Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Irving 07-09-05, 08:34 AM	All - Considering that D&D is now 35, it should be no surprise that there are more than a few dads out there wondering how they play the game with their kids. Here's a thread to talk about the challenges of adapting D&D 3.5 for kids 10 and under. There are two design challenges that require house rules: 1: The math and mechanics need to be placed in the DM's hands and taken away from the player as much as possible. 2: Some of the more graphic elements of the game need to be downplayed. Genuine death of a sentient creature, human or otherwise, needs to be extremely rare. Here are some of my inital thoughts - feel free to add. - Classes need to be limited to some simple selections - fighter, sorcerer, and rogue, possibly. - Feats should be grouped together more heavily into interrelated families. Complex manuevers like trips, disarms, and overruns are removed as feats. - All damage on creatures vulnerable to subdual damage is treated as subdual damage. Death only occurs with a coup de grace. - Critical hits, rather than double damage, prodcue an successful trip or disarm. - Enemies in combat must take make a Will save each round, with modifiers based on the classic "morale check". Failure means they run away or surrender. Evil creatures automatically suffer penalites to this check. - All PCs must be good-aligned. Thoughts? Even if you don't have kids' I'd like to hear from the experience house-rule-makers out there on how to tackle the issues. I'm shooting for a combat environment that resembles the G.I Joe cartoons of my wasted youth, or an anime like The Cat Returns, if that helps to provide a frame of reference.
Vestigial_Thumb 07-09-05, 03:57 PM	I think I might just try this out. I have nephews, twins actually, who are really interested in learning about this. They've already decided what kinds of characters they want to play. :D Thanks dude, you just saved my ass!
Steel Cobra 07-09-05, 05:36 PM	actually this is a pretty good idea but in my opinion kids under 10 should not be playing D&D and well only those with not so much experance should not play for I belive D&D was made for kids in high school+ and well if these kids want to play try playing smaller games until they are old enough
CryoSilver 07-09-05, 06:58 PM	I think you might also have to finagle the rules for turning undead and spell Dcs: they get a little number heavy sometimes, same as with certain skills. To handl skills, I might suggest you just make opposed skills opposed d20 rolls, or only add skill ranks.
Hvitar-Hrafnar 07-09-05, 07:02 PM	A kid about 10 spectates one of my campaigns quite a bit and plays in a campaign with one of the PC's from the campaign he spectates as the DM. We use full-violence, mechanics, math, etc and it doesn't bother him at all. I think all the classes should be available, but I do agree with most of the other rules you said. One of these reasons is because although Fighter, Rogue, and Sorcerer are classics kids should probably experience more than just the classic. Druid is my personal favorite class and although this is indeed a Fantasy game you shouldnt try and shelter anyone from Druids because they are real and/or because if you have strong religious views they conflict. Wizard may be hard for younger kids because of the studying, spellbooks, etc. I myself would hate to be a good aligned character but for younger kids it may be OK.
Vestigial_Thumb 07-09-05, 08:54 PM	Hvitar-Hrafnar This sounds like something in Icelandic... Means White Ravens and is actually spelled hvítir hrafnar. My nephews are actually 8 years old and not the smartest pigs in the sty, so I'm just gonna try this for now, except for limiting classes.
Irving 07-09-05, 09:21 PM	I think you might also have to finagle the rules for turning undead and spell Dcs: they get a little number heavy sometimes, same as with certain skills. To handl skills, I might suggest you just make opposed skills opposed d20 rolls, or only add skill ranks. Oh yeah - I had forgot about skills. - Characters automatically take 10 on all skills. Probably the simplest way to keep it interfaced with ordinary D&D. As for limiting classes - Clerics (and undead turning, by extension) are a can of worms that I can't decide to open or not. I'm leaving undead out of the picture for the moment anyways - maybe ghosts, but not anything, er, goopier. My thought right now for antagonists are Orcs and Goblins (with a strong dose of comedy, mind you - think Games Workshop greenskins with less viciousness), with some Dark Elves for suave, scary, dangerous evil. I'm toying with the idea of using a verison of warforged from Eberron as antagonists if I want a truly violence-light campaign; bashing robots instead of slaying orcs might play out well. Hmm. Maybe a version of Phyrexia, the place where undead machines come from? A good excuse to slip in a quiet ecology theme. "Recycle, because the thing you waste hurt you..." Just brainstorming, but interesting maybe.
Lao, Ninja of the Dragon 07-09-05, 09:56 PM	D&D should not be for Highschool+. I have been playing since I started middle school and I am starting highschool next year. Should I have waited until now to start playing? No. As for small children, My 6-year old cousin can play D&D(with help from his sister on the math. 10 years old and a walking, talking, breathing D&D encyclopedia). My uncle does not tone down a thing, and the kid understands pretty much the core system. And no, they aren't prodigies. They got creativity and imagination. Any kids have that. It helps to be smart to. But a kid can be smart and not be a prodigie.
Hvitar-Hrafnar 07-09-05, 10:20 PM	This sounds like something in Icelandic... Means White Ravens and is actually spelled hvítir hrafnar. My nephews are actually 8 years old and not the smartest pigs in the sty, so I'm just gonna try this for now, except for limiting classes. Interesting to find someone else that knows what it means. My friend from Iceland translated it for me on a whim so I didn't expect it to be 100% perfect. The full name is Hvitar Hrafnar Fjaðrir. Where did you learn Icelandic?
Steel Cobra 07-09-05, 10:47 PM	well thats just my opinion I am going to be a sophmore next well once school starts and well I started reading the books when I was in middle school but I didnt really comprehend these teaching until Im in highschool and I think middle school doesnt disern any of the excitement but it does get rid of some stuff for example now that the PCs are more mature I can use some more mature topics like actuall marrige cause I tried it once before they were in high school and well the PCs were WAY too immatur to deal with those topics and well in my opinion it kind of gives the game more of a sence or real life. sorry about the grammar
CryoSilver 07-09-05, 10:56 PM	I agree that you can start young; in fact, it's almost more enjoyable when you're young because you can fully explore instead of alling into a stereotype as fast. I started playing in 7th grade and even though I am bloody intelligent, I don't see any math in D&D beyond what you learn by 5th garde.
Steel Cobra 07-09-05, 11:27 PM	sterotypes are horrid as it is and well at a young age I say it really doesnt matter as I once did a project about D&D for 6th grade I was constantally teased and made fun of this sterotpe begins at a young age but really it doesnt matter and if your gonna do this I say give them the full thing I dont object to anything
Vestigial_Thumb 07-10-05, 08:52 AM	Interesting to find someone else that knows what it means. My friend from Iceland translated it for me on a whim so I didn't expect it to be 100% perfect. The full name is Hvitar Hrafnar Fjaðrir. Where did you learn Icelandic? I am Icelandic. Hvítar hrafnafjaðrir is spelled right. That means feathers of a white raven.
lostone 07-10-05, 09:51 AM	I'd say examine each child in your game and take them on a case by case basis. Some kids won't care so much about the mechanics and just want to roleplay, and other kids will want to get involved in the mechanics and use them to their advantage. If anything it might help some kids with mental math because it is being used in a game they like. As for how violent and scary things get, take that on a case by case basis as well. Kids watch some pretty violent shows nowadays, granted most of them never/rarely depict death, because that can be a hard concept to swallow. But if a kid has had experience with death in real life it may not be a bad thing to introduce slowly and gently. I have a few nephews I'd love to introduce to the game, but my wife & sister-in-law would not appreciate it so much, I guess I'll just have to settle for improving their M:tG skills instead.
Hvitar-Hrafnar 07-10-05, 12:32 PM	I am Icelandic. Hvítar hrafnafjaðrir is spelled right. That means feathers of a white raven. Then you should know all about the stuff in my signature. ;)
Galstaf, Sorcerer of Lite 07-10-05, 12:37 PM	- Characters automatically take 10 on all skills. Probably the simplest way to keep it interfaced with ordinary D&D. You had me until this one. I'd drop it; let the kids roll some dice! If you want to simplify skills, maybe shrink the skills list a bit (combine Hide and Move Silently into Stealth, Spot and Listen into Notice, etc.), and make sure you help them figure out skill modifiers and write them down. Don't worry about synergy bonuses and such, but I'd keep ability mods and skill ranks. That way you can tell the kids, "Since your character is very strong, he's really good at climbing and swimming." Just don't put too many numbers in front of them on the character sheets -- maybe just the total modifier. I'd simplify a lot of the big lists so as not to overwhelm them -- new players of any age sometimes have their minds blown if you throw too much material at them at once. That problem will only increase when the new players are kids. Weapons, for instance -- does a 10-year-old really care about the difference between a longsword and a bastard sword? Or between a light crossbow and a heavy one? If the kid wants a sword, let him have a sword and be done with it -- don't ask, "what kind of sword?" Speaking of weapons, drop range increments. In fact, drop ranges. For weapons and spells both. If you can see it, you can shoot it with your bow or throw a fireball at it. Rather than ability damage, poisons (and maybe even certain monsters' special attacks) should leave a character nauseated or sickened. I might have more later...
Steel Cobra 07-10-05, 03:09 PM	Weapons, for instance -- does a 10-year-old really care about the difference between a longsword and a bastard sword? Or between a light crossbow and a heavy one? If the kid wants a sword, let him have a sword and be done with it -- don't ask, "what kind of sword?" I think that the kids should have a few differant swords maybe not as many but at least 2 differant swords like a long sword and a great sword but maybe simpler names like good sword and great sword. Speaking of weapons, drop range increments. In fact, drop ranges. For weapons and spells both. If you can see it, you can shoot it with your bow or throw a fireball at it. however I dont agree with this lets say your atop a big ship oif somekind and you see a guy on the ground like far up some how you shouldnt be able to shoot him from that high or even if your at the top of a castle you shouldnt be able to hit (not that itr would happen w/ small kids) the villagers working in the firlds. Rather than ability damage, poisons (and maybe even certain monsters' special attacks) should leave a character nauseated or sickened. Now there is something I agree with
lostone 07-10-05, 03:20 PM	Speaking of weapons, drop range increments. In fact, drop ranges. For weapons and spells both. If you can see it, you can shoot it with your bow or throw a fireball at it.I wouldn't go that far. The maximum distance is range increment x5. Drop the penalties for shooting that far and just have that be the range. The rest I agree with. And definitely keep the dice, kids love dice. Dice are a part of so many games and it is more fun to roll your own dice as a kid than to watch your parent/uncle/brother/whoever roll them for you. If they are old enough to play D&D they are old enough to handle rolling the dice, even if they need some help with what to add to it.
Steel Cobra 07-11-05, 12:11 AM	And definitely keep the dice, kids love dice. Dice are a part of so many games and it is more fun to roll your own dice as a kid than to watch your parent/uncle/brother/whoever roll them for you. If they are old enough to play D&D they are old enough to handle rolling the dice, even if they need some help with what to add to it. I defintally agree with that I mean I imagine thats one of the reasond that the game will keep them hookedits one of the best parts of the game! lol
Darkmeer 07-11-05, 12:46 AM	Okay, take it with a grain of salt: I started playing D&D at age 12. My father taught me. We played ADND 2e, and it was a hoot. We are reasonably good at math, are creative, and liked general mayhem (think Legend of Zelda video games...). We started with a short adventure, and moved on and away from our parents' game. One rule we've always kept in any group: If a player causes a major problem for the group (in real life), they are not invited back. The idea that someone under 12 plays doesn't bother me. I think 10-12 is a good starting age, but not for every kid. I have a cousin who plays DDM with me, and he's only 7. I've told my aunt that I won't start a D&D game with him as a player for a couple of years b/c he isn't ready yet, and she had already given me permission. The level of violence, the level of mood, the level of gameplay is completely in the hands of the kid. Some kids are good with the stuff b/c of video games, but some are not. Not everyone was meant to play D&D, and that's okay. :twocents:
Steel Cobra 07-11-05, 10:40 AM	yes I agree I think it really depends on the kid I mean if they have already been exposed to vilonece like Gran Theft Auto then they might be suited for the 'full experance with dieing if they are one of those partens protected types thisa toned down version might work. But always remeber how much little kids care wht others say and how young sterotyping for D&D starts
DwarvinJedi 07-13-05, 02:42 AM	I started playing before I was 10(Basic D&D boxed Set,yet it was in the Late 90's) and I was smashing in heads like there was no tommorow(even though I was generally good-ish) Dice are fun, keep them. I think today's children(myself included) are getting a little too resistant to blood and gore(I was playing MK at 6). Basically it all comes down to(as others have said) the individual kid and the parent.
StormKnight 07-15-05, 04:36 PM	For simplification, you might want to really cut down on classes, perhaps Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, and maybe Favored Soul - I say favored soul and sorcerer rather than cleric and wizard because spell memorization is a real pain to keep track of! You could make a greatly reduced feat list. You could reduce skills into one skill bonus. Give character clasess with more skill points a higher bonus. If you want to downplay violence, rather than the subdual damage/run away check you describe, simply have creatures get knocked out at 0 HP (don't even track how far negative they go. Hit a little 3 HP goblin for 20 points? Well, then he's sent flying and...knocked out).
dragonman407 07-16-05, 12:39 AM	I think kids can be smart enough to play this game. but just in case you still think theyre not: I was introduced to the game by there being only storytelling and improvised battles. no rules at all. just make sure the DM is fair.
weasel fierce 07-17-05, 02:05 AM	Well, if you can get a copy of the old Basic / Expert "oD&D" set, they are perfect for young players and beginners.
The Livewire 07-17-05, 11:14 AM	Skills for kids. I think the option in unearthed Arcana where you just take skills at max rank, w/o skillpoints would work best for basic D&D. I would allow the kids to take 10. but I'd also allow them to roll. I'm not sure I like the idea of everything being subdual damamge, but then I remember as a kid being turned off by everyone having laser weapons and bailing out at the last second in GI Joe cartoons. Maybe use the subdual damage rule for the kids and BBEG types. With the pictures in the books, weapon choice and armor choice should be left open I think. Might as well teach 'em "I'm taking the Falcion because it looks neat!" Vs "2d4 18-20 x2 vs 2d6 19-20 X2, which does more damage?" Also theat will give them practice as addition and subtraction, buying stuff. If you're going to limit the D&D core classes, I'd allow them to switch off as they get more 'advanced' "You want to play a wizard? OK Billy, you seem to have the sorceror down pretty well, next game we can replace sammy sorceror with mikey mage." Also by all means as the DM ham it up! Do the funny voices, mannerisms, etc. We ran a game for the kids, and one of our regular players played Meepo, another rolled for the rats, and made little ran gnawing noises, etc. The players loved it, and it encouraged them to talk with meepo, vs. 'Kill the kobold!" Let them read the PHB. it helps them read, and again is educational. When it comes to abilities, let them a) make their own mistakes and b) remind them when they forget an ability 'Do you want to heal your friend, or smack the goblin again?' Try being descriptive rather than bogging down in game mechanics. Don't say "You should use your club rather than your falchion on the skeleton because it has damage resistance 5/bludgeoning." Try "you thrust your blade deep into the skeleton, a blow that would drop an orc, but the blade just scrapes along the ribs. You realize your club might be better at breaking bones." Hope this helps
DwarvinJedi 07-17-05, 11:45 AM	Well, if you can get a copy of the old Basic / Expert "oD&D" set, they are perfect for young players and beginners. That is what I played on first, so I will second this opinion.
pangalactic 07-17-05, 02:32 PM	I don't think you need to make any changes to allow your kids to play. I was either 9 or 10 when my dad let me start playing, and he also allowed my brother - who would have been 7 or 8 - to playas well. We used to condensed rules of the AD&D First Quest boxed set, played through that mini-campaign, and then went on to the full rules and adventures my dad had written. You could do the same, using the Basic Game. I see no reason why kids shouldn't play if you think they are old enough - and if you drill into them that it is, at the end of the day, just a game, and they aren't to go reenacting any of what they do in the game in real life.
Verelor 07-18-05, 03:01 PM	The answer is already there and in perfectly boxed form. It's called the D&D Basic Game, and was released last September as a 30th anniversary commeoration. Everything it has is perfect for the young-uns. It says it's ages 12+, but I strongly disagree with that and will say it's mroe like ages 9+. Kids in MY D&D games, though? That's a no go for me. Mature ethical and religious Book of Exalted Deeds/Vile Darkness style theological and religious musings, graphic combat and spell descriptions, criticals that deal limb-maiming injuries, evil that's genuinely and divinely evil, corruption, exaltation and genuinely good characters almost standard as PC's, heavy homebrew and house rules, roleplaying expected on a paperback novel standard, questions of marriage, love, hate, why conform, why rebel, and to top it all off all the regular classes are replaced by advanced classsescreated by either Szatany or Jaerom Darkwind. If the arm of holiness is severed by the Scourge It will bleed And we wouldn't like it any other way :D :D :D P.S.: I'm not psycho :rolleyes:
Venom of the Yuan Ti 07-18-05, 04:38 PM	Dont underestimate the realism threashold of children, but I would say that you ahve to reach -20 or -(you max hp) hp to die (to reduce actual deaths). Classes should be fighter, sorcerour, rouge and cleric, myabe adding ranger and/or paladin. Dont tie clerics to a god, leave the whole are of gods alone, pearents will not thank you for confusing a childs theological outlook, have devils/angels give the magic instead. For turning, assume adverige rolls, you are a level x cleric so you can turn up to y HD of undead and no creature may have more than z hd. Dont trim the weapon lists too much, you should have, for blades, dagger, short sword, longsword (call this a sword) and great sword. I would advocate removing exotic weapons though. Removing ranges seems like a good idea. For the maths side keep a sheet of every character, so you can do the adding whilst they do the rolling. Dont over confuse the plot, stick to either (acromins are mine, they come up a lot) STD (slay the dragon), RTD (rescue the damsel), GTR (Get the relic) or DLS (Dark lord syndrome). That is to say, kill a powerfull monster, save a person, find a treasure or stop a villan. All good clean simple fun. On a side note kids like to be sacred, but dont like nighmares, you can usually get a lot more milladge out of sudden changes in voice volume or pitch, lichting an music out of kids (look at pantos).
Godzilla 07-18-05, 05:11 PM	This is good, but not just for little kids, but maybe someone who's just getting into D&D, spite their age. Of course, they can still do the math part, and they could handle the graphic parts, if they're older. My little brother is 11, and he plays it (some), and we use the rules and such that are in the book. But, if someone is 20, and has never played it, this would be good for them.
Verelor 07-19-05, 06:26 PM	I guess noone even saw the part about where I posted the D&D 3.5 basic game set. Shucks. :mad: I don't really agree in the case of soemone who is just learning that is 20. It is HIGHLY unlikely that someone who is 20, the steriotypical age of today's gamer, is going to be picking up Dungeons & Dragons if he hasn't already played a dozen roleplaying games that are at least loosely similair or has a basic udnerstanding of fantasy concepts. Anyone these days older than 15 who is learning to play PnP fantasy roleplaying games has almost certainly enough knowledge from crpg's to not need the game dumbed down while he/she is learning it.
Bruunwald 07-19-05, 06:51 PM	Okay, take it with a grain of salt: I started playing D&D at age 12. My father taught me. We played ADND 2e, and it was a hoot. We are reasonably good at math, are creative, and liked general mayhem (think Legend of Zelda video games...). We started with a short adventure, and moved on and away from our parents' game. One rule we've always kept in any group: If a player causes a major problem for the group (in real life), they are not invited back. The idea that someone under 12 plays doesn't bother me. I think 10-12 is a good starting age, but not for every kid. I have a cousin who plays DDM with me, and he's only 7. I've told my aunt that I won't start a D&D game with him as a player for a couple of years b/c he isn't ready yet, and she had already given me permission. The level of violence, the level of mood, the level of gameplay is completely in the hands of the kid. Some kids are good with the stuff b/c of video games, but some are not. Not everyone was meant to play D&D, and that's okay. :twocents: Every kid is definitely different. It helps to know your kid well. Spend time with the kids before you play an RPG with them. My little boy just turned five. I watch him closely, and I notice that while the violence in something like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings excites and interests him, with all the swords and arrows and laser guns, he reacts to real danger and violence on the television in a completely different, most often compassionate way. For instance, Anakin loses an arm and he jumps up! Wow, that's exciting. What a development. What will happen next? But a guy gets bitten by a shark on the Discovery Channel and he covers his eyes and says, "Oh no! Ouch! Ouch!" Or, when he plays with plastic swords. He hits the other sword, but never the other person, even though he's seen a hundred sword fights on television and knows what they are for. This tells me that like I was, he'll be ready to play at 10 or 11 (I say that because he's not incredibly attentive yet and I know he'll need to settle down before he can really give it a shot). Maybe before. Pretend violence is one thing. Real violence is completely different. I think that's all your child needs to understand to really be ready to play. Well, that and the attention span part. Teach your child compassion and he'll act with it, and play with it, even if his PC has to eventually kill a goblin, or something.
da beast 07-20-05, 04:19 PM	I got a 5 year old that plays with us since we only have 3 other players. Although I have a sinking suspicion that he is evil... It could be from the time he attempted to assault me with a baseball bat... lol
Verelor 07-22-05, 02:26 PM	I'm terrible with kids. I can't usually relate with someone who is younger than 13, especially not in my Dungeons & Dragons campaigns, which happen to be very mature.
Nethicus 07-22-05, 02:52 PM	Well, I've got an 11 month old, and one on the way, so this is something I've given some thought. IMHO, D&D can be a terrific tool for explaining moral differences, like what actions are good and which are evil, the advantages/disadvantages of pure chaos, and law, etc. 8-10 years old is about the time you want to start introducing this stuff to them. The Catholic Church starts 1st Communion in 2nd grade, and most kids are 7-8 then. If they can pick up transubstantiation, they can get the difference between some moral issues, and they should be learning these things at that age. [I have a few players who play "chaotic good" characters, who feel that stealing is perfectly OK because it's chaotic. I bring up the fact it's evil, too (because they are pocketing the loot), and I seriously got this repsonse "But I'm not killing them to get it." This guy is nearly 30 years old!] The battle between good and evil does not have to be graphic, but it should entail consequences of the actions. For example, you can have the characters wiping out the "mean ol' kobolds", but introduce them to the female and young kobolds as well. Explain to them honor and self-determination. Additionally, show cause & effect. If the characters eliminate the kobolds, have orcs move in. And gradually something more sinister. Then bring up the concept that "Well, maybe if the kobolds were still there, these other creatures would never have moved in." It gets them thinking about solutions other than "killin' the kobolds". I would avoid using anything for BoVD/BoED, and I'd avoid summoning Demons/Devils or that sort of thing. I'd even avoid raising the dead, epsecially if you're in a religious household, as it can confuse younger kids. I have another post on these boards, which can be found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=468844), which details some other rules besides what is currently on the books. As for math-- D&D was one of my first instructional tools for addition/subtraction. I learned quite a bit about conversions and quickly putting things together thanks to D&D. I wouldn't tone down the math-- I mean, all we are doing is adding and subtracting. It's not like there's much calculus (until you hit 3D combat). And Min/Maxing, while annoying from a roleplaying aspect, is a good way for kids to start doing differential math to maximize outcome. Nothing wrong with that. :)
Verelor 07-23-05, 11:41 AM	Definitely. BoVD and BoED are definitely for mature roleplayers only. Battling undead and archfiends should probably be avoided with younger kids, something that evil or unnatural would confuse them. You really don't have to simplify the rules at all. They tell you what they want their cahracter to do as if the character is completely udner their control, and there's probably a rule for it. He or she will be learning many things, from moral and ethical decision-making to medievel culture.
R-man 07-24-05, 04:33 AM	A lot will depend on the specific child in question. My two daughters (age 8 & 10) would have no difficulty with the math or the death issues. However their reading comprehension is both still very weak. Once their reading is up to snuff then I expect to start roleplaying with them. However as a starter and to help teach them the basics of movement and combat could I suggest D&D mini's? I play weekly with my older daughter and will probably be teaching my younger daughter within the next couple of weeks how to play. Yes they are very week but it is easy to simply play a weaker warband to keep things fair. This has a lot of advantages; it teaches them the math skills both in combat and building their warband. It teaches them that D&D combat kills figures and that sometimes retreating is the smart move. It will teach them some of the overarching basics of D&D combat (protect the mage from the fighters, watch out for spells and breath weapons and keep and eye on that nasty archer in the back). Once my girls are both familier with combat it will help them greatly to slide into D&D combat. You don't have to know the rules on how to do all the maneuvers etc. you just have to know that something is possible and then not be afraid to ask "Daddy how do I use my sneak attack?". Once they start asking questions and really looking at what and how to use their character the battle is over as that is really what D&D is all about (refering to skills and the more roleplaying aspects of D&D). The only problem of course is if you are unwilling to spend a couple of dollars on minis. Yes you can spend the absurd amounts that I have spent to get an almost complete collection. But realistically all you really need is 3-4 boosters and a starter set to start playing the basics of the game.
Dark Voivode 07-24-05, 09:13 AM	My main suggestion would be to pick up D&D for Dummies. I know some people are already groaning, but the resource is built around playing the easiest of the classes, so that you may get a feel for the game. The 3.5 boxed set that Verelor mentioned is a step up from that. Then, you have full integration with all the choices of the PHB and DMG. I suppose the final step in this chain would be the introduction of splat materials. Although I believe Psionics is an easier concept for children who've played fantasy video games (power points are essentially spell points or magic points). Personally, I started at age 8 with the original white booklets. Two years later I was DMing our group and I've been doing so pretty steadily ever since. As a DM, occasionally you have to make the hard calls. As much as I love my daughter, she cried when Sirius Black died in the Harry Potter novels and she's 11. She thinks boys are gross and gets embarrassed when my wife and I kiss. We've chosen not to allow her to sit in on the game sessions yet. I think she's a little too involved in the story for her own good. My 7 year-old son is the opposite, he couldn't care less about characters in a book, he's into blood and guts and describing the shark attack he saw on TV (much to my wife's intense displeasure). We're watching him carefully, but I'm not sure he'll be ready before he's 12 or so either. He's a little too involved in the story also, but in a much more gruesome way. My point is you have to take each case individually. What may be right for certain kids may not hold true for others. Some kids just get it. Some kids need help. Others need to wait until they have their feet firmly planted in reality first.
Verelor 07-24-05, 01:54 PM	With a good DM, the only real problem or setback is too little maturity or a locked imagination. A 12-year old will certainly make a great D&D gamer if he or she is mature enough to handle concepts like gore, death, darker gods in a game, and has enough imagination to simply proclaim an action and there will probably be a rule for it (and if there isn't a good DM will wing it seamlessly) The D&D rules are not rules in the restriction sense. They are simply there to govern roleplaying with a more or less physics system.
Xorial 07-28-05, 01:25 PM	There is a game system that is a simplified version od the d20 system called True20 (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=4967&) . All you need is one d20 to play, and the character sheet is one-sided/one page.
Gene2324 07-28-05, 04:02 PM	Well, I'm going on seventeen now (in four days actually) and I've been playing D&D for around ten years (I still like 2nd edition). Anyways, the violence never really phased me as I am more of a happy-go-lucky kind of guy but all the numbers actually helped me when I was in middle school. All my teachers said I had the best math skills they had seen for a long time. My people skills on the other hand were a bit less (I hate most people mind you, just don't like socializing). However, for this day and age I really cannot see why removing the violence from the game is totally neccesary. With what's on Television you get to see things many times worse than what you describe in D&D mostly because in D&D it can be toned down. Another thing about that though, some people are better suited to handling the more mature themes of D&D (killings, razings of cities, etc...) however I don't think that it is suitable for children that are under 8 to be subjected to that (I was so I cannot really talk but I will anyways) I liked the aforementioned Warforged idea where instead of killing orcs, goblins, and other humanoids, the player will kill robots which lessens the impact on a younger childs mind my many levels. Just my 2cp, -Gene
Xorial 07-28-05, 04:27 PM	Well, I'm going on seventeen now (in four days actually) and I've been playing D&D for around ten years (I still like 2nd edition). Anyways, the violence never really phased me as I am more of a happy-go-lucky kind of guy but all the numbers actually helped me when I was in middle school. All my teachers said I had the best math skills they had seen for a long time. My people skills on the other hand were a bit less (I hate most people mind you, just don't like socializing). However, for this day and age I really cannot see why removing the violence from the game is totally neccesary. With what's on Television you get to see things many times worse than what you describe in D&D mostly because in D&D it can be toned down. Another thing about that though, some people are better suited to handling the more mature themes of D&D (killings, razings of cities, etc...) however I don't think that it is suitable for children that are under 8 to be subjected to that (I was so I cannot really talk but I will anyways) I liked the aforementioned Warforged idea where instead of killing orcs, goblins, and other humanoids, the player will kill robots which lessens the impact on a younger childs mind my many levels. Just my 2cp, -Gene The actual toning down that is being discussed is the paper work & rules. Not so much the violence. Simplifying the game some.
Gene2324 07-28-05, 06:47 PM	The actual toning down that is being discussed is the paper work & rules. Not so much the violence. Simplifying the game some. :D I knew that (I didn't...) But if thats the case maybe you should explain to the younger ones that you could roll the dice for them or let them roll them and then tell them the outcome of that. As for simplifying, I'd say. Remove skill checks, just use Attribute checks in their place, maybe keep the more use ones (listen,spot,etc...) but remove the more obscure ones (knowledge,craft,etc...) as for feats, I wouldn't group them. Just explain to the person what it does in it's basest for example the cleave feat, just tell them that if they have it and beat an enemy, that they are allowed a free attack against an enemy they are next to. Keep it simple in terms of puzzles and whatnot as well. I doubt that an eight year old will know "How many kings have ruled this land in the past two-hundred years" even if you told it to them a half-hour ago. Encourage them to take notes as best they can as well, helps in school too.
Fuzzy_Logic 07-30-05, 09:05 AM	Not only does it dpeend on the child, but the game a s a whole. if all your players are children, you may want to tone done the rules to what they can collectively handle. similarly, you're obviously going to use a story which appeals to the kids. on the other hand, if the group includes some adult or teenagers, i wouldn't tone it down much. if the kids are eventually going to learn the real game, start them on it from the beginning, but with help form an older player. as for mroe mature themes, obviously you have to be somewhat careful, but at the same time, it's perfectly okay to have moral issues and the like. if the kids aren't ready for them, they'll usually go right over their heads while the older gamers argue about what to do. "1: The math and mechanics need to be placed in the DM's hands and taken away from the player as much as possible." leave the mechanics in place please. if your kids are arithmetic challenged, help them out with it. i play with my 8 year old brother, and after he rolls, i give him a moment to figure out the numbers or else i annoucne teh result. he keeps his character sheet between us, and i remind him of his hit and damage bonuses, especially when he's got active buffs. - Classes need to be limited to some simple selections - fighter, sorcerer, and rogue, possibly. Again, I'd leave all the classes in place. young gamers tend to be attracted to simpler choices anyway; i've never seen a ten year annoucne that he wanted to play a psychic warrior/cleric/rogue/shadowmind. i tell them honestly which classes aree harder than others. In my games, i have kids read the PHB classes or at least their flavor text, then i talk to them about what kind of characters they want. i then suggest prestige classes, multiclass combos, and noncore classes which might interest them. - Feats should be grouped together more heavily into interrelated families. Complex manuevers like trips, disarms, and overruns are removed as feats. let them pick feats; my brother tends to ask me what feats are good, and i use my knowledge of the supplements to tifnd helpful ones, then i present him a list of interesting choices and he picks. he tends to go for simpler feats anyway, rather than ones like improved trip. - Critical hits, rather than double damage, prodcue an successful trip or disarm. use crits as is, learning the rule sis good for kids. plus, if you make damage not gory, than why not do mroe of it? personally, my brother LOVes rolling criticals with his 3.0 characters's keen, improved critical falchion, and adding up the damage on his x3 damage crits (due to a prestige class) - Enemies in combat must take make a Will save each round, with modifiers based on the classic "morale check". Failure means they run away or surrender. Evil creatures automatically suffer penalites to this check. Why? this doesn't seem to make any sens,e nor does it make the game any more kid-friendly. - All PCs must be good-aligned. in my experience, kids choose ot play good characters anyway, but i'd probably allow neutrals. I think toning down the game too much defeats the point, since the kids will essentially have ot leanr all over again later. personally, the full rules work fine as long as they have an older gamer to remind them to us etheir abilities, help them role turning checks, etc. this problem isn't unique to kids- it's novice gamers in general. in my group made up of teenagers, we have one player (7) who joined without any real gaming experience. she's still struggling with teh rules a bit, but she undertsands the basic concept, and the other players help her out when she gets lost.
Xorial 07-31-05, 11:12 AM	The link I put in an earlier post is to a version of d20 by the publisher, Green Ronin. It is called True20. It is a simplified version of the game that I highly recommend. It makes everything able to be resolved by a single d20 roll. It does away with hit points and traditional weapon damage by using thier popular Toughness save. This was originally developed for their Mutants & Masterminds game. The skills are simplified by not buying ranks. Your character either knows the skill, at level + 3, or they dont. The magic system is based on feats. You get magic powers, but most of them are fatigueing, so it isnt smart to try & use the too many powers in a row. You get fewer "spells", but you have more flexibility. It is a great system for those who like to rempve alot of the redundant bookkeeping. The good this is that you can still use standar D&D materila with a little conversion, and that is mainly any magic the characters & creatures have.
Fuzzy_Logic 07-31-05, 02:28 PM	frankly, magic is one of the most important parts of D&D, and i wouldn't want to see it messed with. spontaneous casters shouldn't be too mcuh for kdis to handle with adult guidance but if it is, talk them into playing a warlock (complete arcane). if you're worried about the creepyness of warlock's, use shadowfoot's excellent reflavored warlock classes, gifted (celestial) and Natural (fey/elemental) or even Strange (undefined flavor/more powers/no eldritch blast)
COPUS Chief 07-31-05, 04:19 PM	Ill start right now by coming out and saying that I am 15 years of age. I began playing D&D 5 years ago with my dad and my 3 yrs older Sister at the dining room table on Wednesday Nights with the D&D Starter kit. I was hooked from the very beginning and I dove into RPing and took to it like a fish to water with my Rogue, Kerwyn. 1: The math and mechanics need to be placed in the DM's hands and taken away from the player as much as possible. I disagree with this completely. When I played, at the age of 10 like I said above, my dad gave us each our own set of dice and we were in control of anything that needed to be done by our characters. If I wanted to pick a lock, I rolled my skill and did the math, which was easy. It was provided on my sheet then and its still provided on sheets now. Also, taking away the mathematics and the mechanics away from kids just doesnt sit right with me. In an interview of a D&D game designer in EGM, I believe, he said that people who play games like D&D are proven to be more mathematically skilled, etc. This means either geeks play D&D or playing D&D makes geeks :P I go with the latter. I dont think you should take the math and mechanics away from the player unless aboslutely neccesary. 2: Some of the more graphic elements of the game need to be downplayed. Genuine death of a sentient creature, human or otherwise, needs to be extremely rare. My sis played an Elf Wizard, and I was a Human Rogue. I was our actual combatant in our two person game so I was the one diving in and swinging my sword. I killed Goblins in combat and my dad used words such as "dies," "is killed," and "slumps over limply." Not graphic terms, but my dad didn't sugar coat it. If he did, I would have enjoyed D&D significantly less, simply because I RPed in an RPG. I wanted to help people. If I had been told that my blow from my Rapier knocked him out I would have gone into a spiel about how the village wont be safe as long as the Goblin lives. Short version. If your play style involves lost limbs and bathing in blood; yes. Tone it down. But dont tone down unneccesarily. If a player shoots something with an arrow, hes been shot with an arrow. Here are some of my inital thoughts - feel free to add. - Classes need to be limited to some simple selections - fighter, sorcerer, and rogue, possibly. I agree. Choices can be rather daunting, right off the bat. Id personally suggest the D&D "ideal party" choices. Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard/Sorcerer. - Feats should be grouped together more heavily into interrelated families. Complex manuevers like trips, disarms, and overruns are removed as feats. I agree, more or less. But I think maneuvers should be explained as neccesary, in the case of a young group of players. They should already know that D&D is open-ended and is designed to allow for choices. The idea of taking away someones weapon should come in at least once. - All damage on creatures vulnerable to subdual damage is treated as subdual damage. Death only occurs with a coup de grace. I disagree. Makes combat more complex than needed, unless of course, You do take away their dice, in which case, youre rolling it all out so they should be content with sitting there while you talk and roll. Im not trying to sound condescending or anything. - Critical hits, rather than double damage, prodcue an successful trip or disarm. You want to take away the complete overjoyous feeling from knowing you did DOUBLE damage?! I think that was most of our responses the first time we rolled out a Critical in D&D. "Wait, so I got a 20 and a 15, so I do DOUBLE damage? I just got a 7 on damage, so I do FOURTEEN?!" Everything is little then, small numbers reach the double digits on a 5% chance. Its one of those instances that all young players can love and enjoy every time. - Enemies in combat must take make a Will save each round, with modifiers based on the classic "morale check". Failure means they run away or surrender. Evil creatures automatically suffer penalites to this check. Meh. Dont like the sound of it, but really I have no problems with this. Just could get boring later on for players as their final villain runs away crying for the bajillionth time. - All PCs must be good-aligned. No reason to expose them to the squabbles of different alignments right away :P save that for when they make their own D&D groups. - Characters automatically take 10 on all skills. Probably the simplest way to keep it interfaced with ordinary D&D. Hmm. Maybe a version of Phyrexia, the place where undead machines come from? A good excuse to slip in a quiet ecology theme. "Recycle, because the thing you waste hurt you..." Just brainstorming, but interesting maybe. Do not mess with their rolls. Im serious. Let them have their fun, watch their eyes light up as they throw that big-orange die with all those sides as I used to call our d20. Sometimes things work, and sometimes things dont. Its the truth of the world. If you want to throw in a theme than here ya go, when they fail a die roll. "Not everything works out. Sometimes things go badly and You cant help it. You just have to keep on going." Thats a good message for a kid and its true to real life. Weapons, for instance -- does a 10-year-old really care about the difference between a longsword and a bastard sword? Or between a light crossbow and a heavy one? If the kid wants a sword, let him have a sword and be done with it -- don't ask, "what kind of sword?" Speaking of weapons, drop range increments. In fact, drop ranges. For weapons and spells both. If you can see it, you can shoot it with your bow or throw a fireball at it. Rather than ability damage, poisons (and maybe even certain monsters' special attacks) should leave a character nauseated or sickened. Yes. Yes 10 yr olds do. I did. I played a Rogue, Kerwyn as mentioned way up there and he used a Rapier. I was 10 so I had no idea what the heck a Rapier was, so I asked my Dad (DM). He found me a black and white pic in the book and explained to me it was a thin sword. My response? "Thats awesome." From then on, I was attached to my Rapier and though Rapier's in general were cool weapon choices. When I approached an NPC Rogue who turned on us, I defeated him in like, 2 hits and saw he had a Mastercraft Rapier. Needless to say, I was excited. Leave Ranges, Range increments are up to debate. We had to maneuver into position to use our ranged weapons. It instilled in my sister and myself a sense of tactics and led us to intelligently plan our actions because we had to account for 30 ft of movement + Attack, etc etc through the Actions-per-Round combinations. Ability damage is one of the most straight forward things in the game. You are down by 2 Dexterity, so you lose one point of yer DEX Bonus. Rather simple if they understand whats going on. Now that I have been annoying and no doubt enraged a number of you, which I apologize for, I shall become useful. Here I go. --Dice & Mechanics: Let them have them. Watch their eyes light up and try and not feel fuzzy. Let them roll and let them handle their numbers. Step in if they take much to long or clearly need help. --Classes: Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Sorcerer/Wizard. These are simple, rather straightforward classes (and at low levels, Turn Undead is easier to figure out) and are even considered balanced when making encounters. --Skills: Leave as is I would be hesitant to say despite my "Preserve the game!" style of thinking. Roll them if neccesary. Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate all roll into Speech, etc etc. --Feats: Dont use tiered feats, right off the bat. If it has a prerequesite of other feats, conveniently forget to include it in the beginning. If theres a feat that only works for a class with a particular ability, get one for each of the base classes so each player can feel priviliged. --Game style: Theyre kids, no need to make a grand and overarching plotline. The Orcs have stolen my prized Ox! I cannot gather my grain for market! Enter the Heroes. It will no doubt be hack-n-slash simply because theyre little and probably wont slip into character too easily. Dont discourage, just nudge them into their characters with First-Person speech. --Graphics: Dont turn off the violence filter, its just unrealistic (dont get into realisticness of D&D. You know what I mean.) Simply be short in your descriptions, as this is fine for a beginning group. "Your crossbow bolt enters the Goblins chest with a thuk and he stumbles back against the wall. Hes killed/defeated/done." Lack of adjectives works. Do what your 7th Grade english teacher would have yelled at your for. --DM: Remember, youre trying to nurture them into the game. Dont give them any sort of misgivings about it, you only teach them the wrong game and make them love a system that doesnt exist. Snipping is fine, as long as it is plainly put "Ya know, if you like this? Theres alot more out there." Teach them the game so they can go on to play it themselves. Finally, playing with kids can be an extremely gratifying game. They play for fun and get into it and grow attached to their own character because to them, it is them in the game. Make it a game they want to enjoy. Throughout this entire thing I no doubt struck a condescending tone in places, and sounded extremely rude and I will apologize right now for it. I do not mean to, and I do not mean to ruin others enjoyment of this topic. And I apologize for the insane length of my post. :) Game On, COPUS EDIT: I completely forgot these in my original type through. We never questioned the whole Cleric thing when we played. We knew their powers came from Gods but we were never like "What God, dad?" etc etc etc. Also, we played out the undead adventure from the starter game. Honestly? My favorite one ever. Necromancers and Zombies invading a families tomb to lie in wait and ambush a wizard in need of the burial shroud. Ambush? Vengeance? Tomb robbing? Undead? Necomancer? All rather mature. But the coolest thing ever.
Ever Lonely Ty 08-25-05, 10:49 PM	Bump for a thoroughly rockin' topic.
Verelor 08-27-05, 11:35 AM	Well, I really don't think there's anything more to say here.
Nalampus 08-27-05, 01:02 PM	I've been running a children's D&D game since last Christmas and feel I've got a couple things to add. My group is aged 11 girl, who is the brains behind the group, she plays a monk 10 boy who is a fighter and spaces out during most of the non-combat stuff 9 girl who is a druid and likes just about every aspect and 6 girl who's attention comes and goes, but she plays a paladin and get's very excited over fighting for "Good!" Imo, the difficult math and thinking behind skills are a big part of what makes this a positive experience. How many teachers have struggled for angle's to get their students excited about math? My kids after 8 mo. know all the bonuses on their attacks and damage, their AC, watch their own HP go up and down, all that stuff. After every lvl gain I used to sit down 1 on 1 with them and guide them through their character advancement. Now however, they all do it together and discuss which feats to take and what skills would work best within their group set-up. It's a lot of complex thinking and use of their imaginations that they would not otherwise do, and I think it's great for them. About violence, that's a personal decision obviously. But if you have boys in the game, first of all I'm sure they see worse on TV or video games, and second of all the fighting is what might be key to keep their interest. Of course we don't have things like rape or stuff that would be truly disturbing, but there has to be some risk and fear to make a won battle feel like truly an accomplishment. I agree 100% with keeping all the classes good aligned, but in our world we do kill evil creatures if they will not be redeemed. Our group learned a strong lesson with the Etton's Riddle adventure (one of the pre-made adventures found on the site here) about what a good alligned god thinks about his hero's killing rampantly. Anyway, I'm in a bit of a rush to get to work atm, just wanted to say that I think D&D as a dad with your kids and their friends is a great idea, and post some of my thoughts on it. Most important -- keep the story fun and they'll have fun creating it with you. GL!
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe 08-27-05, 02:16 PM	One on the groups I DM for is made up entirely of kids 7 through 11. (My step-son, step-daughter, their cousin and a family friend) IMHO, the only thing that needs to be "toned down" is the uber-violence, which is easy as a DM, and the frequent death of sentient creatures. As a reference, the 7 y/o is playing a Soceror, and does quiet well at it, even picking her own spells at each level, with remarkable success. Having to read the spell descriptions and her class description has actually encouraged her to read and expanded her vocabulary. And as far as "nightmares" go; both kids (step-son and step-daughter) claim to not have them as frequently, because when faced with a difficult situation in a dream or in game, they know that it can't really hurt them....It's all in your imagination. ;) Just for clarification, yes, I play with the full on math, skills and feats. You'd be surprised how quickly they catch on with a little help.
lostone 11-17-05, 10:34 AM	Figured this was a good reason to resurrect this thread: Save My Game: DMing for the Younger Set (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20051111a) I was curious what other people thought about this article?
Millennium 11-17-05, 02:18 PM	Some interesting ideas here, but I'm not sure I agree with all of them. Classes need to be limited to some simple selections - fighter, sorcerer, and rogue, possibly. How does the Generic Classes (http://d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm) option from Unearthed Arcana sound? It's a shame they only present equivalent PrCs for the Paladin, Ranger, and Bard, but if you were to work up analogous prestige classes for Druid, Barbarian, and Monk you could then allow the players to try out some newer abilities as they got more advanced. - Feats should be grouped together more heavily into interrelated families. Complex manuevers like trips, disarms, and overruns are removed as feats. You'd lost me on this, until... - Critical hits, rather than double damage, prodcue an successful trip or disarm. This is an interesting idea for very young players who haven't yet grasped the idea of tactics, but you'd need to revert to the older methods as they got a bit older and decided to start working them into tactical styles. - All damage on creatures vulnerable to subdual damage is treated as subdual damage. Death only occurs with a coup de grace. This nerfs regeneration, but maybe that's not such a bad thing. In any case, some of this depends on how much you're willing to allow a child to experience and deal with death. It might be useful if you're dealing with a kid who just can't deal with the concept, but I think you're giving kids less credit than they deserve. - Enemies in combat must take make a Will save each round, with modifiers based on the classic "morale check". Failure means they run away or surrender. Why not just role-play this out? They surrender when the DM thinks it's a good time. - All PCs must be good-aligned. You could also remove the Good/Evil axis from alignment completely, and play solely based on the Law/Chaos axis. That's the way it was done in the days of the earliest editions, though they attached 'good' connotations to Law and 'evil' connotations to Chaos back then. This will wreak havoc with many game mechanics and force the DM to rule-0 a lot of things, and this is why I recommend that alignment not be removed in this fashion for 'normal' games. But if you're dealing with kids then you'll have to do that anyway.
Jodjod 11-22-05, 04:14 AM	All - 1: The math and mechanics need to be placed in the DM's hands and taken away from the player as much as possible. While I can understand this for kids below the 7 sort-of-age, why not just keep the game a fairly low level and let the stats be a sneaky way to help them learn the multiplication tables? ;) 2: Some of the more graphic elements of the game need to be downplayed. Genuine death of a sentient creature, human or otherwise, needs to be extremely rare. You've got two options here: -Reward roleplaying and problem solving so that there is more benefit in taking the baddy alive than dead. -Use lots of oozes, constructs and undead. Here are some of my inital thoughts - feel free to add. - Classes need to be limited to some simple selections - fighter, sorcerer, and rogue, possibly. Here's a system that's caught my eye... (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm) - Feats should be grouped together more heavily into interrelated families. Complex manuevers like trips, disarms, and overruns are removed as feats. Weapon Grouping Feats (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/weaponGroupFeats.htm) - Enemies in combat must take make a Will save each round, with modifiers based on the classic "morale check". Failure means they run away or surrender. Evil creatures automatically suffer penalites to this check. Can't see the point to be honest. But hey, it's your game. - All PCs must be good-aligned. Shouldn't make too much a change from any other D&D game.
The Grand Mystic 11-26-05, 02:14 AM	I'm currently working on a world/campaign for my little brother and his friends (11-13 age range). We haven't even done an adventure yet and they're already into the game just from reading through the Player's Handbook! UA's alternate rules can help to simplify and help out the younger crowd, but sometimes it might be good just to play normal rules D&D the first time so that they understand the basics of the game before you start throwing alternate and house rules at them. I don't know if any of you ever saw the article DMing for the Younger Set (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20051111a) (I know I missed it!), but it really helped me understand what to expect and how to work from the bottom-up.