D&D Brand Dilution

[fba827]

I wouldn't call it "Brand Dilution" but rather table-top-RPG-game dilution.

Yes, you (or others, like myself) might think of D&D and table-top RPG to be synonymous (just like "Xerox" and "copy machine" or "kleenex" and "tissues") but they are in fact separate. All that is happening is that the tabletop RPG market is getting more recognizable products/brand names that are gaining larger portions of the market share than before when D&D had the lion's share.

A brand dilution might better describe it if WotC was supporting two editions of D&D at the same time, or something like that -- where the term "D&D" was representing more than one product at a time. I can't think of any examples at the moment, but, realistically, an example of that would probably be hard to come by since it wouldn't be a very good practical business decision.

 

[Greg K]

Non-gamers frequently use "D&D" to refer to the whole hobby, much like Kleenex, Asprin, and Xerox have all become generic terms for their respective products..

This was the first thing that I thought of. Several of my relatives and friends of the family use D&D to refer to rpgs in general. They have been doing this for as long as I can remember.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

IME, people who keep up with gaming usually automatically specify which edition or ruleset they're talking about. The few times they didn't, they were talking about the latest edition.

Outside of the gaming community, I get the impression that D&D refers to any fantasy rpg. IME, not a lot of non-gamers even realize non-fantasy rpgs exist.

 

[Simon Atavax]

Yes. Yes.

D&D is no longer bound to any particular rule-set, it is encompassed by many.

A beautiful thing actually.

If I played RISK with friends, and we called it "D&D", would it be D&D?

Hmmm . . .

 

[amysrevenge]

"Dilution" has a this negative vibe to it, where the thing that is diluted is weakened as it spreads out. I kind of think that "growth" - where the thing that is growing is strengthened as it spreads out - might be more appropriate.

 

[DaveMage]

I wonder if things are getting to the point where the name "D&D" is no longer specific to a single ruleset or brand? I see people posting that Pathfinder is their D&D of choice, that they are playing D&D using FantasyCraft, that they use (some other rules) for their D&D, and it makes me wonder if maybe the attempts to change traditional D&D gaming so much over the last edition or two has caused many gamers to simply no longer look at D&D as a name that describes a specific game. When you hear someone mention "D&D" do they always mean the most recent rules for sale under that name? Do you know people who use the name "D&D" in a more generic fashion?

The brand is different now.

From 0E -> 3.5 it progressed based on it's past.

In 4E, it went in a new direction.

IMO the brand is still synonymous with Fantasy Role Playing, but when the term "D&D" is mentioned, the question from the listener now needs to be "which version?" (At least, that's what *I* ask. )

 

[Betote]

In my circles, D&D most usually means "roleplaying game with elves, wizards, orcs and dragons". If we need to specify, we refer to the exact version: "Basic", "3.x", "AD&D", "Pathfinder", "Hackmaster" and so on.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

If I played RISK with friends, and we called it "D&D", would it be D&D?

Hmmm . . .

Moreover, if RISK played you with your friends, and called you "D&D", would you be D&D?

Hmmm...

 

[Simon Atavax]

Moreover, if RISK played you with your friends, and called you "D&D", would you be D&D?

Hmmm...

And if RISK played with me, and RISK wore a tight-fitting cheerleader's outfit, and told me I had been naughty, and . . .

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Moreover, if RISK played you with your friends, and called you "D&D", would you be D&D?

Hmmm...

"In soviot...ow...oh ow ow where did you guys get the rotten fruit so soon...and please stop throwing rocks ow ow ho oh ow"