D&D 5E Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble

[billd91]

I really don't pay too much attention to the game designers either. I hear and see the names but I have never bought a product based on whose name is on the cover.

I have and I have avoided titles based on the designer names as well. It's simply a case of having liked (or disliked) the work of someone on another project and looking to see if that quality follows them to other projects. Quite often (though not always), it does. Guys like Robin Laws have made a pretty good name for themselves and I'm reasonably convinced that putting his name on a product probably sells more copies.

 

[tangleknot]

Unless your a gamer most people have never heard of Pathfinder (PF), 13th age, Gurps, WOD, AEG- games, etc... but ask anyone alive during the 80's, and they've heard of D&D. Gamers who want to get back into the genre, or who are new to RPG's will probobly gravitate to the newest edition of D&D, not because its better but because its available and they know the brand.

I have no doubt D&D next will be the beast of RPG's, at least at first release. However unless they provide a more streamlined/ simpler game (compared to PF), and provide more content per $$ (D&D 4's PHB was tiny, full of white space, and expensive); I won't be jumping on the band wagon...

Well if they start publishing Planescape with new rules... yeah, I'd jump PF's ship for planescape

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

I have no doubt D&D next will be the beast of RPG's, at least at first release. However unless they provide a more streamlined/ simpler game (compared to PF), and provide more content per $$ (D&D 4's PHB was tiny, full of white space, and expensive); I won't be jumping on the band wagon...

Well if they start publishing Planescape with new rules... yeah, I'd jump PF's ship for planescape

Almost everything that carries a famous brand name will sell well in the beginning because everyone will want to at least try it. It may even may the New York Times Best seller list but that doesn't mean it's a good game.

 

[willvr]

Almost everything that carries a famous brand name will sell well in the beginning because everyone will want to at least try it. It may even may the New York Times Best seller list but that doesn't mean it's a good game.

Well, yes. But that's why I argue DnD still -does- have brand name recognition. Especially for non-gamers.

Good's fairly subjective anyway. What one person says is good, the other says is terrible. And vice-versa.

 

[fjw70]

I do my best to increase D&D awareness in my house. I tell my kids we are playing D&D. It may be the 13th Age version of D&D or the Pathfinder version of D&D or whatever, but it is all D&D to me.

 

[Najo]

D&D brand name carries a lot of weight in the general public. Its known as the name that attaches to sword and sorcery game of imagined adventure with your friends. Most people in their 30's and 40's that is the name they associate to roleplaying games. Its the brand that is in pop culture.

Likewise, D&D has a strength that none of the other systems have, its settings. Planescape, Dark Sun, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Greyhawk, Dragonlance...

Those carry weight. If supported right, they will bring people back.

 

[NewJeffCT]

You've never looked at the names on the cover of the books you were buying?? I sure as heck know that Rob Heinsoo wrote the very excellent 4e Underdark book. Huh, I wonder what he's doing nowadays...



Anecdotally, I know lots of 4e players who have no interest in whatevertheheck 5e is doing. Also, I think you confuse "I have valid criticisms of the system that I play" with "I don't like this system." Just because 4e's grid-based tactical combat can be a little clunky and over-complicated doesn't mean that I don't want a good tactical combat system.

As I said in my last post, D&D players have more options outside of D&D than they probably ever have had before. There's no guarantee they are going to try the new edition if they're not enthusiastic about it now. In fact, they may well have already tried the playtest, for free, and moved on.

Books, yes. RPG books, never. They could have printed Chinese characters on the front for the author's name for all I knew. For the "core" rulebooks, I will buy them no matter the author. (I still can't tell you who has done anything for Pathfinder, other than remembering a woman wrote The Worldwound Incursion because of its supposedly controversial storyline and the writer writing her first adventure.) For the individual modules/adventures, I tend to look at reviews online and/or browse through them in the FLGS and decide if I like it. For supplemental/splat books, I buy them if I need them. For me, the PCs, NPCs, monsters and villains are the stars of D&D and what makes it, not if it was one person or another that wrote it.

 

[DaveMage]

D&D brand name carries a lot of weight in the general public. Its known as the name that attaches to sword and sorcery game of imagined adventure with your friends. Most people in their 30's and 40's that is the name they associate to roleplaying games. Its the brand that is in pop culture.

Likewise, D&D has a strength that none of the other systems have, its settings. Planescape, Dark Sun, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Greyhawk, Dragonlance...

Those carry weight. If supported right, they will bring people back.

That's one thing 4E failed to do that all other editions had done, and that's to have at least 1 signature setting for the edition. Basic had Mystara, 1E had Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, and Dragonlance. 2E had Planescape, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, and Birthright. 3E (well, 3.5) had Eberron. 4E had nothing new.

It seems like 5E will once again use the Realms as a base (hence the Sundering), but maybe a new setting is something that would be in their best interest to develop to at least compliment the Realms for those that want something different. (New is shiny.)

 

[Mistwell]

The following are the main reasons I think D&DN is going to be in trouble.

1. Lack of online excitement/hype 6 months out from release.

Not only is it the most-discussed RPG on the internet right now, but that level of discussion has increased every month, while discussion of other games has decreased. It's now taking in 40% of all discussion of D&D-like games, with the next closest at 26% (Pathfinder). When Morrus first started tracking this, it was below Pathfinder in that discussion chart.

Also, when you look at the online polls for "intent to buy", they are virtually identical to the "intent to buy" polls 4e got at the same time. And, the sales for 4e, in the first year, far exceeded the initial sales of both 3e and 3.5e.

Those two factors combined, the high level of discussion on the internet, and the high level of intent to purchase, tell me using objective measures that you are incorrect.

Now, that does not mean it will sustain the high level of sales I think it is likely to see in the first year. That will depend entirely on whether or not people like the game. But I think interest in the game is very high.

Have you considered the possibility it's your own lack of interest and that of the people in your circle, and confirmation bias, at play in your conclusions?

 

[xazil]

On the point of old TSR stuff leading to OSR I am not so sure.

Personally I have been getting some of the old modules to read them for nostalgia reason. But others I have been running basically out of the box with DnDN rules.