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

[Umbran]

Nah. For you it is all black, when speaking of WotC or current D&D.

Mod Note:
Please stop making it personal. I mean, unless you really like seeing red text, earning Warning Points, and getting removed from discussions.

This goes for everyone. Nobody here should be surprised to see opinions in this thread they don't agree with. Nobody should be surprised that attacking another poster is considered a problem.

So, treat folks well, already. If you can't treat folks kindly, and with resect, please just don't post.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't overall mind D&D's dominance, however, I wish it was significantly more modular in the core rules as was promised instead of relying on miscellaneous 3rd party creators to fill in the blanks (I'd like to minimize the amount of resources I have to parse and read through to run the game like I want).

As a GM type, I do want to play loads of other games, but I might be able to satisfy those wants and needs more if D&D supported them better as written.

I find that the significant sales of games like Dark Souls and Elden Ring does mean that the demand for tougher games with higher lethality exists, and D&D could fill the gap on both ends - low complexity and super-heroics, but offering modular rules that can run with higher complexity and lethality. Unfortunately, D&D has over time distilled into what Hasbro/WotC thinks the "purest", lowest-common denominator form of D&D is, without considering all that's been lost in that distillation, and disregards a desire for other styles of D&D.

Yeah, the official game does seem to be trying to shape the experience in a very specific way to make "their" version of D&D, and because of the market dominance, not only is their version most popular, it's so much more well-known than anything else most players aren't even aware there's a non-WotC way of roleplaying, let alone are motivated to look into it.

 

[Xenolith234]

Yeah, the official game does seem to be trying to shape the experience in a very specific way to make "their" version of D&D, and because of the market dominance, not only is their version most popular, it's so much more well-known than anything else most players aren't even aware there's a non-WotC way of roleplaying, let alone are motivated to look into it.

I think for a not-insignificant amount of players in the sphere, that aren't aware of forum discussions and GM-talk, that's all they'll ever know, and it's hard to wean folks off of sugary sweets and eat their vegetables. The vegetables are tough, chewy, and not always the most enjoyable when plain, but with flavor, seasonings, and the proper chef, can be amazing.

 

[Kurotowa]

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

Simply put, but accurate. There's a thing called the Network Effect, where the appeal of good or service increases with the number of people already using it. When you pick a social media service, you want the one with a lot of users because that's where the people you want to talk to are. When you pick an MMORPG, you're likely to go with the one that your friends are already playing.

It's the same with TTRPGs. The dominant game in the market will attract the most new players because it's easy to find groups for that game, and there are lively online discussion hubs for it, and there's a large supply of books to support it. If D&D was dethroned, another would rise to take its place in similarly dominant fashion. The market forces at work wouldn't have changed.

When I see people make these complaints, the heart of it always seems to be "I want more people to play the games that I want to play, and I don't want to play D&D." And the solution to that is to go out and recruit. Yes, it's harder to sell people on some small niche game system than it is for familiar reliable D&D. Killing D&D won't help with that. You may love your small alternative TTRPG, but the chance that it would rise to fill D&D's vacant spot at the top is tiny.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think for a not-insignificant amount of players in the sphere, that aren't aware of forum discussions and GM-talk, that's all they'll ever know, and it's hard to wean folks off of sugary sweets and eat their vegetables. The vegetables are tough, chewy, and not always the most enjoyable when plain, but with flavor, seasonings, and the proper chef, can be amazing.

Now that's a food analogy I can get behind!

 

[Xenolith234]

Now that's a food analogy I can get behind!

Gotta get organically-sourced D&D!

 

[Oofta]

This particular forum is dedicated to "Dungeons & Dragons", not "whatever WotC's most current edition is, so don't talk about other publishers or really any other way of doing things".

Because there are other forums specifically dedicated to older editions of D&D and TTRPGs in general, this is the forum for the current edition of D&D. While the majority of the direction of D&D is up to WOTC it also includes 3PP that supports the current edition of D&D.

 

[Oofta]

Well, maybe the GM would enjoy something else more ... (BTW, it seems pretty typical that the "GM type" has lots of games they would like to unleash on their group, but most in the group just want to keep playing their dwarf druid.)
Sometimes, everyone can get on the same page, sometimes they don't ... I guess the thing here is that if D&D has already set the expectations, you will always feel on the defense when you want to try something else. And that can be frustrating ... I mean, why do some people always have to compare other RPGs with D&D? Why can't they just try them out on their own terms and see if they like them?
(of course, the problem is not D&D-exclusive; I played with someone who compared everything with Chronicles of Darkness, and all other RPGs always came up short for him.)

On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with sticking to what you like. But if one person is adamant about sticking to what they like, while the other person would like to try something else ... well, either one of them has to move, or they can't play together. And constantly having to move because so many people find even the notion confusing that you might want to play anything else then D&D can be, as I said, frustrating.

I never said the DM should change. I just don't think it makes any sense to blame D&D for being a more enjoyable game for that particular player.

 

[Oofta]

You can't play a Dwarf Druid in Call of Cthulhu? I'm not sure I get what you are saying.

The fact that they don't like CoC as much as D&D, is not the fault of D&D.

 

[Oofta]

It's not about not wanting to discuss D&D ... but, for example, a lot of online discussions of general RPG topics (like, recently, this one), end up as discussions about that one edition of D&D vs. another, and if you don't play D&D, much less dived into the minutiae, you'll be unable to take part in these discussions.

I'll admit I have no idea what goes on in those other forums, the complaint struck me as people complaining that we talk about D&D on a D&D forum.