Gaming Comes Out-of-the-Box [was "Beginner-Friendly Gam

[wyrdlyng]

Something's bothering me about all of this and I think I've figured it out.

The ideas of a gateway game that's being thrown about all seem to somehow be simpler versions of existing rpgs, no? Now, if you're targeting 8 to 11 year old kids doesn't this seem wrong? Perhaps it's just my experiences but most 8-11 year old kids I know would require sedatives (or a video game) to sit still for any period of time. Which is why I think we're using the wrong tool.

IMHO, a good first-tier gateway for this age group would be something active which incorporate some of the concepts of rpgs such that when they get older and more sedate the ideas presented in second-tier gateway games would not be foreign or unfamiliar.

At that point, probably 12-14, you use something more rpg-esque. Even something like a very simplified LARP would be a good gateway for the 3rd stage which would be a social gathering along the lines of modern rpgs.

Of course all of this is based on the assumption that there is not an older gamer to "bring them into the fold." This is targeting those who might see something and be curious and as they get comfortable with concepts they continue to delve deeper.

Take a look at Megabloks. If this isn't a gateway into the realm of wargames then I don't know what is. You have small, highly detailed, sculpted, Lego-like figures and established armies which fight each other. All that's missing is some rules and dice and you have the basis for most fantasy wargames.

I think if someone wants to bring newcomers into rpgs then you need to make the gateways things which they already might be doing.

[Le Joueur]

The ideas of a gateway game that's being thrown about all seem to somehow be simpler versions of existing rpgs, no?

The ones that Eugene is talking about, yes; the whole thread, no.

Take a look at Megabloks. If this isn't a gateway into the realm of wargames then I don't know what is. You have small, highly detailed, sculpted, Lego-like figures and established armies which fight each other. All that's missing is some rules and dice and you have the basis for most fantasy wargames.

Yeah!  I got some of these!  There so close to what I wanted out of Warhammer Fantasy.  Neato (although the plastic is as 'flexible' as Legos, darnit, and the castle parts suck when you want to 'build big').

I think if someone wants to bring newcomers into rpgs then you need to make the gateways things which they already might be doing.

Bingo!

That's why I keep asking where the Collectible Card Game Dungeons & Dragons is.  Rather than a one-on-one 'master of realms' style, I think you could make it a one-on-one personal style...or something.   But where is it?

Or for that matter any others?

Are they waiting for us to design them?

Fang Langford

[quozl]

The Pokemon Adventure Game is the example Eugene used.  I recently picked this up at KB Toys on clearance for $2.  It's interesting, not a simpler rpg but a battle game where you make in character choices.  Each mission is very short (maybe 20 minutes?).  The real question is:  Did kids actually play it?  According to WOTC, plenty of them sold but it's hard to tell if they actually got played.

I agree that wargames can be a gateway to rpgs especially if they're skirmish level like you'd play with action figures or LEGO figs.  (I'm a LEGO man, don't mention that yucky clone brand!)  I think Wiz Kids' Mage Knight and Hero Clix will bring in rpg players.  (It was just announced that Toys R Us would be carrying Hero Clix!)

But this is "in the box".  There's got to be something else out there that nobody's tried yet.  How can you go from freeform "let's pretend" to rpg rules?  Put another way, why would you (or an 8 year old) want to?

[quozl]

How can you go from freeform "let's pretend" to rpg rules?  Put another way, why would you (or an 8 year old) want to?

And now I will try to answer my own question.  I was 8 years when I discovered rpgs.  My cousin (who was 9) showed me AD&D's Monster Manual and I thought it was the most incredible thing I'd ever seen.  It had all these fascinating things in there and they were all rated so you could tell how string they were in relation to each other.  I wanted to play but my cousin said we couldn't because we need the other books.  I wanted to play anyway, freeform, but he declined.  He then showed me a complete rpg, Top Secret.  He said I could read the rules and we could play that.  So I read them.  There was lots of cool stuff in it but the rules did not make any sense to me.  I could have played it freeform but my cousin wanted to play by the rules.  So we did and it sucked and we went back to our usual freeform roleplaying (always based on stuff you could find in the encyclopedia -- my cousin was a stickler for going by the book).

So why would I (as an 8 year old) want to play an rpg?  To do all the cool stuff I see in the book!  If you wanted me as an avid roleplayer then, all you would have had to do was put some simple rules in that Monster Manual on how to use the stats they provided.  When I got older and wanted more detail, I'd buy more books.  If you wanted me as a Top Secret player, you'd just have all the cool spy stuff and simple rules on how to use it and some martial arts too.

Surprisingly, based on me, I guess I've come to the conclusion that if you want to sell an rpg to kids, sell them a monster manual or a spy gadgets book or a sci-fi goodies book with very simple rules for avoiding the "I shot you--you're dead", "No you missed" problems you get with freeform.

[Valamir]

So....then Killer should be the ultimate gateway RPG, yes?

[quozl]

So....then Killer should be the ultimate gateway RPG, yes?

I would think so although you might want to put in some disclaimers saying to ask your parents before setting traps all over your house!

Sadly, I only came across that game right after high school.  It was still cool but I can only imagine all the fun I would have had with it as a kid.

For those who need the reference: http://www.sjgames.com/killer/

[Eugene Zee]

Hi guys,

Sorry I was in the middle of posting when I lost access.

Wyrdling.  I felt the remark you made about the kids attention spans was a very good point.  The solution that we can up with was that kids would spend more time acting out their characters in game play.  Much like a LARP and Table top put together.  But you already said that.  Well, I agree with you retroactively.  Also if we do things the right way we may be able to mesmerize the children with a good story, that they can help write.

I think where I was trying to go was to get the kids used to roleplaying as a positive and fun form of playing in an interesting setting and as a result we can groom and grow the next generation.  Although you are right, in essence a "gateway game" could be a simplefied altered roleplaying game, I think that is ok.  I think we may have to start from the edges of the box because we want them to end up in the box.  Also, I do think an adult would have to be present, not necessarily a roleplayer but someone who could be a "storyteller".

Quozl, I think that we go from freeform to more rules all the time.  That's the thing.  Kids want less rules (more expression and fun) and believe it or not adults want more.  So if you gradually incorporate more rules in stages it will work.  In the beginning the children go on quests with their characters and can grow and add to their PC's in simple ways but what this does is get them used to the roleplaying format of fun and hunger for more as they get older.  The more out of the box you go..the more you risk not being an effective gateway.  Each designer has to determine what their ultimate goal is.  Draw a larger miniature gaming market.  Grow the roleplaying market.  Or just create a unique product that children will think is cool and play.  I think they all have their attractions.

Megablocks.  Sounds like little green army men.  :)

Regards

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

I'm probably going to draw quite a bit of fire for suggesting this ...

... that "let's pretend" games are not the procedural precursor of role-playing.

Yes, I know all the "what is role-playing" introductions say that it's "cops and robbers" with rules to resolve disagreements, but I think that claim is false. For one thing, rules don't resolve disagreements, they introduce unpredictability. I've noted that functional Drama-rules in role-playing serve this purpose no less than Fortune mechanics do. For another, the bulk of cops-and-robbers play is hide-and-seek and chasing - neither of which correspond to any kind of activity during role-playing.

The baseline of RPG activity is Exploration, and being able to cooperate in produced shared Exploration. The first step is no problem; daydreaming is the child's stock-in-trade; all kids daydream and enjoy imagining either themselves or others doing dangerous and interesting things. But creative daydreaming is a little different - having the "authority," so to speak, to generate imaginative situations that interest someone else. And finally, communicative, creative daydreaming is a final step, and it requires a social context for that activity. Bluntly, I can think of no activity in elementary education that encourages this ability.

Best,
Ron

[Eugene Zee]

Ron,

Fire, fire, fire.  :)

I realize that there exists no medium for a reasonable precursor to roleplaying but can we create one.  If we can, what would it look like.  I have a suspicion that it will look very much like a simpler roleplaying game in a dramatic format or something similar.

What do you think?

[quozl]

But creative daydreaming is a little different - having the "authority," so to speak, to generate imaginative situations that interest someone else. And finally, communicative, creative daydreaming is a final step, and it requires a social context for that activity. Bluntly, I can think of no activity in elementary education that encourages this ability.

That's interesting.  Maybe it was the subversive influence of my cousin but that's what we did when we played "let's pretend".  Sure, we played the occasional cops and robbers but a lot of the time we just sat around and played like you described.  

For example, we would start with a million dollars and say were big shot ranchers.  We'd spend our money on the best pickup, rifle, dogs, etc. and then interact.  "Your dog ran onto my property so I shot it."  We'd also devise secret codes and invent espionage stories surrounding them.  

Was I weird for an 8 year old?  I don't know but I do know one 8 year old at least who does similar sorts of things (usually with his LEGO bricks) and he's never been exposed to rpgs, just things like Zelda and Pokemon.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jon,

I did that with my Legos, and also with my toy animals and my action figures. I agree with you that it's the activity I'm looking for as the bridge, and I'm interested to know how it can be recognized, matured, and encouraged. I also found the number of friends who could do it with me to be pretty rare; they usually changed the game into one form or another of "break stuff we built," or got bored with keeping an ongoing storyline in mind.

Best,
Ron

[Eugene Zee]

Quozl,

I don't think you were a weird 8 year old.  Maybe now, JK.  ;)

I think that the key is cooperative and creative play to reach a mutual goal.  Not really too much structure but a little direction.  A little structure will be introduced by the kids but thats all.

Regards

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I did that with my Legos, and also with my toy animals and my action figures. I agree with you that it's the activity I'm looking for as the bridge, and I'm interested to know how it can be recognized, matured, and encouraged. I also found the number of friends who could do it with me to be pretty rare; they usually changed the game into one form or another of "break stuff we built," or got bored with keeping an ongoing storyline in mind.

This brings me to a very "out-of-the-box" idea: that role-players aren't created by any sort of marketing - instead, they're born or socialized into the role.

I don't believe there's a "magic bullet" that's going to get more people into role-playing. I think people find role-playing because they need it, and the only way to get those people who do need it and haven't found it yet is by telling them about it.

I see no evidence that the community is exposing others to RPGs - especially those that need RPGs. I'd love to be proved wrong.

[quozl]

I also found the number of friends who could do it with me to be pretty rare; they usually changed the game into one form or another of "break stuff we built," or got bored with keeping an ongoing storyline in mind.

While that was true with boys, it wasn't so true with girls.  Playing house always seemed to be pure story, even soap opera.  It did always turn into something involving running or some physical action after about 20 minutes, however (this was when I was 6 or 7).

I don't know but I've heard that schools are using more roleplaying-like activities now to teach kids.  Does anyone here know this to be true or false?

[Mike Holmes]

I did that with my Legos, and also with my toy animals and my action figures.

To add a data point: sandbox. We used stones for currency. I called the game economy.

Mike