Quote from: JongWKThere's the Commandos, FanPro's demo team for Shadowrun and Battletech.

How effective do you think they are at pulling in newbies to RPGs as opposed to newbies to Shadowrun? Are you one?

More generally, do you think demo teams are effective in creating new RPGers or  are they just building the networks that have been discussed?

I ave always liked demo teams I just have a horrible time managing them. Just do not have the patience.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltHow effective do you think they are at pulling in newbies to RPGs as opposed to newbies to Shadowrun? Are you one?

I considered becoming a Commando once, but lack of time killed that plan. I'm taking a guess here, but I think the team is probably more effective with Shadowrun newbies than with RPG newbies. It's not a bad way for a gamer to try Shadowrun for the first time, though.

QuoteMore generally, do you think demo teams are effective in creating new RPGers or are they just building the networks that have been discussed?

I think both, though you need to put demo teams outside a gaming con to be truly effective with potential gamers. High school fairs, town festivals, public libraries... you get the idea.


It goes without saying that people joining a demo team need to be... socially acceptable, to put it charitably. A bad demo could turn off a lot of people.

Quote from: HinterWeltDoes GW do any of their promotion/support with their RPG?

No, it's put out by a seperate sub company.  I'm not even sure if it a division of GW or a liscensing type deal...but GW doesn't pay the RPG any lip service.

From what I've seen, WotC is the only company that actively tries to get new people into the game sith such things as D&D day (or whatever it is called.  The promotional day they have in game stores) and the CMGs that often lead into the RPGs, not to mention card games.

Games Workshop doesn't do much in the USA, but I think they do more oversees?  But that is a mini game, not a RPG...but still it's related.  And if that's the case, then we have to talk about all the CCG companies, who do a much better job of getting newbies into the game than RPG companies do.

Here's some info from Dunner, the guy who runs the Commandos.

I think a big problem with the games that are coming out today is they are very complicated and really designed for people already in the hobby.

Simple games that are really easy to pick up and learn (Ala the Box Set Games of the past) would give newbies a game that had everything they need to get started (even throw in dice) and get them started in gaming.

Once they learn then they can move on to the games we are used to playing.

Quote from: HinterWeltI honestly think this is coming about. You have more stores that are opening on bigger budget (those lights, new carpet, nifty displays cost money) and doing better. Part of it is that they usually have RPGs in a lower bracket in terms of thier profits but they are still there at least.

Does GW do any of their promotion/support with their RPG?

Bill

I don't think they do, because as grubman pointed out, it's licensed rather than in-house. But GW stores are still gaming stores, and they're pretty much the best gaming stores (for certain values of "gaming") out there. The retail environment stuck in my mind because I play D&D with the marketing director of the company I work for, and we once went to both a GW store and a more general "gaming" store in the same day while talking about work.

Quote from: Blue DevilI think a big problem with the games that are coming out today is they are very complicated and really designed for people already in the hobby.

Yeah, I agree, and the players themselves are partially to blame for that. The hardcore players, in fact, are tightening an already tight niche market, making it more difficult for rookies to join in the fun. In today's world, someone interested in learning more about RPGs would turn to the internet. It's not like they can ask their neighbour, whose main hobby is fly fishing or model plane building.
The bulk of the people who post regularly on RPG sites are experienced veterans. Many criticize rules-lite games out of hand, and bark if there isn't a complex rule for any given situation. Then, they narf on about and argue over mechanics. They shamelessly shill and recommend their favourite game - whatever the hell it happens to be - without thinking about whether a new player could comprehend the overly complicated, anally retentive, rule set. Even worse, some rain scorn down on newbies who ask simple questions.
Why the hell would some newcomer subject themselves to this flagrant stupidity when they can go to a computer games store, pick up whatever they want, install it into their computer and play? We are fast-becoming a society where instant gratification isn't a want, it's a need (at least in the eyes of the consumer). If you want to attract these people to the hobby, then games should be simpler, not more complex.
Most of the guys (and girls) I know, who still play RPGs, never visit RPG sites and they prefer very mainstream material (D&D and the like) over games by small publishers. Small publishers, on the other hand, frequent RPG sites and are (possibly) influenced by all the waffle on the boards. As a result, they make more complex games that cater to hardcore gamers, even though hardcore gamers contradict themselves constantly.

Here's a contradiction, guys:

A: I have seen plenty of calls for rules light games for introductory purposes, yet every person asking for it is a veteran gamer who has been playing for years and is burned out on more rules-heavy systems. Without exception so far.

B: The games that attract the most newbies are rather rules-heavy - like D&D, Rifts, Vampire, and Exalted.

This leads to some bizarre conclusions, namely:

C: Rules-light games may be better suited to older, more experienced gamers, as the rules are replaced with a combination of player buy-in and GM fiat, and require little time for setup and play.

D: Rules-heavy games may support newbie players by giving them clear and distinct rulesets that have an answer for every situation, because the players don't have experience with RPGing, and kids are just awash with free time.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceHere's a contradiction, guys:

A: I have seen plenty of calls for rules light games for introductory purposes, yet every person asking for it is a veteran gamer who has been playing for years and is burned out on more rules-heavy systems. Without exception so far.

B: The games that attract the most newbies are rather rules-heavy - like D&D, Rifts, Vampire, and Exalted.

This leads to some bizarre conclusions, namely:

C: Rules-light games may be better suited to older, more experienced gamers, as the rules are replaced with a combination of player buy-in and GM fiat, and require little time for setup and play.

D: Rules-heavy games may support newbie players by giving them clear and distinct rulesets that have an answer for every situation, because the players don't have experience with RPGing, and kids are just awash with free time.

-clash

Very on Clash! It has been my experience, with new players, they want direction and boundaries provided by "heavier" rule sets. Far too often, people assume lite rules equal easy rules. This is not necessarily so.  A lot of base assumption must go into making a rules lite system work. IME, rules lite, as you noted, are better suited for players and GMs that have gotten to the point where they require very little in terms of actual rules and can run a game just by sitting around an improving any resolutions they need. Rules lite just provides them with the means of handy reference.

I constantly get told that Iridium Lite is not Lite and therefore not an intro game. I disagree. The system is summed in six pages but has depth to how it functions allowing most situations to be covered. Most importantly, the GM does not have to do much improv with the rules set. That is almost more important than ease of play for the players.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltVery on Clash! It has been my experience, with new players, they want direction and boundaries provided by "heavier" rule sets. Far too often, people assume lite rules equal easy rules. This is not necessarily so.  A lot of base assumption must go into making a rules lite system work. IME, rules lite, as you noted, are better suited for players and GMs that have gotten to the point where they require very little in terms of actual rules and can run a game just by sitting around an improving any resolutions they need. Rules lite just provides them with the means of handy reference.

I constantly get told that Iridium Lite is not Lite and therefore not an intro game. I disagree. The system is summed in six pages but has depth to how it functions allowing most situations to be covered. Most importantly, the GM does not have to do much improv with the rules set. That is almost more important than ease of play for the players.

Bill

I think the crux really isn't the heaviness of the system, it's the clarity of the rules. A moderately heavy system with very clear and consistent rules may be ideal for newbies. Your Iridium Light is certainly closer to fititng that bill than most, Bill.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceA: I have seen plenty of calls for rules light games for introductory purposes, yet every person asking for it is a veteran gamer who has been playing for years and is burned out on more rules-heavy systems. Without exception so far.

I agree with this, to a point. Veteran gamers are turning to rules light games. However, a vocal core still bemoan games that fail to give them a rule for every damn thing.

Quote from: flyingmiceB: The games that attract the most newbies are rather rules-heavy - like D&D, Rifts, Vampire, and Exalted.

I think that has to do more with the availability of those games than the fact that they are rules heavy, rules light, or rules absent. I can walk into my local Chapters and get myself a copy of those games. But I can't get the rules light stuff.
When I introduce new players, primarily those who are not from the stereotypical gamer mould, they don't want tons of rules, they want rules that they can understand quickly and easily. If the rules are too complicated they flick on the TV instead.

Quote from: grubmanNo, it's put out by a seperate sub company.  I'm not even sure if it a division of GW or a liscensing type deal...but GW doesn't pay the RPG any lip service.

It's likely they did this out of fear that rpg sales would impact on the miniatures, which is a shame as WFRP would have instantly gained some of the best retail coverage in the industry. From what I gather it's doing well anyway, but with full GW support it could have been massive.

Clash, you're spot on re. rules lite and rules heavy. I don't know why that is, either. One could invoke The Evil Marketing Ploy(TM).

But it's probably more complicated. The new, first-time gamers targeted by 3.x and Exalted are clearly 16-year old male persons. These seem to be partial to a) big weapons, b) Lidda, c) competitive rules mastery. As in, if you don't know the charm treez as well as the other boy does, your character will suck relative to his.

The million-dollar question is: What should a game look like that could draw in first-time gamers who are not aforementioned 16-year old boys but rather twenty-somethings? Of both genders if possible?

The Forgers have been trying to go there, but I don't know that their relationship RPGs have sold in the four digits.

One thing's for sure: you're not going to sell a rules-heavy game to twenty-something noobs with NO prior RPG experience. It has got be lite.

An angle that I haven't seen exploited but should is the MMORPG market. Once you let the WoW (or Everquest, or whatever) players know that all MMORPGs got their start with tabletop games, they get curious and want to take a shot at them. At least that has been my experience, anecdotal as it is.
Just the social aspect of a tabletop game seems to attract part of the crowd of potential gamers out there.