Why is the original red box so special

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Not flamebait, I'm honestly curious.

I was a wee tot when the original Red Box released in '83.

What was it about the product and the time it was released that made it worth recreating almost 30 years later?

I have a copy in my game library, but it's hard to figure out what is so special about it that it's treated with such reverence now. The D&D rules compendium hard cover seems like a better rule book. The earlier D&D products seem more groundbreaking?

Please enlighten me.

Related: Does anyone know how many red boxes were sold, especially compared to earlier and later (A)D&D products?

 

[ggroy]

Related: Does anyone know how many red boxes were sold, especially compared to earlier and later (A)D&D products?

According to:

Print Run

there was around a million copies of the basic D&D box set sold during 1989.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

The reason is because it was so many player's (myself included) first introduction to the game.

And that's the standard we should judge it by, how well it introduced new players (I think it did quite well). That's also the goal of the new Red Box. It's not intended for those of us who have a long history with the game, it's intended to be something that will be easy for somebody who has never gamed before to pick up and play.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

The Red Box was my introduction to D&D so it will always be special in that regard. Because it was a "first" for me, it justs sits in the consciousness as a fundamental part of my gaming being. It was a step forward from the choose-your-own-adventure and fighting fantasy game books that I loved (and still love) so much.

I don't know how the new red box will go in comparison as the audience it is aimed at has most likely already been saturated with WoW, and computer games in general. As such, for that audience, might the new red box be seen as a comparitive step backwards with the experience taking up far less room in their creative consciousness?

Whatever the case, I'll be purchasing essentials even if when it boils down to it, it is just the nostalgic chance to own that Elmore Dragon once again.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[pawsplay]

It was a well-written book, intended for new gamers. It is still one of the best introductory games ever written. Further, despite the fairly sparse coverage of a number of adventuring challenges, it was a complete ruleset in a small number of pages. It was well organized, the artwork was evocative as well as both thematic and varied, and the monster selection was well chosen. Provided it could be done at level 3 and under, there was virtually nothing it couldn't do. It even had a handful of 3rd level spells in the DM's book for higher level adversaries. It also had an attractive character sheet, some nice mapping templates, a complete set of funny dice...

 

[BigWeather]

Honestly it does nothing for me. I'd prefer a modern 4e look to it (and that's saying a bit because I'm not a *huge* fan of 4e art). Now if they modeled it after Moldvay with Otus art I'd be all over it. Of course I learned from that set so it probably is just a matter of what you started with.

 

[Korgoth]

My first box was the Moldvay magenta box with the awesome (still my favorite piece of fantasy art) Erol Otus green dragon cover. That (due also to the interiors) will always be the "Erol Otus edition" to me, and it really shapes what I find interesting and cool in fantasy. Weird. Mercenary explorers in a fantasy / sci-fi nightmare world delving ever further.

The Mentzer red box (Elmore cover) was the one that, as a youth, I really "got" in terms of how to play and run the game. The solo adventures put you right into it... "this is how a D&D adventure actually plays" was the feeling you got from it. First you're in a dungeon with Aleena going up against Bargle and the undead. Then you do a second solo in which you explore the rest of that dungeon, complete with a secret door, a riddle puzzle, a rust monster, goblins, undead, you name it! And you learn the fundamentals of mapping as well.

That's what it did right: fundamentals. There were actually some holes in the rules (no rule for natural healing was ever included). But it felt polished and it gave you a good sense of how to do the basic things. I think anybody of the appropriate age and decent intelligence could sit down with those materials and get up to speed quickly. The DM materials included a sample dungeon that you could expand, and it also had a lot going on in it and showed you how you were supposed to be writing these things up.

The Elmore art gave an interesting vibe to the series. It was heroic and upbeat. Whereas Otus is eerie and phantasmagorical (and I appreciate him all the more in my adulthood), the Elmore art really caught the spirit of heroic / epic fantasy. It was very romantic in nature.

While I actually prefer the Moldvay/Cook/Marsh B/X series (magenta and cyan) both aesthetically and as a tighter game, the Mentzer series (red, blue, green, black, gold) was powerful. An heroic / epic feel, an epic scope (36th level plus Immortals) and an absolute first rate introductory regime make it a true classic of the genre. I think people's love of the red box reflects that, especially in its introductory materials which really held your hand while being engrossing at the same time.

Plus I'm sure my teenage hormones were in love with practically every woman Elmore ever drew.

 

[Dausuul]

Not flamebait, I'm honestly curious.

I was a wee tot when the original Red Box released in '83.

What was it about the product and the time it was released that made it worth recreating almost 30 years later?

I have a copy in my game library, but it's hard to figure out what is so special about it that it's treated with such reverence now. The D&D rules compendium hard cover seems like a better rule book. The earlier D&D products seem more groundbreaking?

Hmm.

It may be just nostalgia value. For a lot of us, including me, the Red Box was our introduction to D&D--which is what it was intended to be. The Rules Cyclopedia was a much less newbie-friendly format (if only because the sheer page count intimidated people), and by that point the game was largely dominated by AD&D, so I doubt many people have that same association with the Cyclopedia. When I set out to buy myself a set of the Classic D&D rules on eBay a few years back, it didn't even occur to me to look for a Rules Cyclopedia--it was red, blue, cyan, and black boxes all the way.

For all of the sound and fury about 4E's changes, the current crop of game designers at WotC have some distinct retro sensibilities. I think it's pretty clear many of them were Classic D&D fans. You can see echoes of it in a number of places. The tier system, for example, mirrors the Basic/Expert/Companion/Master progression. Fallcrest is fairly reminiscent of Threshold. Et cetera. It does not surprise me that the new Red Box is a deliberate imitation of the old one, right down to the same Larry Elmore box art.

And yes, I'm gonna buy it.

 

[Lancelot]

My first box was the Moldvay magenta box with the awesome (still my favorite piece of fantasy art) Erol Otus green dragon cover...

My experience is much the same as Korgoth's. The original magenta box simply blew me away.

• The Magenta box cover was amazing. A dungeon, a dragon, a buff fighter, a "hot" sorceress... my 10-year-old mind was blown.
• It had a play example which I really enjoyed reading. I wept for the thief, and every elf I rolled up for the next 4 months was called Silverleaf. No joke.
• It had a short module included in the back... which included a full description of the design choices that went into it (even the random rolls that generated the room contents!).
• It had an additional unkeyed map with some natural caverns and crypts, plus some story hooks, that helped me create a "sequel" to the module in the book.

I wasn't as emotionally invested in Red Box when it came out, but I still thoroughly enjoyed it... for much the same reasons.

• The cover rocked. I've always enjoyed Elmore.
• There was a play example and a couple of compelling NPCs (Aleena and Bargle).
• Even better, there was a mappable solo adventure! Fan-tas-tic!!! I loved the solo gamebooks of the 80's, so I was stoked to see a D&D solo adventure.
• ...and, once more, they expanded on that sample adventure and gave the DM enough material to create a natural sequel.

1e AD&D was less inspiring to me. Sure, there was a play example in the DMG (quite a fun one, in fact) and a (mostly) unkeyed dungeon map, but it was more about the rules and less about the examples.

...and then they largely stopped including detailed play examples, solo modules, partially-complete modules for starter DMs and so forth. It just became "the rules". 4e made an attempt with the short module and town in the back of the DMG but... it just wasn't the same.

I'm stoked to hear there's a [short] solo adventure in the upcoming Essentials product. I'd like to see more of that sort of thing... and more play examples... and some DM material that expands on the solo adventure.

If nothing else, it helps create a sort of "common experience". Nearly everyone who picked up the Red Box can remember fighting Bargle, or finding the rust monster in the solo dungeon. To a lesser extent, there were a lot of stories here when 4e first came out regarding players' experiences at fighting the dragon in the sample module in the back of the 4e DMG. If the New Red Box can recreate some of those feelings for a new generation (or even a crusty old generation like mine), it'll be a great thing.

 

[billd91]

For me, it wasn't. I started with the Holmes edition.
But that still wasn't as magical as buying my own 1e Advanced D&D Player's Handbook.