GreyLord
Legend
Another thread got me thinking about how successful D&D really is. One of the complaints about the first two portions of an article it discussed was that it hit 4e and other editions hard with criticism, but treated 3.X with kids gloves in comparison to the harshness it gave over to the other systems.
Now 3e was a pretty big success and still a very big impact on the RPG scene today (just look at Pathfinder for example), but I wanted to see what is the harshest criticism that could be levelled at 3e.
When taking that approach, I think when one sees it's biggest criticism, 3e could actually be seen as one of the biggest failures of D&D rather than it's biggest success. It set an example for how 4e was to be released (stop printing the previous edition (s) (AD&D/D&D) and instead put out your own game/house ruled version and call it D&D instead...), which also in the same light could be seen as a drastic failure also. It set up the path of what eventually turned up the creation of 4e, a splintering of the community to be perhaps at the worst splinter ever (even with 2e, I don't think we had people willing to shed blood over the differences of who liked what game better), and even worse, the current lack of legal means to buy new versions of older editions (even in 2e they had a release pocket sized] of 1e books, and 2e had the grandfather clause as well as almost seamless backwards compatibility with AD&D (via aforementioned grandfather clause) and D&D. It set the trail of what has now become our current situation.
3e had an awesome opportunity to begin anew what had occurred before...to create a sensational fad that got everyone playing it, when instead it didn't get any farther than a few blurbs in the media...and a unified RPG crowd.
On the surface we look at 3e and think...wow...what great sales. At the same time...were sales really that great? Or were they actually simply good in relation to what had been expected up to that point?
To tell the truth, in light of some of the resurrected brands recently (Transformers, Star Wars, Stargate [with Stargate albeit the original wasn't that big to start with...but then with the restart of it with the TV series got to be a LOT bigger then the original...then simmered down to cancellation...so non-factor again]), D&D 3e could have been FAR MORE successful than it was.
So to start...
3e is seen as successful...and it was.
However many don't actually point out that 3e was also a failure...and a major one at that.
3e bought in and unified the Roleplaying community. It bought a majority of those who were dissatisfied or disliked AD&D and/or D&D to the fold of D20 and the D&D game.
It FAILED to truly increase the numbers of Roleplayers (in my book) or to even cater to new audiences to the degree to make huge dividends down the road.
[THIS SHOULD BE BOLDED, JUST SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IT DID BRING IN NEW BLOOD...BUT NOTHING UNUSUAL] It still brought in the new blood as the older editions did...so new blood came...but not like it did at it's height.
It didn't create a new fad that extended beyond the Roleplaying sphere of the D&D audience (those who played D&D or chose NOT to play D&D because they had other systems they liked better) (as opposed to those who had no desire to play D&D or didn't know the rules in the first place).
A primary example of what should and could have happened had the D&D brand been managed in a way that exceeded expectations and would have made it a major player at Hasbro...at least for a while.
Transformers was a major brand 20-25 years ago. It then diminished from it's fad and did not appeal to as many people.
It is now a Fad again. It could have just brought in those who already were fans of the comics, cartoons, and toys (as some other movies of a similar type have done), but instead it used it's marketing leverage and power to create a NEW and powerful fad that impacted the coffers of the company tremendously.
I don't think Wizards is the only company that could do this for D&D or for Roleplaying.
This is what Gygax was able to do, make a fad out of a non-fad.
He made shows that weren't jokes in relation to what they were talking about(Gygax came out with the D&D cartoon which was great....WotC had a hand promoting the D&D movie which was an abomination).
Gygax got press (in many ways free press, especially negative sometimes...but press that actually ended up promoting the hobby). WotC got a few blurbs of the New D&D game...but not much mainstream that I saw.
Gygax was in big box stores. WotC had an occasional product there, such as the Basic Box...but the pushes by those in the company to inspire higher ups to put the new D&D products into stores other than the hobby chains...not so successful.
So yes, 3e was successful, but I think it was also a wasted opportunity. They looked at it from an audience already there...but not as strongly as how to make it EXPLODE beyond that audience into realms where those who didn't even care about D&D would suddenly stop and look, then buy and play.
And in that I think it was a wasted opportunity and a failure.
Now 3e was a pretty big success and still a very big impact on the RPG scene today (just look at Pathfinder for example), but I wanted to see what is the harshest criticism that could be levelled at 3e.
When taking that approach, I think when one sees it's biggest criticism, 3e could actually be seen as one of the biggest failures of D&D rather than it's biggest success. It set an example for how 4e was to be released (stop printing the previous edition (s) (AD&D/D&D) and instead put out your own game/house ruled version and call it D&D instead...), which also in the same light could be seen as a drastic failure also. It set up the path of what eventually turned up the creation of 4e, a splintering of the community to be perhaps at the worst splinter ever (even with 2e, I don't think we had people willing to shed blood over the differences of who liked what game better), and even worse, the current lack of legal means to buy new versions of older editions (even in 2e they had a release pocket sized] of 1e books, and 2e had the grandfather clause as well as almost seamless backwards compatibility with AD&D (via aforementioned grandfather clause) and D&D. It set the trail of what has now become our current situation.
3e had an awesome opportunity to begin anew what had occurred before...to create a sensational fad that got everyone playing it, when instead it didn't get any farther than a few blurbs in the media...and a unified RPG crowd.
On the surface we look at 3e and think...wow...what great sales. At the same time...were sales really that great? Or were they actually simply good in relation to what had been expected up to that point?
To tell the truth, in light of some of the resurrected brands recently (Transformers, Star Wars, Stargate [with Stargate albeit the original wasn't that big to start with...but then with the restart of it with the TV series got to be a LOT bigger then the original...then simmered down to cancellation...so non-factor again]), D&D 3e could have been FAR MORE successful than it was.
So to start...
3e is seen as successful...and it was.
However many don't actually point out that 3e was also a failure...and a major one at that.
3e bought in and unified the Roleplaying community. It bought a majority of those who were dissatisfied or disliked AD&D and/or D&D to the fold of D20 and the D&D game.
It FAILED to truly increase the numbers of Roleplayers (in my book) or to even cater to new audiences to the degree to make huge dividends down the road.
[THIS SHOULD BE BOLDED, JUST SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IT DID BRING IN NEW BLOOD...BUT NOTHING UNUSUAL] It still brought in the new blood as the older editions did...so new blood came...but not like it did at it's height.
It didn't create a new fad that extended beyond the Roleplaying sphere of the D&D audience (those who played D&D or chose NOT to play D&D because they had other systems they liked better) (as opposed to those who had no desire to play D&D or didn't know the rules in the first place).
A primary example of what should and could have happened had the D&D brand been managed in a way that exceeded expectations and would have made it a major player at Hasbro...at least for a while.
Transformers was a major brand 20-25 years ago. It then diminished from it's fad and did not appeal to as many people.
It is now a Fad again. It could have just brought in those who already were fans of the comics, cartoons, and toys (as some other movies of a similar type have done), but instead it used it's marketing leverage and power to create a NEW and powerful fad that impacted the coffers of the company tremendously.
I don't think Wizards is the only company that could do this for D&D or for Roleplaying.
This is what Gygax was able to do, make a fad out of a non-fad.
He made shows that weren't jokes in relation to what they were talking about(Gygax came out with the D&D cartoon which was great....WotC had a hand promoting the D&D movie which was an abomination).
Gygax got press (in many ways free press, especially negative sometimes...but press that actually ended up promoting the hobby). WotC got a few blurbs of the New D&D game...but not much mainstream that I saw.
Gygax was in big box stores. WotC had an occasional product there, such as the Basic Box...but the pushes by those in the company to inspire higher ups to put the new D&D products into stores other than the hobby chains...not so successful.
So yes, 3e was successful, but I think it was also a wasted opportunity. They looked at it from an audience already there...but not as strongly as how to make it EXPLODE beyond that audience into realms where those who didn't even care about D&D would suddenly stop and look, then buy and play.
And in that I think it was a wasted opportunity and a failure.
Last edited:
