D&D 5E A new Golden Age for D&D

[Deathstrike]

How similar to the ideas that:
Rock is Dead
Punk is Dead
Cyberpunk is Dead

is D&D?

Cyberpunk is not dead. It will never die. Sacrilege! Roll for initiative while I jack into the net.

 

[AriochQ]

Using argument by analogy...

Comic books had a golden age. There are probably far more comics sold, and read, today than there were back then. I doubt anyone would call the current age of comics the 'new golden age'.

Late 70's/early 80's will always be my 'Golden Age' for D&D, simply based on the pleasant memories. I remember going to the book store in the mall and looking through the rack to find the latest D&D module. Everything was new and exciting. Even though I am pretty sure my friends and I hacked the rules to h*ll, those were some of the best games I ever played.

 

[Celtavian]

If we're talking personal Golden Ages, it would definitely be back in the days of the Red Box. When the game was new, I was young, and we played purely for fun having never heard of min-maxing and didn't care what everyone else was doing. You played purely in your imagination without any concerns about fiddly bits or rules.

 

[Dausuul]

If we're talking personal Golden Ages, it would definitely be back in the days of the Red Box. When the game was new, I was young, and we played purely for fun having never heard of min-maxing and didn't care what everyone else was doing.

My personal Golden Age was much the same. The excitement of discovering the game for the first time (especially if it happens when you're a kid) is something that can't be replicated by rulesets or sales numbers. It comes once and never again.

I think there is a comparable period for the community as a whole. D&D was "discovered" in the late '70s and early '80s. The time when the game was new to everyone was special and unique, and will never come again (unless the community completely dies out, which is unlikely). So, if a Golden Age is the time of discovery, D&D's Golden Age is over forever.

What we have now is what I would call a renaissance.

 

[Hussar]

Aspects of HotDQ/RoT reminded me of Red Hand of Doom. I haven't played Rage of Demons but the main cast seems like it builds upon the demon princes from MM1 and MM2 (and the adventures).

But "reminds me of" doesn't mean something is derivative. Tiamat's been in the game since almost day 1, but, that doesn't mean that using Tiamat is derivative. And, yes, the demon princes have also been around for a long time. Again, using demon princes doesn't make a work derivative. Do you know of a module where multiple demon princes are invading an area at the same time? I don't.

 

[Windjammer]

It's too early to tell, since it's not clear where 5e is going. It'll take another 5 to 10 years to even begin to understand how 5e will be remembered, and then - perhaps - an assessment of a 'golden age' or no will be warranted.

Just think of the terms in which 4e was debated on this board in 2009 (i.e. one year into its existence). Compare that to 2014, or 2015: it's the edition that splintered the fanbase.

If I had to speculate, 5e will be remembered mostly in terms of its PR rather than its content. It was the edition designed to bring fans lost by 4e back into the fold. Hence: the edition that was mostly harmless, largely devoid of mechanical innovation, a visual facelift of a deeply conservative outlook. The edition that presented a quiet period for D&D to regain its strength and creative impulse.

I had hoped that 2012's Essentials would already be that edition, giving the team enough time to prepare for something exciting and new. But apparently we have to wait for 6e, or longer, if 6e will be the third edition under Mearls's helm.

 

[Dausuul]

If I had to speculate, 5e will be remembered mostly in terms of its PR rather than its content. It was the edition designed to bring fans lost by 4e back into the fold. Hence: the edition that was mostly harmless, largely devoid of mechanical innovation, a visual facelift of a deeply conservative outlook. The edition that presented a quiet period for D&D to regain its strength and creative impulse.

I had hoped that 2012's Essentials would already be that edition, giving the team enough time to prepare for something exciting and new. But apparently we have to wait for 6e, or longer, if 6e will be the third edition under Mearls's helm.

Making your game as part of a franchise is a tradeoff: You get a ready-made fanbase, but you need to stay mostly within the established boundaries of the franchise. Putting the name "Dungeons & Dragons" on a book cover is a promise: "This is a new, improved version of the game you already know." Fans shell out their hard-earned cash on the basis of that promise. If they wanted a totally different game, they wouldn't be buying Dungeons and Dragons!

Don't look for radical innovation from a franchise. That's not what franchises are for. Franchises change by evolution, not revolution; D&D 5E is a perfect example of this. It follows the form of previous editions (mostly 3E and BECMI), but quietly incorporates some new mechanics like proficiency bonus, backgrounds, inspiration, and advantage. These mechanics don't result in dramatic changes to the way the game plays or reads; instead, they enhance, they streamline, they polish.

Over many editions, you might see the game evolve away from its roots, but any one edition that tries to make a sharp break from its predecessor is going to meet the same backlash as 4E, and it will be followed by a 5E-like "return to form."

 

[Kramodlog]

To borrow from comic books, it seems like the 70s and part of the 80s was the Golden Age of D&D. With few RPG rivals, D&D was so popular Dragon mag had 100,000 subscribers, if I am not mistaken. Everything was new and had to be done. Classic modules that would be pan now were born in that Age.

The late 80s and the early 90s was the Silver Age. The Forgotten Realms was a cash cow and a wealth of material for different world was produced.

The early 00s was the Bonze Age with 3.x and the OGL reviving D&D and RPGs.

4e's period was a the Dark Age. You know why.

5e is very young, so it is difficult to give it an age. Maybe it is new golden age, but that remains to be seen. There is few RPG books on the way. I think the Digital Age is a potential name, as video games are now the focus of the brand. Maybe the movie and potential cartoon will change that and we'll call it the Entertainment Age or Pop Age.

 

[darjr]

It's a golden age for me.

I have a lunch game at work, new gamers seem to be crawling out if the woodwork.

Whether or not it's a golden age for the popularity of the game as a whole, it's undeniably an amazing time for new DIY-RPG content.

Stuff like Yoon-Suin and Fire On The Velvet Horizon, for example, are far better than anything that's been produced in ages.

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/144820/YoonSuin

http://www.lulu.com/shop/scrap-prin...elvet-horizon/paperback/product-22094199.html

Never heard of them, I'll check them out.

 

[Mistwell]

Using argument by analogy...

Comic books had a golden age. There are probably far more comics sold, and read, today than there were back then.

I disagree. More comics sold during the golden age of comics, than do now. At least, in the United States.

In 2014 comics sold $540.4 million, at an average price of $3.77, for a rough estimate of 143.3 million copies sold per year (that includes both hardcopy and digital).

By 1959, comics were selling about 26 million copies per month, per issue, across all comics on average. That's 314.3 million copies sold per year. More than double the number of comics being sold in 2014.