Is a popular non-D&D traditional fantasy RPG possible?

[Mercurius]

Yeah, Crothian is right. The number-one thing you need is a good game.

The number-two thing you need is a good game that has a point beyond being, frankly, a more traditional version of D&D, because ain't nothing stopping you from running a traditional fantasy game with D&D.

Yes, I agree with Crothian. But let me clarify about "a more traditional version of D&D." My view is that because 4E is less traditional than previous editions, there is a relatively large group of long-timers who might be open to playing something else, something "more traditional." So the game I envision would have to accomodate that, but also add something new, which I am saying could be embodied through these theme/setting sourcebooks.

Does anyone remember the game Shards of the Stone from the mid-90s? It was similar to what I have in mind, with a Core rulebook (which is what it was literally called) and numerous Realms in the same world that were cut off by some kind of magical mist, most of them separate continents. Each "Realm book" (which never came out as the game collapsed under its own ambition and some in-fighting, if I heard correctly) would detail a different continent with a different theme or style, almost like separate campaign worlds. I think they even had a couple Big Names like Ed Greenwood on to write a Realm.

Now I only bring Shards up because I think the basic idea might work for what I'm talking about: core rules, one larger world, dozens of smaller realms/themes. Shards had a kind of metaplot that might not lend itself to huge popularity, but might work (see World of Darkness). If I remember, at least one of the Realms was pretty traditional, but some of them were pretty out there.

By the way, Sean Patrick Fannon's "Shaintar" PDF game is one of the (more traditional) Realms, Fannon being one of two main designers for Shards.

 

[tenkar]

So again, what would a fantasy RPG need to do to compete, or at least thrive alongside D&D?

If that answer was known I think someone would have already taken that ball and run with it.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Yes, I agree with Crothian. But let me clarify about "a more traditional version of D&D." My view is that because 4E is less traditional than previous editions, there is a relatively large group of long-timers who might be open to playing something else, something "more traditional." So the game I envision would have to accomodate that, but also add something new, which I am saying could be embodied through these theme/setting sourcebooks.

This is the whole problem of your premise.

You don't think 4e is "traditional".

To many other people, it is. You have classes, you go in dungeons, you kill stuff, you get items and abilities to help you kill more stuff. You do a bit of role-playing somewhere in the killing and taking of stuff.

4e has all that and to many people (as in "so many that they needed a second print before the books are even released"), that's all they need.

It might not be "traditional" to you or the people you regularly associate with, but it is to many, many others.

You'll need a better angle than just "traditional" D&D, because older versions of D&D already exist.

 

[Doug McCrae]

My view is that because 4E is less traditional than previous editions, there is a relatively large group of long-timers who might be open to playing something else, something "more traditional."

So your target market for the new product is people who don't want to buy new product because they prefer what they're currently playing?

 

[Particle_Man]

This sounds like a Fantasy Heartbreaker, slouching towards Bethlehem, waiting to be still-born.

 

[Dice4Hire]

So again, what would a fantasy RPG need to do to compete, or at least thrive alongside D&D?

First of all, it has to have a game system that is not D&D, but one that simply models the world in a realistic fashion. And this is hard, becasue having a high learning curve or insane amounts of rules hurts rather than helps.

Second, it needs to have a feel. A definite feel that incorporates all aspects of fantasy, or at least most of them. I have seen good fantasy games that do their niche very well, but if you do not like that niche, you just pass on by. With D&D you can play many kinds of games, I frequently see people doing games I would't touch with a ten foot pole, but they are part of the D&D ruleset.

I like how WTOC reinvented the D&D brand with 4E. I am not sure I want to follow them, but it is a daring evolution to the rules.

A second-place game needs to do that. No d20, but a set of rules nad such that makes the gmae fun, innovative and fun to play.

 

[portermj]

I think the time is always right for a quality product of any genre. On the flip side, I'm not sure there is ever a good time to release a mediocre or poor product.

As far as being able to compete with D&D, I think that RPG publishers have D&D players as their target market, they will always be smaller than D&D. White Wolf was able to reach the level of success they did by reaching an audience outside of traditional RPG players.

Even going after disgruntled 3rd edition fans is pretty limiting since it would mean convincing 3rd edition fans to give up the 3rd edition system for a new system. To me that is a tougher challenge than convincing 4E players to try a new system.

 

[Barastrondo]

This sounds like a Fantasy Heartbreaker, slouching towards Bethlehem, waiting to be still-born.

I would have said "Fantasy Heartbreaker" myself. The very premise of it — something very, very, very like a game you're already playing, but juuust different enough that you could theoretically love this one all the more, and could there be enough people that all feel the exact same way that it would be the Number One Not-D&D Game? — is the philosophy that has already launched a thousand such rough beasts.

 

[Umbran]

So what do you think? Is it possible? And if so, what would it require to actually work and attain a degree of popularity that would allow it to exist indefinitely without going out of print and going through similar "edition-expansion-new edition-expansion" cycles as D&D?

I think you'll need to define "traditional" independently from any particular previous game system before we can really answer this.

That aside, I think you'll find one major flaw in your premise - avoiding the "edition-expansion-new edition-expansion" cycle. This cycle is part of the basic economics of selling to a niche market, which quickly gets saturated. The cycle is the only clear way to keep the market from saturating with your product - by changing the product.

 

[Spinachcat]

Given the questionable popularity of 4E--at least relative to the initial popularity of 3E--and considering that it seems geared more towards a younger/new crowd, I would think that a very well-done traditional fantasy game might be able to actually survive on its own indefinitely.

There is no questionable popularity other than some internet delusions. The current edition of D&D is always the most popular RPG on the market by a massive margin. And "traditional fantasy" is an elusive term. There is no consensus on its meaning and there never was. Look at Arneson's Blackmoor. Far more Burroughs than Tolkein. And where's the Tolkein in Dark Sun, Planescape and Eberron?

p.s. Could this be Pathfinder?

Pathfinder is C&C for the 3.x crowd. It will do fine for a tiny niche company that will be absolutely thrilled to get 5% of the RPG crowd. I am not being mean. I am writing my own grognard retro-throwback RPG and I am completely clear that the marketplace for such products is extremely limited. I would be thrilled to get 1% of the RPG audience, but 1/10th of 1% is more realistic without a massive marketing budget.

The only possible fantasy RPG to grab 20% of the D&D market would have been Harry Potter: the RPG and only if it was published 5 years ago at the height of the HP craze. Now, the HP:RPG would be lucky to snag 10% of D&D sales and that will diminish with each passing year as HP fades from the general consciousness.