Indoctrinating Kids to Devil Worship
Ron Edwards:
Hiya,
I ask that you focus this thread a little. The fact is that no one can tell you for sure what texts to buy, we can only guess based on what seems useful to us, individually. No one can know in advance whether you dislike reading on-screen, or do or don't want the tiles.
It also seems like a thankless task on our part. One person did give you some straightforward recommendations, and your reply slapped them down, on the basis of things he could not have known. I'm getting the impression that you are annoyed with the books and line development. I do sympathize with the money angle - that's marketing ass, unfortunately all too common - but I don't think it's fair to take it out on people who are responding in good faith to your request.
I ask that you re-cast the discussion in a more positive way. If someone says, "Try Book B and Book C, but not Book A and for God's sake not Book D," then you might disagree, but you can certainly say "Thanks." And if you've actually come to your conclusion already - which means that no one's post will really be welcome to you anyway - then it would help us to know that too.
I'm not sure what you're accomplishing with the satanic/devil references. As a thread title, it's amusing to me as a fellow gamer. But you mentioned it again in the latest post and I don't know if that's just another joke, or a subtle point of some kind that I'm supposed to be understanding, or what. I ask that you hold off on that content until people get a clearer idea of what you want.
If you're interested in my preferences as a fellow poster here, then I'd like to say that your account of play sounded great, and I would love to know more about how you introduced the rules, what sort of characterizations went on, and anything else about the game itself. Many of us are interested in everything we can learn about how to play RPGs with kids.
---
What follows is not intended to be a topic of discussion. I'm including it in order to validate what was interpreted as a non-contributing post, to see if I can head off a potential rift among participants, and also in hopes that what I say turns out to be interesting.
Odd as it may have seemed at first reading, Callan's post is incisive - well, once you get more accustomed to Callan anyway. My paraphrase is that one should not ever assume that a given role-playing game text - and I'll go so far as to say especially D&D, any version - literally provides the rules for play which one needs.
There are two reasons. The easy one is that different people need different things, coming to game texts as they do with differing assumptions. It's not like customers of, say, a new board game; everyone who purchases a new board game has a basic, unshakeable, and accurate notion of what this thing is for, well before they know the rules. You can't say that for RPGs. People come with creative priorities
The harder reason is that few game authors think in terms of customer audience. Or rather, the only audience they write to is limited to people very close to them. For grass-roots authors, that means their own play-group and maybe their annoying best friend who keeps saying what they "have" to include. For non-independent, committee-driven authors, that means their various co-flunkies and editors and line developers and people like that. Only quite rare game texts are written toward a specific audience whom the author does not know, but does bear strongly in mind and trusts to exist, and with its (the text's) parts carefully calibrated to be what they need, and not, for instance, what anyone else might need.
All of which is to say, and again this is my intended paraphrase for Callan's post, that even if you did pony up the $120 for "essential" material (which I agree, is economic ass), you might not be garnering the necessary materials and instructions for play. This is not a slam on D&D4E, because I am speaking of any game text, not merely this one, and I strongly emphasize "might" rather than "won't," because I don't know that game or its texts well.
Best, Ron
masqueradeball:
Just to comment a little on the development of D&D... there is no clear term that designates what books are absolutely necessary and which ones aren't. Core now means "usable in all campaign settings" so all the PHBs are "core" as is the DMG 2... which besides the errata'd rules is essentially a bunch of advice. Essential is a sort of baby step towards 5th addition thats meant to allow the brand to be marketed towards 1) Non-gamers and 2) people who were irritated at the perceived "anti 3e" marketing of the original 4e release. As far as price points are concerned, I'm pretty sure its meant to make the game cheaper to play.
The wizards website has book suggestions, but no bare minimums laid out... I would say Rules Compendium, one of the class books (Heroes of a...) and the DM Kit (this is assuming you already have dice) plus monsters and tiles as needed... so initial buy in, not including the Red Box is 80$, then you can add on stuff as you go.
Also, you could just get the original 4e PHB/DMG/MMl combo and familiarize yourself with the errata. If your new to 4e but not to D&D this might be the best place to start. That will cost you about 100 bucks.
Also, Bloodied doesn't mean much of anything. It indicates that a given character/creature has lost half of their hit points. Some effects refer to the bloodied condition. When they do, its important, when they don't, being at hp or lower doesn't do anything in and of itself until you reach 0 hp.
Ar Kayon:
Ron,
The DnD references to demons were intended to be tongue-in-cheek. And now that I have to explain it, you've ruined the joke.
Masqueradeball,
"The wizards website has book suggestions, but no bare minimums laid out... I would say Rules Compendium, one of the class books (Heroes of a...) and the DM Kit (this is assuming you already have dice) plus monsters and tiles as needed... so initial buy in, not including the Red Box is 80$, then you can add on stuff as you go."
Thank you. This ^^ helps out a lot.
Ron Edwards:
This is a moderator post.
1. Everyone who's posted so far has tried to help you. You are expected to respond with courtesy, and not use granting and withholding such a response as a means of subtle slams. That's an internet game honed to a fine art on other websites. Don't do that here.
2. The other internet game you are playing is called "bait the moderator." I'm sure you have reduced any number of site mods to sputtering helplessness elsewhere. It doesn't work here.
3. Learn to accept my moderation with grace. If I say "this is not funny," or "it started funny but now it's weirder or unclear," then that is the way it is. This is a known feature of the site and cannot be socially gamed. You will not succeed in making yourself into the put-upon, victimized, over-moderated victim.
I will not hesitate to close and lock threads if you post in this way again. I am specifically referring to your post to Teataine.
Best, Ron
Ar Kayon:
You're an idiot.
Best (to let you know I'm being courteous),
Ar
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page