Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasputin
Original monsters only become interesting once you have already played the game. Beholders and mindflayers have little allure to non-gamers since they have no image of them outside of D&D. Because some of us have been gamers so long, we often lose that perspective.
|
We also lose the perspective that non-gamers just starting to get into gaming
have no idea at all what "monsters" should be. At most they've heard of "dragons," because "This game is like
Dungeons & Dragons, right?", and they know about "demons," because that's a catchall term for anything evil and nasty. It would be a very bad assumption indeed to think they're familiar with real-world mythology and fantasy novels/movies, though.
I've had to explain what an "orc" is
after Peter Jackson so thoughtfully filled hours of footage and thousands to theaters with stories about fighting orcs. I've had to explain what a "minotaur" is, and a "titan," and a bunch of other stuff out of myth. Yes, people know what "vampires" and "zombies" are, except that they expect the former to be a pastiche of Dracula retellings and "those guys from
Blade and
Buffy and
Underworld," and the latter to conform to Romero-style horror movies . . . and when the versions in the game aren't like that, they get bummed, so you end up apologizing.
Honestly, explanations and apologies are a waste of time. If you're giving people monsters they haven't heard of anyway, why not give them monsters that
nobody has heard of, so That Guy can't lean on player knowledge to ruin the challenge? And so that there's no risk that there's some version in a film somewhere that will build up false hopes?
I think the best plan in a game intended to bring new people to gaming is to assume they've never looked inside a game manual to see the art or learn about the monsters. Basically, to take the stance you're introducing the reader to freaky-looking
things that their alter-egos are going to fight.