploration into other worlds.  This, I think, is the real draw for many, and would probably be the real draw for the ellusive "new player", if we could but find a way to tap into that.

As a pasttime, WoW has a lot going for it. You can do it alone. You can play anytime you like. It has a built in social networking aspect. You can immerse yourself in a fantasy world. You can do this in anonymity. No RPG can match this.

Strangely enough, one thing I think RPGs can match is the obsessive nature of MMOs. Keeping players interested in a continuous cycle of rewards, deep character advancement options, tweaking for performance, etc.  To do this though, requires a fairly high degree of crunch.

I remember when you could buy the Diablo II starter set for D&D3. It was a self-contained adventure and rules, all packed into a small box. Theoretically, this should have hit on all cylinders. It was a small package, with straightforward rules and none of the bulk of D&D3, that tapped into an existing popular franchise, before the advent of the mega-popular WoW. Also, it was widely available in bookstores and it was advertized in comics.

And yet we are still having this same discussion about what rules-light game will bring people into the hobby...

I have to cut this short, but you make very fine points. Thanks for the discussion,

That was an interesting read, guys, thanks.

Essentially, I think we ought to 'need brains' to play rpgs as much as we need them everywhere else which is to say, it doesn't hurt, but its usefulness in the capacity of enjoyment is fairly limited.

The fact is, D&D 3.5 is pretty complicated. But on the other hand, if you play a Half-Orc Barbarian with a Great Axe, your damage output is still going to be on par with anything but the most rediculous of min-maxed creations and you'll still have a pretty good time with everything else.

In fact, you can max shit the hell out, but Rogue 20 with a Short Sword, Cleric 20, or Druid 20 as a friggin' Bear is pretty easy to figure out for anybody.

In fact, the question looks a lot more like, "How much goddamn work are we expected to put into our shit when we play RPGs?" because even somebody of average intelligence can pore over books and do the basic math needed, or go online and look at optimization threads. It just takes work. As it was said before, there's an incorrect conflation between the ability to max out a character with a build and intelligence. It primarily leans on the enjoyment of the act of tweaking. For example, I like to tweak builds from time to time, even if I'm not real serious about it. I've certainly read about even more.

But when I sit down to play, I don't worry about it as much. I just assign my stats where I want them and play a Fighter/Rogue (or something), even though there are technically more powerful choices. It does fine. I don't think about it too hard.

Should you need to be brilliant? No. Should you be invested in having fun at the table? Yes. Do most games require brilliance? No. Do some games require an inordinant amount of work? Yes.

Is that ok/should they? Sure. There are other games that don't.

Good point- the worst minmaxer I've ever known was, at best, semi literate. He often used the phrase "I likeded it," usually in reference to his online anime strip poker game.

Quote from: Kyle AaronIt's not the case at all that the stupid gamers just play fighters.

Of course not, all kinds of gamers play all kinds of characters. In the groups I played in, though, I did notice a tendency for more casual and less 'intelletual' players to pick fighters, and sharper folk to pick magic users and thieves. As a general rule - almost everyone broke their mold at some point. Other peoples' experience may have been much different.

Quote from: jrientsPersonally, I think D&D has done a disservice to the hobby by progressively making it harder for a player of average intelligence and dedication to grok the rules.

To a degree. But it seems to me that for some, working with the system is part of the activity, the draw of the activity.

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiTo a degree. But it seems to me that for some, working with the system is part of the activity, the draw of the activity.

Certainly the present contours of the system are great fun for people who like to massage mechanics.  But for Regular Joe Orc-Killer?  Maybe not so much.

Quote from: jrientsCertainly the present contours of the system are great fun for people who like to massage mechanics.  But for Regular Joe Orc-Killer?  Maybe not so much.

I agree. But how much does Regular Joe Orc-Killer really have to work with the rules? If he builds a basic character and doesn't set out to optimize it, how much contact is really required?

I, personally, am not a rules guy. I do feel that D&D is complex - it has a lot of parts. There have been times when I've felt that there's a lot for me to know. But the times when I've felt overwhelmed and put off by the mechanics of RPGs have been playing other games (Champions, I'm looking at you).

Seanchai

Each group only needs one guy that's plugged into the greater scene to get the full value of it.  That one guy can read all the optimization threads, keep up on all the new releases, do all the legwork and everyone in the group benefits from his actions.  It's just like all the raiding guilds in WOW benefiting from the works of the world-best raiders like Death & Taxes or Nilhilum because the latter two (and their fellows) publish all of the winning boss-fight strategies online for the rest to copy and employ (or the top Arena fighters posting their team and character builds for PVP players to copy); you only need a vocal minority of hardcore hobbists anymore for the majority to get the benefit.