The Escapist on D&D Past, Present, and Future

[delericho]

Unlikely for the same reason he listed model trains dying. The model train industry is dying because they priced out beginners. The RPG industry will never be more expensive than the cost of a book and a set of dice...

The big cost of getting started with D&D isn't financial, it is in all the reading you need to do.

Before a new group can get started, someone has to read the better part of 1,000 pages of core rules, and the rest of the group need to be familiar enough with a very complex system to create characters. Then they need to create characters, and create an adventure (or buy and read a pre-gen, meaning yet more reading). And then they get to start having fun.

The alternative should be the Red Box, which provides a quick and easy way in to the game. Unfortunately, the Red Box is pretty much worthless. It is only very recently that we've finally gotten any decent starter set (for Pathfinder) - there's been a gap since the mid-90s.

...but it does look like the first two articles were carefully written to criticize 4E and doesn't include any quotes from anyone who isn't a direct competitor of the game...

Note that the 'Present' article quotes both R.A. Salvatore (author working for WotC) and Andy Collins (ex-WotC, but not a competitor).

 

[Ahnehnois]

The big cost of getting started with D&D isn't financial, it is in all the reading you need to do.

Before a new group can get started, someone has to read the better part of 1,000 pages of core rules, and the rest of the group need to be familiar enough with a very complex system to create characters. Then they need to create characters, and create an adventure (or buy and read a pre-gen, meaning yet more reading). And then they get to start having fun.

The alternative should be the Red Box, which provides a quick and easy way in to the game. Unfortunately, the Red Box is pretty much worthless. It is only very recently that we've finally gotten any decent starter set (for Pathfinder) - there's been a gap since the mid-90s.

I've seen this raised before and it puzzles me. People-even average ones-are capable of learning a great deal very quickly, even if they don't realize it. Many players are introduced to the game by someone who already knows it; I don't know that a bunch of newbies picking up some books and trying to play is all that common (it's debatable as to whether it could or should be).

More than that, many people play rule-intensive games, watch complex TV shows, and engage in time-consuming hobbies of all stripes. I don't see rpgs as an aberration in this regard. I see a niche for a beginner product, definitely, but I think it's only a niche.

Of the people who have considered the game and rejected it, how many were motivated by fear of learning all the rules? Very few, I'd say.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Then you must not have read the rules for the earliest edition, which suggested you use Chainmail to act out combat, or you have the same memory problem a lot of people here do.

Did you actually play d&d back in the mid 70's? Because I did, and despite all the times I see people nowadays saying "oh, the rules tell you to use chainmail for combat", i don't think anybody did. Certainly none of the people I gamed with, heard about or knew via APAs.

The significance of the chainmail meme astonishes me. It is almost as if people read this on the Internet over the last couple of years and accept it as gospel. It wasn't and it isn't. Really.

 

[caudor]

Whoops, posted deleted content in wrong thread. Sorry.

 

[Rechan]

The big cost of getting started with D&D isn't financial, it is in all the reading you need to do.

Not if you're the parent buying the books for a kid. Parent walks into a store, asks what they have to spend to get a kid without a group yet into D&D, the store owner will point to the PHB, MM and DMG. That's $90. That's a lot to drop on a "We don't know if he'll like/do it".

And if you're a kid, $90 is a large drop in the bucket.

Hell, I want to give the new books to a kid and I feel $90 is a lot.

 

[nedjer]

If it's Monte Cook; shouldn't it be Mike Mearls instead of the offhand/ dismissive Mearls?

 

[R_Chance]

Did you actually play d&d back in the mid 70's? Because I did, and despite all the times I see people nowadays saying "oh, the rules tell you to use chainmail for combat", i don't think anybody did. Certainly none of the people I gamed with, heard about or knew via APAs.

The significance of the chainmail meme astonishes me. It is almost as if people read this on the Internet over the last couple of years and accept it as gospel. It wasn't and it isn't. Really.

I've played since 1974. We played Chainmail before D&D came out, both historical medieval miniatures and fantasy. My current PF / 3.5 / homebrew campaign setting is based on the fantasy campaign setting I developed for Chainmail fantasy miniature campaigns.

We always used the "alternative" combat rules for D&D using a twenty sided die as opposed to the two six sided system in Chainmail. I always thought it was superior for a game based on individual combat.

Even in a group of miniature enthusiasts like us I don't remember anyone using / advocating using Chainmail for anything except large scale miniature battles.

 

[Morrus]

I've seen this raised before and it puzzles me. People-even average ones-are capable of learning a great deal very quickly, even if they don't realize it. Many players are introduced to the game by someone who already knows it; I don't know that a bunch of newbies picking up some books and trying to play is all that common (it's debatable as to whether it could or should be).

More than that, many people play rule-intensive games, watch complex TV shows, and engage in time-consuming hobbies of all stripes. I don't see rpgs as an aberration in this regard. I see a niche for a beginner product, definitely, but I think it's only a niche.

Of the people who have considered the game and rejected it, how many were motivated by fear of learning all the rules? Very few, I'd say.

A fear? No. But I'll happily admit that the barrier to me buying new games is that I don't have the time or inclination to learn the new rules; and I don't think I'm alone in that. That, frankly, is why a brand works. It's why it works on me (most of the time - there are always exceptions). WotC is perfectly aware of this psychology, although may have stretched it too far with 4E and overstepped.

That's why there will be a D&D 5E and not a new WotC-produced Caverns & Dinosaurs 1E. Because - although it may have been damaged in the last few years and not as effective as it once was - people will assume they can step easily into it.

 

[Ahnehnois]

A fear? No. But I'll happily admit that the barrier to me buying new games is that I don't have the time or inclination to learn the new rules; and I don't think I'm alone in that. That, frankly, is why a brand works. It's why it works on me (most of the time - there are always exceptions). WotC is perfectly aware of this psychology, although may have stretched it too far with 4E and overstepped.

That's why there will be a D&D 5E and not a new WotC-produced Caverns & Dinosaurs 1E. Because - although it may have been damaged in the last few years and not as effective as it once was - people will assume they can step easily into it.

Yes, but that's the perspective of a conoisseur-someone who knows games. Is a child or young adult who considers playing D&D and has never played a tabletop rpg before motivated by the same things?

Frankly, I think most beginners don't remotely realize the complexity of the rules or the depth to which a D&D game can be developed. They get into the game slowly and stop at whatever level of depth seems right. There are a lot of casual D&D players out there who never really learned the rules well, they just trust their DM (they're not on EN World though).

I think their questions about the game for a prospective player are more social. Does playing this game make me part of a group I don't want to be part of? Will other people judge me if I do it? Will my life change for the worse? Frankly, I think a simple set of D&D rules is just as stigmatized as a complicated one, which is to say, very much so. That's the rate-limiting factor in recruiting new players.

That's my opinion, anyway, from my experience. I'm sure there are many on this subject.

 

[Morrus]

Frankly, I think a simple set of D&D rules is just as stigmatized as a complicated one, which is to say, very much so.

I certainly believe it was in the US in the 80s. I didn't experience it while I was growing up in the UK, though; and I certainly don't as an adult. A little curiosity, but no stigma at all. Geek is chic, y'know! Doctor Who is mainstream TV!