DnD Sports Changes Name To RPG Sports

Flexor the Mighty! · Oct 18, 2018

Henry said:
I don't get the surprise that 'competitive D&D' would have an audience. Has anyone taken stock of the amount of theorycrafting that goes on in various online media platforms? Or has taken note of the popularity of things like Draft Kings for even people who don't actually participate for prize money? While I seriously doubt that this is going to become the next Fortnite, the idea of it having popularity is not a big surprise.

Competitive D&D does have a history, it does have a draw, and if the setup was interesting enough, I'd probably watch it myself. I've said before that I know I'd be interested in seeing a tournament style even televised, but with good editing instead of watching every little inventory adjustment, as much to see how different teams handled different interesting challenges - almost like a "run four teams through white plume mountain, see who dies where" kind of thing. Can YOU handle the Frictionless Room and the Super-Tetanus without dying?*

* P.S. Please don't tell me that the above is a spoiler for a 35-year-old module, thanks...

I would watch that where critical role holds no interest for me. PVP battle royales are a meh. We need a new Tomb of Horrors and resulting tournament streamed.

Hjorimir · Oct 18, 2018

I honestly don't have much interest in RPGs as a sport. It flies in the face of the things I personally love about our hobby. That said, there's no "right" way to play your games and I hope it's fun for the people interested in this kind of thing.

pming · Oct 18, 2018

Hiya!

Actually...I feel MUCH better about the whole thing now. Before, with D&D in the name, I figured it had to have been given at least the nod of approval from WotC (who would then be taking a sizable chunk of the change for it). But now knowing it is just one company trying to pull it off, and, ahem, "expanding" it to all/other RPG's...makes me breath easier.

That said...I'll never watch or support Roll20. To explain my reasons would get me kicked off these forums, so I'll leave it at "I'm not keen on many of the behind-the-scenes reasons and attitudes of Nolan in regards to some of his customers". I'll stick with Fantasy Grounds II. It's easier, prettier, and nicer to use over longer games...imho, of course.

Lastly: Watching tabletop Wargamming...oh yeah! THAT I would watch...well, I'd watch on my own time anyway (wouldn't 'tune in' to watch it, so to speak). And, as [MENTION=158]Henry[/MENTION] pointed out...watching most of several groups of players tackle the same Tournament Adventure Module (like Tomb of Horrors, Slave Pits of the Undercity, Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, etc) and finding out which group of players played the best. That, again, I'd watch. But a "battle royal PvP, kill other PC's in an arena" type thing? Er...no interest what so ever. I'm actually so against that idea that I hope it fails...and transforms into something I would support (like the above mentioned "Party v. Module" thing).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

Rygar · Oct 19, 2018

Henry said:
I don't get the surprise that 'competitive D&D' would have an audience. Has anyone taken stock of the amount of theorycrafting that goes on in various online media platforms? Or has taken note of the popularity of things like Draft Kings for even people who don't actually participate for prize money? While I seriously doubt that this is going to become the next Fortnite, the idea of it having popularity is not a big surprise.

Competitive D&D does have a history, it does have a draw, and if the setup was interesting enough, I'd probably watch it myself. I've said before that I know I'd be interested in seeing a tournament style even televised, but with good editing instead of watching every little inventory adjustment, as much to see how different teams handled different interesting challenges - almost like a "run four teams through white plume mountain, see who dies where" kind of thing. Can YOU handle the Frictionless Room and the Super-Tetanus without dying?*

* P.S. Please don't tell me that the above is a spoiler for a 35-year-old module, thanks...

Does it?

How big is the player base of D&D? We could use the rather questionable 9 million number WOTC batted around awhile ago. What percentage of that is going to spend time watching someone else roll dice and pencil in numbers on a piece of paper? Keep in mind, this is the same thing as asking what percentage of people would be interested in watching a Magic the Gathering game. Which based on their more recent tournament (Worlds I think?) was 19,000 people* (Out of a player base of reportedly 20-30 million). So we can theorize that what we're looking at is a viewer rate of about what? 6,500 to 9,000? I don't think I'd call that either a draw or an audience.

Going into other RPG's, Pathfinder ends up a percentage of D&D, and everything else is going to number in the hundreds of people at best since their market penetration is really small.

I suspect we'll find that its popularity is embarrassingly small, and after 2-3 events we never hear about it again.

*Keep in mind too, with Magic the Gathering, there's a lot of incentive to watch. Learning new tricks, learning how to play better, or copying decks can literally make you money by winning in your area. And they still have a vanishingly small portion of their player base watching.

Morrus · Oct 19, 2018

Rygar said:
Does it?

How big is the player base of D&D? We could use the rather questionable 9 million number WOTC batted around awhile ago.

The number you refer to was 15M in North America.

Henry · Oct 19, 2018

Rygar said:
Does it?
How big is the player base of D&D? We could use the rather questionable 9 million number WOTC batted around awhile ago. What percentage of that is going to spend time watching someone else roll dice and pencil in numbers on a piece of paper? Keep in mind, this is the same thing as asking what percentage of people would be interested in watching a Magic the Gathering game. Which based on their more recent tournament (Worlds I think?) was 19,000 people* (Out of a player base of reportedly 20-30 million). So we can theorize that what we're looking at is a viewer rate of about what? 6,500 to 9,000? I don't think I'd call that either a draw or an audience.

Going into other RPG's, Pathfinder ends up a percentage of D&D, and everything else is going to number in the hundreds of people at best since their market penetration is really small.

I suspect we'll find that its popularity is embarrassingly small, and after 2-3 events we never hear about it again.

In addition to Nathan Stewart, Brand Director for D&D, updating that figure to 12 to 15 million in North America alone, as [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] mentions, keep in mind that Critical Role, where people are "rolling dice and recording numbers on a character sheet," pull in somewhere between 55,000 and 65,000 viewers a week regularly, and fill halls with 3000 to 5000 people per appearance. Even half that will still make an audience to garner a following, and more likely to follow if it's something you don't have to devote 4 or 5 hours to, as you would Critical Role.

Ignoring just D&D for a moment, others like Glass Cannon Podcast have audiences probably closer to 10 to 12,000, with at least 4,000 solid Patreon members donating enough for them to make a regular business of it as a self-sustaining model. There's a long tail of different RPG viewing audiences out there, not all of which overlap, simply because there wouldn't be enough hours in the day for them to (since so many are 3 to 5 hours long to consume)

Again, is it an audience of millions? Nope, and no one claimed it was - but all they need is that 20,000 or 30,000 strong initially and some form of sustainment model (which Twitch can provide) to sustain themselves to continue growth. It's the sign of a medium that has recently founded itself and going through its growing pains, to become or found something bigger down the road which we can't yet see.

MonsterEnvy · Oct 19, 2018

pming said:
That said...I'll never watch or support Roll20. To explain my reasons would get me kicked off these forums, so I'll leave it at "I'm not keen on many of the behind-the-scenes reasons and attitudes of Nolan in regards to some of his customers". I'll stick with Fantasy Grounds II. It's easier, prettier, and nicer to use over longer games...imho, of course.

This site does not have anything to do with Roll20 outside of that some people use it to play games or watch people use it to play games. I don't see how you explaining why you are boycotting roll20 would get you kicked.

Parmandur · Oct 19, 2018

MonsterEnvy said:
This site does not have anything to do with Roll20 outside of that some people use it to play games or watch people use it to play games. I don't see how you explaining why you are boycotting roll20 would get you kicked.

(Implied politics are implied)

Vexorg · Oct 19, 2018

MonsterEnvy said:
This site does not have anything to do with Roll20 outside of that some people use it to play games or watch people use it to play games. I don't see how you explaining why you are boycotting roll20 would get you kicked.

Probably just warned rather than kicked. ENWorld.strongly discourages
Discussions of a political nature. And recently there were a few controversies involving a Roll20 cofounder that involved his personal politics.

CapnZapp · Oct 19, 2018

Morrus said:
Was there something you’d like to say?

MonsterEnvy said:
We told you WotC was not running it.

MonsterEnvy said:
Whats so funny. I don't get it.

AriochQ said:
Read it as nervous laughter and it makes more sense. In the prior announcement he has multiple posts essentially stating that 'of course WotC is involved' and probably being a little to forceful going after those with dissenting opinions. Foot, meet mouth.

I will only talk for myself. I don't excuse anyone's impoliteness but I find his reaction quite natural and easy to understand.

To me it's incredibly naive to use a brand name unlicensed, and one that is wholly unsuited to the intended purpose at that. Having to make such a sudden course correction begs the question: what where they thinking?

But again, maybe that's just me.