D&D 5E Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble

[Manbearcat]

Ack. Sorry, I meant the cartoon MOVIE. (Dropped a highly relevant word there.)

No, the Transformers cartoon itself did fine.

Ah. Gotcha. Well, there is no accounting for taste!

Truth be told, it was going to be impossible to work from the beginning. I mean the movie was set in the year 2005! 2005! How in the world could anyone fathom a world, advanced by tech and organized by social ideas, so far removed from the mundane 1985! Its beyond comprehension! If they would have chosen a distant future a little more relatable, say....2000 (?), maybe the viewership may have been able to access the content and it would have done better!

 

[nofax1]

Rules Wars

Personally I think the ruleset is secondary to the fact that no matter what the rules are it provides a framework in which to tell and interactive story. As long as the rules don't get in the way of that story then it's fine by me. I played Basic/AD&D from about 1980 until a bit in college circa 1988. Only played 1st ed. until I decided to get back into it with 4e in the past year or so. I have no problems with the rules, nor do I have problems with Pathfinder 3.75 either. Despite the rules you are always capable of changing what you don't like to make it better fit your style.

Play whatever ruleset you prefer and stop your whining about which is better. They are all just different. Get over it.

 

[TwoSix]

Ah. Gotcha. Well, there is no accounting for taste!

Truth be told, it was going to be impossible to work from the beginning. I mean the movie was set in the year 2005! 2005! How in the world could anyone fathom a world, advanced by tech and organized by social ideas, so far removed from the mundane 1985! Its beyond comprehension! If they would have chosen a distant future a little more relatable, say....2000 (?), maybe the viewership may have been able to access the content and it would have done better!

Hmm, I didn't remember that was a member of the pantheon of movies and video games set not nearly far enough in the future.

 

[Hussar]

As far as iconic characters go, sure it's Drizzt and probably the Dragonlance bunch but again look at Marvel. Iron Man was hardly a big name. Avengers? Nowhere near the recognition of Justice League.

But they were known just enough to get off the ground. A FR movie could be done right. Same with Dragonlance.

 

[Derren]

A FR movie could be done right. Same with Dragonlance.

Unlikely as for that they have to beat or at least come close to LotR/Hobbit and no one is going to invest that kind of money into a D&D movie, especially now as the fantasy phase seems to wane again in favor of Sci Fi.

 

[Nellisir]

Unlikely as for that they have to beat or at least come close to LotR/Hobbit and no one is going to invest that kind of money into a D&D movie, especially now as the fantasy phase seems to wane again in favor of Sci Fi.

As you point out in this very quote, it cycles. And Hollywood loves stuff that people know. People know D&D, and it's not a stretch to look at the D&D novels and think "Hmmm, opportunity!" If it got optioned now, it would probably be 5-10 years before anything hit the theatres.

 

[Lokiare]

Personally I think the ruleset is secondary to the fact that no matter what the rules are it provides a framework in which to tell and interactive story. As long as the rules don't get in the way of that story then it's fine by me. I played Basic/AD&D from about 1980 until a bit in college circa 1988. Only played 1st ed. until I decided to get back into it with 4e in the past year or so. I have no problems with the rules, nor do I have problems with Pathfinder 3.75 either. Despite the rules you are always capable of changing what you don't like to make it better fit your style.

Play whatever ruleset you prefer and stop your whining about which is better. They are all just different. Get over it.

The problem is the things the rules don't cover like role playing, story, world building, etc...etc... are not inherent to that game. So they don't count. You can play any edition of D&D in the forgotten realms, playing the same adventure for instance. That has no bearing on the mechanics. Its the other way around. The mechanics can enhance or degrade the role playing, story, and world building, not the other way around.

I'm not beholden to any given rule set. I'm beholden to ideals like:

Tactical options on level up and each round of play.
One options (class, race, etc...etc...) should not be an obvious better choice than another option under all circumstances.
Players should not be punished for wanting to play a specific character concept.
The difference between an optimized character and an unoptimized character should not be so great that they can't play at the same table.

There are more, but those are the ones that 5E fail on that are on the top of my head.

 

[Hussar]

Why would it have to be more successful than The Hobbit? If that were true Hollywood would never make any movies.

Well, we'd like to make this spy action movie but it might not make more money than the Bourne movies so forgettaboutit.

All the movie has to be is profitable.

 

[Derren]

As you point out in this very quote, it cycles. And Hollywood loves stuff that people know. People know D&D, and it's not a stretch to look at the D&D novels and think "Hmmm, opportunity!" If it got optioned now, it would probably be 5-10 years before anything hit the theatres.

Problem is, you can't make a movie about a rules set. You have to make a "Forgotten Realms" or "Dragonlance" movie instead or invent a new setting which loses a lot of attraction. And while many people know D&D, a lot less people know about the settings. By now a "Neverwinter" would be the most recognized setting thanks to its video games, but still not big enough for publishers to try to make a big budget film about it which would be necessary to increase the D&D brand value.

Why would it have to be more successful than The Hobbit?

Because only a success of this magnitude would jump start the D&D brand. Just making a little money is not enough for that.

 

[Lokiare]

Problem is, you can't make a movie about a rules set. You have to make a "Forgotten Realms" or "Dragonlance" movie instead or invent a new setting which loses a lot of attraction. And while many people know D&D, a lot less people know about the settings. By now a "Neverwinter" would be the most recognized setting thanks to its video games, but still not big enough for publishers to try to make a big budget film about it which would be necessary to increase the D&D brand value.



Because only a success of this magnitude would jump start the D&D brand. Just making a little money is not enough for that.

I got one word for you: Drizzt Do' Urden

Wait that's more than one word, but it would jump start the brand as a movie. You could even color him a pale blue color or just show different ranges of color types of Drow to get around the racial thing...

Of course to remain true to the literature we would have to have several drow preistesses in stripperific outfits.