D&D 5E D&D and who it's aimed at

[beancounter]

Marketing to 12 year olds is different than marketing to 8 year olds.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Marketing to 12 year olds is different than marketing to 8 year olds.

yes but marketing to a bunch of 40 and 50 somethings with the maturity of a 12 year old and the sense of humor of an 8 year old (poop jokes) will never be a bad idea.

 

[Malmuria]

I think we make/are making assumptions about what kind of material is for kids (“disneyfied” ) and what kind of material is for adults (“grimdark”). The reason that claims of what is “old school” never have coherence is that there were already a variety of styles and aestheics present from the 70s onward. Indeed, fantasy itself, not matter how dark in tone, was and probably is regarded as an inherently childish genre. This is true of the source material as well: faerie stories can be twisted and malevolent and gory horror can be cartoonish and campy.

WOTC does make one product explicitly aimed at children, the Young Adventurer’s Guides, and there is no effort in those books to make the material cute or fluffy; it’s basically all the classic tropes along with standard 5e art.

If I see any trend, it’s to make 5e more of an anything-game. Meaning, one that can supposedly handle any kind of genre, and therefore appeal not to a different demographic, but more demographics.

 

[Scribe]

• Candlekeep Mysteries - weak adventures with next to nothing to do in them.
• Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft - rebooted Ravenloft that misses the mark of the original campaign setting.
• Wild Beyond the Witchlight - displacer beast kittens and talk your way out of fluffy challenges.
• Fizban's Treasury of Dragons - boring book about the most boring creatures in the game.
• Strixhaven: A Curriculum of Chaos - Harry Potter by way of modern American college life
• Call of the Netherdeep - I'm not into Critical Role
• Journeys Through the Radiant Citadel - More cuddly kittens and adorableness
• Spelljammer: Adventures in Space - Was a joke in the 1980s. Still going to be a joke.
• Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen / Warriors of Krynn - Boring campaign setting about the most boring creatures in the game.

I found Fizban's, pretty great. Spelljammer, I'll at least tune into the spoilers and marketing and give it a chance.

Candlekeep was a nope.
Ravenloft, was a nope.
Witchlight, was a nope.
Strix was a 'yeet out the window' nope.
Netherdeep looks kind of cool.
Radient Citadel, nope.
Dragonlance, will depend on how much is retconned.

So, 1 yes, 2 maybes, 5 nopes.

/shrug

Thats what happens as we age, we no longer become the primary demographic.

 

[Morrus]

I found Fizban's, pretty great. Spelljammer, I'll at least tune into the spoilers and marketing and give it a chance.

Candlekeep was a nope.
Ravenloft, was a nope.
Witchlight, was a nope.
Strix was a 'yeet out the window' nope.
Netherdeep looks kind of cool.
Radient Citadel, nope.
Dragonlance, will depend on how much is retconned.

So, 1 yes, 2 maybes, 5 nopes.

/shrug

Thats what happens as we age, we no longer become the primary demographic.

Your last sentence doesn't have anything to do with rest of your post? Unless you're meaning is that all the books you didn't like were because they were intended for a young demographic? In which case, that was my whole point: they're not.

 

[Scribe]

Your last sentence doesn't have anything to do with rest of your post? Unless you're meaning is that all the books you didn't like were because they were intended for a young demographic? In which case, that was my whole point: they're not.

No, but I dont think they are for me. 'Young' at my stage of the game could be 20-30 year olds.

Not children, but certainly not me, if that makes sense.

EDIT: I actually had this discussion with my soon to be 18 year old son last night. Is he a child? Well no, hes not 8. Is he a child to me? May as well be.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I find it interesting that while there are constant complaints that D&D is being 'Disneyfied'

I always find this pretty funny because the very first adventure I wrote and ran, in 1989, was loosely inspired by an episode of The Gummi Bears (which for those who didn't see it, was inexplicably kinda-okay-for-kids-cartoon medieval fantasy!).

Which was by Disney.

So I guess I've always run "Disneyfied" D&D! For 30+ years!

 

[Greg Benage]

I don't really see evidence for the age-based targeting, to be honest. I feel like all the products they've released in the last couple years should appeal to players of all ages. I guess adventure-wise, Candlekeep, Witchlight, Strixhaven, Netherdeep has been a bit of a slump for me, but I wouldn't describe it as "Disneyfied" and I don't think my lack of interest can be attributed to age.

 

[Morrus]

No, but I dont think they are for me. 'Young' at my stage of the game could be 20-30 year olds.

Not children, but certainly not me, if that makes sense.

EDIT: I actually had this discussion with my soon to be 18 year old son last night. Is he a child? Well no, hes not 8. Is he a child to me? May as well be.

I'm not sure why you're discussing the definition of a child? My question was why you linked your not liking a whole bunch of products to your age?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I always find this pretty funny because the very first adventure I wrote and ran, in 1989, was loosely inspired by an episode of The Gummi Bears (which for those who didn't see it, was inexplicably kinda-okay-for-kids-cartoon medieval fantasy!).

Which was by Disney.

So I guess I've always run "Disneyfied" D&D! For 30+ years!

Ah, but you aren't Official D&D.

Official D&D must always support what the player, as an individual, wants it to support. To not support that is to dumb down or "kiddify" or "Disneyfy" it.

Meanwhile, all the other people frustrated about it not supporting their interests are just being selfish and petulant, because the game's success means every single thing in it is extremely popular and directly responsible for that success. (Unless it's multiclassing or Hexblades. Those are horrible, awful, just the worst and it's a trampling of the very spirit of the game that they were included.)

Official support is necessary for all the things each poster personally values, because otherwise they aren't part of the game, and totally unnecessary for everything each poster does not value, since no one ever needed official support to DM.