Dungeons & Dragons Does Not Exist: Meditations on Brand Dilution

[shadzar]

That would be the kids fault for not specifying what he actually wants. It's the same with any other fad present. A brand of skateboard, a type of bicycle, a set of MtG cards, a specific computer accessory, sunglasses, shirts, skirts, shoes, the list of things goes on forever..

Because the company is not responsible for making sure their brands are not diluted?

There is no number on the cover of the books remember, so there is the company to blame for that, not the kid.

He specified he wanted the D&D PHB. He got that. He doesn't know from 4th or 3rd edition except upon inspection of the book and trying to use it.

The customer shouldn't need to specify things so finitely in some convoluted manner.

One wants a '72 Ford Mustang that is simple. One wants 4th edition D&D PHB, not so simple. the container doesn't indicate properly its contents.

Take the Red Box, made to look exactly like the old one. It isn't the customers fault for this, but the companies.

Again why AD&D changed the name, AND added numbers on the outside of the books.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

IMom goes to a local comic/game store

No, Mom goes to Wallmart or Target. There she sees 4e and bing bang boom.

Sorry, I don't buy that. Being non-partisan does not mean that you can't still think of older editions (or even Pathfinder) as Dungeons and Dragons.

Of course not. 3e was D&D, as was every edition before it.

However, when most people say "I'm going to play D&D," just as with 3e, the assumption is that they mean "the newest edition," otherwise they would have specified. If I say "I'm going to play Legend of the Five Rings," people will more or less all know I mean L5R4.

 

[Wicht]

However, when most people say "I'm going to play D&D," just as with 3e, the assumption is that they mean "the newest edition," otherwise they would have specified.

Your assumption maybe.

 

[shadzar]

No, Mom goes to Wallmart or Target. There she sees 4e and bing bang boom.

Not around here, along with CCGs, that type of game product was among the "departments" removed from Walmart, and Target is just a joke that hardly anyone goes to as it too much resembles Roses.

Maybe where you are you have a decent Walmart.

However, when most people say "I'm going to play D&D," just as with 3e, the assumption is that they mean "the newest edition," otherwise they would have specified.

No, that is actually part of the problem with the dilution of "D&D". Anyone making that assumption is just a fad follower*. Not everyone follows fads.

If they don't consider 4th edition to be D&D, then they wouldn't assume people to think that is what they meant.

*Buying the newest to have the newest is just a symptom of fads, and a fad itself, that just happened ot never die.

Stores, conventions, people in general having to explain which "edition" they mean, just further goes to show the dilution of the name.

 

[BryonD]

I can't agree.

"Ford" is a brand name; it certainly exists and works as a brand name is supposed to. But there are a hundred different "Ford" cars.

And, in this context, that just means that the Ford name is diluted.

It may or may not work as a brand name. But, because there are a "hundred" different Ford cars (trucks, vans, SUVs,...) telling someone "I drive a Ford." tells them your brand preference but tells them virtually nothing about the kind of vehicle you drive.

These days telling someone "I play D&D" tells them you are a gamer, but it tells them precious little about the details of the kind of game you like.

Many, many years ago (before you or I were born), "I drive a Ford." told people BOTH about your brand preference and something about the car you drove. The brand part still exists but the dilution of meaning coexists with the brand information.

Not nearly as many years ago "I play D&D" also provided a lot better information about what kind of game you played. Granted, pretty much from day 1 there was dilution. I don't remotely claim it was ever uniform. But it is not a boolean situation. It used to be dilute. Now it is much more dilute.

 

[kitsune9]

Interesting essay Chainsaw Mage!

 

[Raven Crowking]

I cannot fathom how anyone can claim that adding more potential meanings to a term doesn't dilute the clarity of the term.

It doesn't matter what the term is. "Pet" has a more diluted meaning than "Dog", and "Dog" has a more diluted meaning than "German Shepherd". OTOH, if German shepherds were the only dogs, and dogs the only pets, then "Pet" would be no more diluted than "German Shepherd".

To claim otherwise is to deny reality.

One can take the tact that the most recent definitions somehow removes all previous definitions from common parlance, but that's also denying reality. People play all sorts of D&D. There are people playing games they call D&D that haven't got a TSR or a WotC logo on the cover.

You can prevent dilution of a term's meaning only by preventing new meaningings from being added. You can decrease dilution only by reducing the number of meanings being used.

Pretending otherwise is a disservice, to yourself and to others.

Whether it is good or bad......That's a whole 'nother question. And it can be treated as such without denying underlying reality.



RC

 

[ProfessorCirno]

No, that is actually part of the problem with the dilution of "D&D". Anyone making that assumption is just a fad follower*. Not everyone follows fads.

If they don't consider 4th edition to be D&D, then they wouldn't assume people to think that is what they meant.

*Buying the newest to have the newest is just a symptom of fads, and a fad itself, that just happened ot never die.

Stores, conventions, people in general having to explain which "edition" they mean, just further goes to show the dilution of the name.

Come on, we play D&D. Following fads? We wouldn't be popular even with a Bag of +10 Social Conformity.

In every situation throughout just about any media throughout all of life, if you say "I'm <verb>ing <noun>," you're either 1) referring to the most recent one or 2) referring to the entire series as a whole, which is typically then clarified. Example one: I'm playing Smash Brothers. People will generally think you mean the most recent, save for the most diehard fans. Example 2) I'm watching Dr Who. "Oh, which episode?" There, now you clarify.

When I say "I'm playing D&D" there are three responses.

1) They don't know the game or only know of it as that nerd thing. Social convention implies it to be the most recent one. Ergo, 4e.

2) They know the game. They either respond with "which one" or go with the implication that it is the most recent. Ergo, "Which one" or "Oh, 4e?"

3) They know the game, actually think there's "fads" in the nerdiest thing imaginable, also we're all giant nerds for playing it, let's not kid ourselves. They respond with "which one."

In none of these examples is the implication given that you are playing a previous edition. There is either "Oh the newest" or "Which one?"

 

[Wicht]

You keep making that same assertion but it runs counter to all my experiences in the last couple of years. I talk to people that say they play Dungeons and Dragons. I say "which edition? Did you switch?" They say, "no we didn't switch over. We didn't like the direction 4e was going." I say, "Have you tried Pathfinder?"

So yes there's generally a time of edition clarification but never has the assumption on the part of people I converse with been that Dungeons and Dragons equals 4e. And I have learned not to assume that this is what people mean. Because the above has happened several times in the last couple of years and not a one of the people I ran into, or chatted with online, had switched or equated 4e with the D&D experience. So again, you are projecting your assumptions.

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

Nitpick: The house rules in monopoly are game breakers. No auctions, free parking pays, etc. turn a quick reasonable game (1-2 hours) into a hellish slog.

Well corrected. (Although "hellish slog" is perhaps a bit overstated, just as my original post has been accused of being. ).

By "game breaker" I didn't mean in the technical sense that gamers use the term, so much as "something that radically changes the game you are expecting into something different."