RPG Theory- The Limits of My Language are the Limits of My World

[FrogReaver]

I have never gotten this perspective. I'm not looking for a perfect system. I'm looking for a game. I'm not making a long term commitment.

Perhaps that's one thing that separates you from others. Your mix of time/interest/motivation leaves open the possibility to put the time and effort into learning/trying new systems. Not everyone has the time/interest/motivation to learn and try a new system.

For example my group meets for 3ish hours a week. We've tried a few different games and have been playing a few years. 5e of course, Stars without number (great game), A battletech RPG and a 3 page simple game one of the players wrote. In general Stars without number took 1-2 sessions to even get started up. It took a few more sessions to really run smoothly (personally I prefer it to 5e and even the simple 3 page game I prefer to 5e). The Battletech RPG was similar in terms of set up time and smoothly running time (and was mostly a mini war game at least how we played it). But we are ultimately back to playing 5e. Why? IMO, because it caters to the group as a whole more. Why don't we try out alot of different games to see if one works even better for us? The time investment into trying and learning a new system isn't typically worth it, though the players are very accommodating if someone wants to try something for a session or 2.

 

[pemerton]

the bleeding edge is often informed by criticisms of popular work. The French New Wave defined itself, in some respects, as being nothing like what those filmmakers saw as the stunted, polished "cinema of quality" at the time.

I agree with this.

In the context of RPGing, for instance, we have games like RQ, C&S and RM that are critical responses to (what were seen as) the inanities of D&D's non-simulationist elements: silo-ed character classes; AC and hp; inane dungeons; etc.

And then we have the indie/"story now" games from the second half of the 90s through to AW that are critical responses to (what were seen as) the incoherence and railroadiness of the White Wolf (and similar) "storytelling" RPGs.

And the OSR is a critical response to (what was seen as) the lack of fiction and fictional positioning in 3E D&D. (Calling the OSR "avant garde" is tricky, because at least some of its elements seem self-consciously reactionary, but I think that's a fair characterisation - in the RPG context - of things like LotFP or ZakS's work.)

In due course there will be some sort of response to AW - maybe it's already here, in the form of FitD! I probably won't play it - I suspect my tastes are largely fixed, given my age and inclinations - but it seems silly to rail against it.

But what happens when people criticize or even reference D&D in anything other than a positive light? Claims of elitism, pretentiousness, and blame for creating a divisive environment.

So, it's a Catch-22. Don't leave D&D out of the conversation, since that's dismissing its player base. But also, keep D&D out of your mouth unless it's to heap praise upon it.

I would add: theorising D&D as it is played is primarily a theory of consumption. It belongs, I think, to economics and social psychology.

That's not the sort of theory I'm interested in, at least in the ENworld context. And so I don't post about it.

 

[Fenris-77]

Hmm, just to tack an idea on to my post upstream I'll expand a little on the idea that the system I know might have more weight than any real assessment of what that system is actually good at. The idea that D&D isn't an equal opportunity system in terms of the three pillars is, I think, a trivially obvious statement. However, set next to that we have the absolute plethora of posts, hacks, and questions about doing X with 5E. I think many people would rather hack what they know, or bolt on a widget, than buy, learn, and then sell to a group a whole new system. That's not a bad thing either, as 5E is an eminently hackable system IMO.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Sure. When we start talking 2 fairly generic games I think it's worth asking what one does different than the other that is driving it's success. Like, why has mcdonalds been more successful and continues to be more successful than most other fast food burger chains? Or getting back to RPG's. What's different about D&D and Savage Worlds and which of those things are propelling D&D's success over Savage Worlds?

Well, and to make it abundantly clear I'm not claiming this is the only factor, when one of the two has been the public face of the hobby for almost fifty years now I don't think you can at least write-off a big part of it being because one of the two is immensely more well known and has had a vastly longer time to generate an extent community. That doesn't mean there aren't people who genuinely and legitimately prefer the D&D structure for any number of reasons, but I at least think you have to make some effort to factor the prior issues in when assessing that. As I've noted before, if you're playing with groups for whom trying anything new is not a thing they normally do, and you get interested in Savage Worlds--then what? Do you abandon your extent game just to try it out? If you're not big into online play (and even with COVID, some people really aren't) can you even find somewhere to try it?

I think its just really easy for people who feel like D&D and its kin are being dismissed to ignore the really massive gravitational advantage it has these days, even if other games are, to some extent, more accessible than they once were.

 

[Thomas Shey]

D&D, IMO anyway, is maybe more specialized than it seems. That's not a bad thing, but I think that people overestimate the ability of the system to comfortably handle just about any kind of game. D&D is indelibly combat focused by the nature of its mechanics and subsystems, so styles that don't emphasize combat to some degree aren't really using the system to it's best advantage. 5E starts to chug a little when it gets too focused on social interaction and/or exploration (if you'll pardon the three pillar metaphor), as it does neither of those things particularly well. It does them, and not even badly exactly, just maybe not well.

While this is true, I'd argue that at least the vast majority of trad games aren't immensely less combat focused, even if their non-combat skills are a little better supported. Games that really lean into non-combat elements are still more the exception than the rule, even outside D&D and its kin.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I want to add musical numbers into D&D. Which terms should I use to make it so?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I want to add musical numbers into D&D. Which terms should I use to make it so?

 

[pemerton]

I guess I just don't understand why I should care why something is popular or not.

And adding to that: analysing why 5e is popular is not very relevant to helping me enjoy and improve my RPGing. Eg inspired by a recent post of yours I started a thread on Conflict in RPGing. In the OP is try to sketch what I see as some of the possibilities, including contrasts with other, narrative, media.

If someone has experience from 5e play that is relevant to thinking about conflict in RPGing, then by all means post away. But the relevance of that experience doesn't depend in any way on 5e being popular. I'm not asking for advice on how to make a commercially sellable RPG. I'm looking for ideas about how to play and GM my RPGs in ways that will give me an enjoyable experience.

This insufficient fandom bit is getting real thin.

When I was regularly buying and playing what WotC was selling - from around 2009 to around 2012 - I was regularly criticised for being a WotC "fan boy". Now that I don't buy and play what WotC is selling, I'm regularly criticised from being out of touch with what's popular and mainstream.

So I don't worry too much about it!

 

[pemerton]

But about why care if D&D is popular, because presumably that means it's doing something right and understanding what those things are is important.

What does "doing it right" mean? That's just a tautology for it's popular. And why is it important to understand why it's popular?

I mean, if I'm buying a bike maybe popularity is relevant - it can be a marker of quality for price. (Of course, it can also be a marker of branding success.)

If I'm buying clothes than I get why popularity is important, because (except during lockdowns) clothes are a social thing, and fitting in with what's normal or popular is part of that sociality.

But if I'm buying myself a CD, why is it relevant whether or not the performer or genre is popular? Isn't what's relevant whether or not I like it, or think it's worth learning to like it?

If you think 5e D&D has cleverly solved a particular technical problem in RPGing, then tell me about that. But the cleverness of the solution is not going to be shown or explained just by pointing out its popularity.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well, and to make it abundantly clear I'm not claiming this is the only factor, when one of the two has been the public face of the hobby for almost fifty years now I don't think you can at least write-off a big part of it being because one of the two is immensely more well known and has had a vastly longer time to generate an extent community. That doesn't mean there aren't people who genuinely and legitimately prefer the D&D structure for any number of reasons, but I at least think you have to make some effort to factor the prior issues in when assessing that. As I've noted before, if you're playing with groups for whom trying anything new is not a thing they normally do, and you get interested in Savage Worlds--then what? Do you abandon your extent game just to try it out? If you're not big into online play (and even with COVID, some people really aren't) can you even find somewhere to try it?

I think its just really easy for people who feel like D&D and its kin are being dismissed to ignore the really massive gravitational advantage it has these days, even if other games are, to some extent, more accessible than they once were.

All I’m suggesting is that saying it’s popular now because it’s always been popular doesn’t explain what made it popular to begin with. Note that 5e has become immensely more popular despite he previous edition being much less popular in comparison.