D&D General D&D's Utter Dominance Is Good or Bad Because...

[Mistwell]

The community is stronger if the games are more diverse just as much as it's stronger if the people are more diverse. By your argument, popularity is an unallocated good because it leads to more players, and that's the priority above everything else.

But sure, it's all about my personal pleasure here.

My argument? You made the argument, not me.

You said there would be fewer players total, and said that looked "like nothing but a good thing" provided a larger breadth of games were played.

That's pretty clear - you think it's good if TTRPG players were lost in this scenario.

If you had said in your mind it was worth it to lose some players for something, that would be a different story. That's not what you said. You said no part of the scenario was anything but a good thing.

Which yes, looks like it's about your personal gratification, not the "community" which is a very nebulous concept to begin with.

If you didn't mean that, then make it clear. If you did mean that, then address why it's "nothing but a good thing" to lose players. For anything.

 

[Micah Sweet]

My argument? You made the argument, not me.

You said there would be fewer players total, and said that looked "like nothing but a good thing" provided a larger breadth of games were played.

That's pretty clear - you think it's good if TTRPG players were lost in this scenario.

If you had said in your mind it was worth it to lose some players for something, that would be a different story. That's not what you said. You said no part of the scenario was anything but a good thing.

Which yes, looks like it's about your personal gratification, not the "community" which is a very nebulous concept to begin with.

If you didn't mean that, then make it clear. If you did mean that, then address why it's "nothing but a good thing" to lose players. For anything.

Ok. It would be worth it to me, and I think the gaming community as a whole, to lose a degree of D&D's popularity, even if that shrinks the total player base, if it increases the diversity of games played.

If that's not clear enough for you, sorry.

 

[SableWyvern]

This makes me something of an outlier, in the online community at least, but the state of D&D has no meaningful impact on my gaming.

I have a stable, long-running group that are happy to play whatever game I want to run. I have twenty years of games queued up. Occasionally, something else will show up that interests me, and it might get added to the list. If I need more players, there are at half-a-dozen people around my workplace that I could approach, and most other members of the group could most likely find a person or two if required.

If everyone stops playing D&D tomorrow, it won't meaningfully affect me. If every active game in the world other than mine is suddenly based on D&D 5e tomorrow, it won't meaningfully affect me.

 

[FrogReaver]

Neither. It depends mostly on whether you like 5e or not as to whether its dominance is good.

 

[Reynard]

Neither. It depends mostly on whether you like 5e or not as to whether its dominance is good.

You don't feel like there are any other consequences of 5E's outsized role in the hobby and industry, aside from your game at your table being 5E or not?

 

[FrogReaver]

You don't feel like there are any other consequences of 5E's outsized role in the hobby and industry, aside from your game at your table being 5E or not?

Yes, but whether those are good or bad depend mostly on whether one likes 5e or not.

 

[Remathilis]

That to me sounds like nothing but a good thing. If we could get more variety in the community, but sacrifice some popularity in exchange I would consider that a fair trade.

So you'd get rid of (hypothetically) 50% of the current TTRPG community just to see your needs met?


Edit: apparently asked and answered.

 

[Remathilis]

Somebody has to be the big dog. Just gotta deal with the big dog.

If WotC D&D died tomorrow, another company would end up in its place. Most likely, it's Paizo and I would give them about a year or two tops for the honeymoon before people started calling for Paizo to get out of the way to allow for more diversity in the TTRPG market.

And the beat goes on and on

 

[Zardnaar]

Fewer players is included in your "nothing but a good thing?" Seriously, your own personal gratification in an increase in different games is so important that you think nothing at all of those people who enjoy gaming right now who wouldn't be playing at all anymore?

I suspect if/when D&D becomes less popular those other RPGs will struggle to find players still.

D&D is probably 90%+ now the markets pretty 10 times bigger than pre 5E.

So if Eben 5% of 5E players choose other rpgs theyre probably gaining more players than 2013.

Downside is D&D is basically a monopoly with 90%+ market share.

 

[Zardnaar]

If WotC D&D died tomorrow, another company would end up in its place. Most likely, it's Paizo and I would give them about a year or two tops for the honeymoon before people started calling for Paizo to get out of the way to allow for more diversity in the TTRPG market.

And the beat goes on and on

Well the replacement won't be as big. Probably back to 2013 or slightly ahead