What book should be a first grader's intro to OOTS?

[The Aboleth]

Hey, everyone!

So, I'm trying to introduce my nephew to OOTS; he's in first grade, and he's starting to develop a fondness for reading. I'm a bit worried that OOTS might be "above" a first grader's level, but then again when I was his age I was reading anything and everything I could. If nothing else, the artwork will probably be enough to grasp his interest.

Couple caveats:

1.) Neither he nor his parents know anything about D&D; however, they play a lot of video games together so "fantasy stuff" will be familiar to them even if the exact nuances of a rules joke will be lost.

2.) Violent content isn't a concern--he regularly plays Call of Duty with his dad, for example (note: not hear to debate the parenting decision of allowing a first grader to play CoD or other violent games--his dad has explained to him that video games are fantasy and that the violent things he may do in a game absolutely WILL NOT be done in real life for obvious reasons; the kid has seemed to receive that message loud and clear). Point is, if you're worried about recommending a book that contains some of the more "violent" plotlines or scenes (like the vampirization of Durkon, for example) please don't let that hinder your recommendation.

3.) I'm looking for the "starting point" which will most likely grab his interest, not necessarily the "starting point" that makes the most sense in the comic's timeline. So, for example, if you think the War for Azure City would be more appealing to start at for him than the Dungeon of Dorukon, then by all means recommend the former over the latter.

So, what book would you recommend I start my nephew at for his introduction to Order of the Stick? Please not only provide a suggestion, but your reasoning as to why. Thank you!

[Kish]

On the Origins of PCs. It introduces and sets up all the characters, unambiguously as they were intended to be once there was a story (no early-comic weirdness, such as would be the case with Dungeon Crawlin' Fools).

Picking up partway through the story would be substantially less appealing to me if I was in first grade (or any age), and Start of Darkness is amazing but also thoroughly depressing as a standalone work.

[Peelee]

Seconding On the Order of PCs. Normally I'd say Start of Darkness, but On the Order of PCs would be better for first grader. SoD is pretty dark.

[MoonCat]

I was about nine when my brother started me on OoTs, so if I had to recommend something based on my own experience, I'd say, start him at the beginning!

Those initial comics tend to feel a bit slow after you get to see what OoTS becomes, but on their own they're engaging strips with nice art, and they develop well into a funny and coherent plot.
One benefit of the first book is that many of its jokes will be based in parodying fantasy tropes, with which I think most children are innately familiar around that age. As for the gaming references, I'd never played DnD until I'd read the entire extant comic, but I still not only understood the jokes, I found them funny.
This is in comparison to the other books, which have greater material to call back and call forward to. That makes them excellent books in a series, but frustrating places to start if you're just starting to introduce yourself to the work. My own philosophy is that if you want a young reader to enjoy a work, let them meet it like anyone else. You don't have to tempt them in with the shiniest bits, a good story speaks for itself, and OoTS most certainly is one of those.

Disclaimer: I'm an obsessive completionist when it comes to media and even started reading Discworld with the earliest books, tried to watch Doctor Who from the start, and still haven't seen Fullmetal Alchemist because there's two series (???) and I still can't tell which one I'm supposed to see first. Mileage may vary.

[Guinea_Pig]

I'd also recommend On the Origins of PCs. Start of Darkness is probably too grim and depressing for a first grader, whereas Origins is a fairly straightforward story. You get a sense of the humour present in the comic and a decent understanding of who the characters are.

[dtilque]

Origins of PCs is a good place to start, but there's also an introductory section of Dungeon Crawlin' Fools that's also a good place to start. Both give a good idea of the humor as well as introducing the members of the Order.

[Lord Torath]

How about the coloring book?

Failing that, New Edition.

[DemonRoach]

and still haven't seen Fullmetal Alchemist because there's two series (???) and I still can't tell which one I'm supposed to see first. Mileage may vary.

They are fundamentally the same. Flip for it. Most of my circle favour the latter, I prefer the prior version.

[The Aboleth]

They are fundamentally the same. Flip for it. Most of my circle favour the latter, I prefer the prior version.

They are fundamentally the same for the first few episodes of Brotherhood, then they diverge greatly. I would recommend Brotherhood over the original FMA because I think it's a better story overall with better characters, but that's just my personal preference.

These are all great suggestions, thanks everyone! I think I'll get him the coloring book AND On the Origin of PCs; that way if he doesn't take to the comic right away, he can at least have fun coloring stuff (which he loves to do).

[AcerbicOrb]

People keep recommending On the Origin of the PCs, but it features Haley in the bath and a few girls in underwear, so bear that in mind before showing it to a kid.

[The Aboleth]

People keep recommending On the Origin of the PCs, but it features Haley in the bath and a few girls in underwear, so bear that in mind before showing it to a kid.

This is a good point; I'll ask his Dad about it before I decide to get him On the Origin of PCs. Still gonna get the coloring book, though.

[Kish]

"A first grader shouldn't see a scantily clad stick figure" is taking "puritanical" to a rare level.

[Murk]

I'd say, since Haley in bath more resembles a chicken nugget taking a bath than it does a woman taking a bath, it shouldn't be a problem.

[The Aboleth]

"A first grader shouldn't see a scantily clad stick figure" is taking "puritanical" to a rare level.

I mean, I don't think it's a big deal, but I don't want to make any presumptions on what my brother and sister-in-law want their child to see. I know for a fact violent scenes are ok, but not sure on things approaching nudity or semi-nudity. My guess is they'll find it OK in this case, though.

[hroþila]

OtOoPC also features discount whores.

[Peelee]

"A first grader shouldn't see a scantily clad stick figure" is taking "puritanical" to a rare level.

Again, seconded.

OtOoPC also features discount whores.

This one is a better argument against. It wouldn't bother me with my child*, because I was older than that when I watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, and IIRC, there's a lot in that movie that is around the same level ob objectionable that completely went over my head due to my age. In fact, I'm a little surprised my parents were cool with it (only a little, though).

*Admittedly, I may change my tune when my kid hits that age, but I suspect I won't.

[Fyraltari]

They are fundamentally the same. Flip for it. Most of my circle favour the latter, I prefer the prior version.

I think the first serie was done before the manga was finished so they had to spin their own story once they ran out of material while brotherhood is a straight-up adaptation.

[AcerbicOrb]

"A first grader shouldn't see a scantily clad stick figure" is taking "puritanical" to a rare level.

Oh I agree, but it's not OP's kid, so he should at least consider it.

[MoonCat]

I think the issue with a scantily-clad Haley in OtOPCs is less one of titillation, and more that it sends the message that that's what the female characters (and only the female characters) are there for.

Duly noted regarding FMA, by the way. Thanks to all who have weighed in on that.

[DemonRoach]

They are fundamentally the same for the first few episodes of Brotherhood, then they diverge greatly. I would recommend Brotherhood over the original FMA because I think it's a better story overall with better characters, but that's just my personal preference.

Alas poor coin, your deception is undone before it could take glorious spinning flight

[Finagle]

I think the issue with a scantily-clad Haley in OtOPCs is less one of titillation, and more that it sends the message that that's what the female characters (and only the female characters) are there for.

OK am I the only one in the world that got that "HALEY'S SHOWER SCENE OMG" was ridiculing the entire idea of titillation?? Like, did that just pass straight over everyone's heads? Because she's a stick figure. There would never be anything there to see. Get it? Stick figures, everyone.

[The Aboleth]

OK am I the only one in the world that got that "HALEY'S SHOWER SCENE OMG" was ridiculing the entire idea of titillation?? Like, did that just pass straight over everyone's heads? Because she's a stick figure. There would never be anything there to see. Get it? Stick figures, everyone.

I think everyone above, say, a first grader's level gets it. A first grader might not, so it's worth consideration.

Alas poor coin, your deception is undone before it could take glorious spinning flight

What?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

What?

DemonRoach suggested not thinking about it and just flipping a coin. You thought about it, therefore denying a coin a chance to be flipped.

Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog: few enjoy it, and the frog dies.

GW

[The Aboleth]

DemonRoach suggested not thinking about it and just flipping a coin. You thought about it, therefore denying a coin a chance to be flipped.

Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog: few enjoy it, and the frog dies.

GW

Ah, I see! I thought it was a quote from a poem or something. Poor frog....

[RatElemental]

DemonRoach suggested not thinking about it and just flipping a coin. You thought about it, therefore denying a coin a chance to be flipped.

Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog: few enjoy it, and the frog dies.

GW

Something always bothered me about that saying. If you're dissecting something, it's already dead, otherwise it's a vivisection.

Anyway, if the kid's parents are okay with swearing and whatnot, then page one of the main comic is, in my opinion, a pretty good place to start. But then, I started out reading random pages linked by tvtropes and then finally went back and read the whole thing beginning to end years later.

That said, clearly the best place to start is the most recent comic, and then you read the entire thing backwards. Then the side books in reverse chronological order, each one backwards as well.

[Jasdoif]

That said, clearly the best place to start is the most recent comic, and then you read the entire thing backwards. Then the side books in reverse chronological order, each one backwards as well.

No, that's for the second reading; it highlights foreshadowing and background details.

[grandpheonix]

I was about nine when my brother started me on OoTs, so if I had to recommend something based on my own experience, I'd say, start him at the beginning!

Those initial comics tend to feel a bit slow after you get to see what OoTS becomes, but on their own they're engaging strips with nice art, and they develop well into a funny and coherent plot.
One benefit of the first book is that many of its jokes will be based in parodying fantasy tropes, with which I think most children are innately familiar around that age. As for the gaming references, I'd never played DnD until I'd read the entire extant comic, but I still not only understood the jokes, I found them funny.
This is in comparison to the other books, which have greater material to call back and call forward to. That makes them excellent books in a series, but frustrating places to start if you're just starting to introduce yourself to the work. My own philosophy is that if you want a young reader to enjoy a work, let them meet it like anyone else. You don't have to tempt them in with the shiniest bits, a good story speaks for itself, and OoTS most certainly is one of those.

Disclaimer: I'm an obsessive completionist when it comes to media and even started reading Discworld with the earliest books, tried to watch Doctor Who from the start, and still haven't seen Fullmetal Alchemist because there's two series (???) and I still can't tell which one I'm supposed to see first. Mileage may vary.

Full metal Alchemist is where you start. Do brotherhood after. Brotherhood assumes you watched the original.

[KorvinStarmast]

Hey, everyone!

So, I'm trying to introduce my nephew to OOTS; he's in first grade, and he's starting to develop a fondness for reading. I'm a bit worried that OOTS might be "above" a first grader's level, but then again when I was his age I was reading anything and everything I could. If nothing else, the artwork will probably be enough to grasp his interest.

There are other books. I'd recommend leaving OoTS for 3rd or 4th grade at the earliest. More of the jokes won't have to be explained that way. D&D was originally built/designed for ages 12 and up (though its original iteration was arguable for teenage and adult wargamers ...). Rich didn't write this as a children's books. (My aunt spent almost 40 years as a school librarian for elementary schools. She was very much an expert on what a children's book was, and what books were a decent fit for a given age range. This benefited my kids a lot as I'd go to her for advice of books to fit their reading level/age).

[Cizak]

Full metal Alchemist is where you start. Do brotherhood after. Brotherhood assumes you watched the original.

Not necessarily. I've shown Brotherhood to multiple people without showng them 2003 and they've enjoyed it plenty fine.

My personal opinion:
If you think you really have the time for two series, start with 2003. It's a good series up until the ending, which is one of the biggest letdowns in pop culture history. Brotherhood is then even more therapeutic in how it fixes what 2003 broke.

Or if you only want to watch one, just go with Brotherhood. It's all around great (one of my top five series of all time) and told much better than 2003 since the original manga artist is a much better writer than whoever wrote the parts of 2003 that goes off-manga.

[Synesthesy]

I don't know what does mean "first grader" in age numbers....

However, I don't see this comic as something for children. Not because it would be too explicit (I think this is the right world for both sex and (little) language), but because there is too much that wouldn't be understood at all.

NOTE: in my country, the most problematic things to show to children would be things like "V is a male or a female" or "Dad what does 'Hailey's latent bisexuality' means?" :P

This comic is born as a parody. To understand a parody, you need some culture about what is parodied. This is the first thing to check, IMHO.