What Game or Publisher Would You Have Be Market leader

[Reynard]

They have the best selling non-d20 game that is older than I am.

Des CoC sell as well or better than, say, PF2? I have no idea.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Or Chaosium. Maaaaybe SJG. Either way, that sounds like a pretty good alternative landscape.

SJG would be a hellscape. They couldn't write an accessible or popular RPG even if you sent the FBI to stick them up again and this time say "Write an accessible RPG or Steve gets it!".

We'd just get endless vaaaaaaaagueeeeeely libertarian-leaning sourcebooks for GURPS. Entire libraries worth.

(Challenge: Find a GURPS setting sourcebook that doesn't lean either wildly libertarian or somewhat militarist/fascist or somehow both - Challenge level: Very Hard*).

* = Please do not take this challenge seriously. Presented solely for the sake of mocking SJG/GURPS. All rights reserved. No resemblance to RPGs living or dead is intended.

 

[Parmandur]

Des CoC sell as well or better than, say, PF2? I have no idea.

No, that's whybI said non-d20. CoC is consistently the best selling non-D&D derivative, usually 3rd in those FLGS charts and very high on Amazon rankings (compared to everything that is not D&D or Parhdinder, sometimes ahead of it).

Apparently Chaosium's original offices were walking distance from my childhood home, so that's weird.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

SJG would be a hellscape.

Well, if they were the dominant leader, sure. But in a marketplace that was "ruled" by pluralities, I don't think so. They crank out lots of content, from retro to, um, slighly less retro. They provide a currently published alternative to folks like Free League, with more traditional products, and a lot of them. While I don't think the rereleases of OGRE or Car Wars should be the dominant forces in the market, I think the market is better off having them in it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Des CoC sell as well or better than, say, PF2? I have no idea.

CoC is apparently huge in Asia, due to some smart early moves to sell translated editions there.

 

[Breaking Star Games]

I don't think WotC does do that particularly badly.

It sort of hints at it in the DMG, but in terms of actually being something WotC talks about significantly, not really.

This is more of a fan problem. D&D fans, particularly younger ones with no knowledge of other TT RPGs whatsoever, very often push D&D extremely hard as a "do-everything" system.

It feels weird to respond and not actually contest any of my points. Yes, fans make it a problem, but my point is that the TTRPG community would be healthier with a designer who is telling it as it is and making games that have real focus and do what they are designed to do well.

Contrasting the 5e PHB and DMG descriptions of the game compared to Masks should speak for itself. WotC just describes general things of Exploration, Social and Combat in equal length, but that itself is misleading given its mechanics all focus on Combat. Classes are all balanced around Combat. And its vague enough to mean just about anything.

The DMG also never sets boundaries but basic structuring of how to create campaigns and mentions various genres including Mystery and Intrigue. But overemphasis on these modes of gameplay definitely show the class imbalances - of course Rogues, Bards and Wizards will hog the spotlight with heaps of utility in Exploration and Social pillars supported by mechanics. We have Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft attempts to make Horror a supported genre. Yet, I don’t find a superheroic, high magic Characters nearly the best fit for a genre that relies on powerlessness. And this goes further with many adventures emphasizing gameplay poorly balanced and the system poorly executes.

I believe we would have a healthier game when the player base explicitly is told the boundaries of the system instead of being told that D&D 5e is the “World’s Greatest RPG.”

At the end of the day, 5e is heroic characters who go into dangerous "dungeons," killing monsters and getting treasure.

 

[Tony Vargas]

"Let's just use D&D for everything" is an ancient issue, stemming from there just not being anything else, initially, and D&D being really pretty baroque/weird, and hard to learn, if you weren't coming to it as a 70s wargaming enthusiast (I presume, it was easier for them - for me as a kid c1980 it was initially impenetrable, ironically, it was the 1e PH I eventually deciphered; and I've never seen a new player take to TSR or 5e D&D like a duck to water).
Learning a second RPG is daunting, especially if it's not just a D&D-like rip-off, so yeah, we've already figured how to tweak/ignore/house-rule D&D into something fun for us, let's do that to make it something fun, but Star Wars or space opera or super-heroes... sure, why not?

Once you do make an effort and learn a few systems, you start to realize that it's not always going to be that hard....

 

[payn]

It feels weird to respond and not actually contest any of my points. Yes, fans make it a problem, but my point is that the TTRPG community would be healthier with a designer who is telling it as it is and making games that have real focus and do what they are designed to do well.

Contrasting the 5e PHB and DMG descriptions of the game compared to Masks should speak for itself. WotC just describes general things of Exploration, Social and Combat in equal length, but that itself is misleading given its mechanics all focus on Combat. Classes are all balanced around Combat. And its vague enough to mean just about anything.

The DMG also never sets boundaries but basic structuring of how to create campaigns and mentions various genres including Mystery and Intrigue. But overemphasis on these modes of gameplay definitely show the class imbalances - of course Rogues, Bards and Wizards will hog the spotlight with heaps of utility in Exploration and Social pillars supported by mechanics. We have Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft attempts to make Horror a supported genre. Yet, I don’t find a superheroic, high magic Characters nearly the best fit for a genre that relies on powerlessness. And this goes further with many adventures emphasizing gameplay poorly balanced and the system poorly executes.

I was just thinking about bespoke games and really anticipating my Cowboy Bebop kickstarter. I probably wont play this game much, but it will be really fun to dive into the characters for a few nights. Many bespoke games really get me excited to play and run them. However, none of them really have lasting power. Something about a strictly defined play loop just gets repetitive and has instantly diminishing return.

I believe we would have a healthier game when the player base explicitly is told the boundaries of the system instead of being told that D&D 5e is the “World’s Greatest RPG.”

At the end of the day, 5e is heroic characters who go into dangerous "dungeons," killing monsters and getting treasure.

Nope. I think D&D is the entry system, a generic kitchen sink game. I would love to have those blanks filled in more by supplements, but I love the fact D&D is not defined as a simple game loop which gives it both longevity and staying power a lot of bespoke experiences just simply do not. Clearly, YMMV.

 

[Thomas Shey]

(Challenge: Find a GURPS setting sourcebook that doesn't lean either wildly libertarian or somewhat militarist/fascist or somehow both - Challenge level: Very Hard*).

* = Please do not take this challenge seriously. Presented solely for the sake of mocking SJG/GURPS. All rights reserved. No resemblance to RPGs living or dead is intended.

I was about to say "Witchworld", but I suspect even in your mocking you're talking about current ones.

 

[Tony Vargas]

(Challenge: Find a GURPS setting sourcebook that doesn't lean either wildly libertarian or somewhat militarist/fascist or somehow both Please do not take this challenge seriously. Presented solely for the sake of mocking SJG/GURPS.

There's no GURPS: Great Patriotic War? Or GURPS: Juche! That's an oversight.