D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[Red Castle]

That would be a great plan. I really wish WotC was following it.

I believe they do. I believe they still care about the older players. Asking the opinion of the community via polls shows a will to listen to the current player base. Not changing for a new edition by making the future changes compatible is another way to try to keep the older players. You can be against their changes, doesn't mean that WotC doesn't care about the older players, at least what they believe is the majority.

A game, be it a TTRPG or Wargame, always evolve. If it didn't we would still be playing the very first edition of DnD and Warhammer 40k would not be going to its 10th edition. Every time there is a change in edition, a game will lose some players, sometimes more than other, but the idea is always to win more than you lose. Now, when your game have millions and millions of players worldwide, you can't please everyone, it's impossible. But if the new editions didn't also have the older players in mind, they would have just died or went obscure, you can't rely entirely on a particular age group of player. But since the company can't realistically please everyone, it's natural that every time a game evolve, some players will feel left out. There is a reason why even though there is 5 edition of DnD, there's still players playing older editions. You also have to face the reality that some players just won't move to a new edition because they have been buying hundreds of dollars of book, they don't want to 'lose' their investment and start again.

So by making OneDnD still compatible with 5th edition, being an evolution of the game and not starting at zero, I believe it shows that they do care about the older players, or they would just scrap all that and move on to 6th edition, like they did with 3rd, 4th and 5th in the past. And yet, everytime they moved on from a past edition, there was always players that didn't want to make the switch, but still the playerbase continue to grew. Even the 4th edition that is considered by a part of the community as a failure in fact sold really well, just not as much as WotC expected.

So, even though the game is moving in a direction you personally don't like, doesn't mean that WotC doesn't care about the older players. You might not just be in the majority. And it's okay, a game can evolve without you. I mean, 4th edition is my personal favorite, doesn't mean that they were not thinking about older players when they switched to 5th edition, even though I've been playing since the late 80s. And judging by the success of 5th edition, I believe they made the right call.

So, unless you think that a game should never evolve and get stuck in time, I do believe that they currently have both the older and new players in mind and really try to please both.

 

[Maxperson]

So $120 x 12 = $1,440 per year vs. $200 in books per year. That gives our teenager $1,240 to spend on non-D&D stuff. What am I missing. It seems you are saying teens don’t have the money for D&D while also proving the do?!

The links I provided show the myriad of things that teens spend money on. $1440 doesn't even begin to cover the multitude things that they want and spend money on.

Teens have a new favorite restaurant — and it’s not Starbucks

Chick-fil-A has unseated Starbucks as teens' favorite restaurant.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Maxperson]

What makes you think the majority of teens don’t work? And why would doing chores make any difference?

Why do people keep insisting that the older gamers matter? This is the drum that’s been beaten since 1999 when 3e released. DnD has always been primarily a game for the 16-25 crowd. Always has been and always will be.

Because the older gamers outnumber the younger games 60/40. 75/25 if you're looking at teens only. Teens cannot be driving the money to WotC. They just don't have enough money to do it, especially with their significantly lower numbers.

 

[mamba]

This isn't about restrictions. And the fact that you're happy with what they're putting out now doesn't make your opinion any more true than mine.

sure, but at that point it becomes an ‘I do not like the changes’ thing. You have not demonstrated that young / new players like them while old / existing ones do not

 

[Parmandur]

interested in seeing a link to that information. It wasn't that way at all at the movie I attended, but that really is a small sample size and can't be used as reliable. Do you have a link?

Sure:

"More than 60 percent of ticket buyers were male, while the largest age group was 18-24 (31 percent). Those between ages 25 and 34 followed at 28 percent."

Redirect Notice

I'm not going to keep arguing about the realities of companies marketing to younger people, bit there are resources that you can get through your local library that can give hard data on market research.

 

[Maxperson]

and yet you have not offered proof of it not being spent, your statistics only show that not everyone does / most don’t buy everything. That incidentally is true for every age group…

Okay fine. If you want to believe that the 25% of players who are teens are outspending the other 75% that have much more money to spend, you can do that.

 

[Parmandur]

I can’t name a single DCC artist, but then again most of the D&D artist I know are from 1e!

Tobe fair, a lot of DCC artists are too, like Erol Otis.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I believe they do. I believe they still care about the older players. Asking the opinion of the community via polls shows a will to listen to the current player base. Not changing for a new edition by making the future changes compatible is another way to try to keep the older players. You can be against their changes, doesn't mean that WotC doesn't care about the older players, at least what they believe is the majority.

A game, be it a TTRPG or Wargame, always evolve. If it didn't we would still be playing the very first edition of DnD and Warhammer 40k would not be going to its 10th edition. Every time there is a change in edition, a game will lose some players, sometimes more than other, but the idea is always to win more than you lose. Now, when your game have millions and millions of players worldwide, you can't please everyone, it's impossible. But if the new editions didn't also have the older players in mind, they would have just died or went obscure, you can't rely entirely on a particular age group of player. But since the company can't realistically please everyone, it's natural that every time a game evolve, some players will feel left out. There is a reason why even though there is 5 edition of DnD, there's still players playing older editions. You also have to face the reality that some players just won't move to a new edition because they have been buying hundreds of dollars of book, they don't want to 'lose' their investment and start again.

So by making OneDnD still compatible with 5th edition, being an evolution of the game and not starting at zero, I believe it shows that they do care about the older players, or they would just scrap all that and move on to 6th edition, like they did with 3rd, 4th and 5th in the past. And yet, everytime they moved on from a past edition, there was always players that didn't want to make the switch, but still the playerbase continue to grew. Even the 4th edition that is considered by a part of the community as a failure in fact sold really well, just not as much as WotC expected.

So, even though the game is moving in a direction you personally don't like, doesn't mean that WotC doesn't care about the older players. You might not just be in the majority. And it's okay, a game can evolve without you. I mean, 4th edition is my personal favorite, doesn't mean that they were not thinking about older players when they switched to 5th edition, even though I've been playing since the late 80s. And judging by the success of 5th edition, I believe they made the right call.

So, unless you think that a game should never evolve and get stuck in time, I do believe that they currently have both the older and new players in mind and really try to please both.

Well, as you say, the game has definitely evolved in a direction I don't like. The only part of that that's really upsetting to me (apart from what they've done with the settings), is that the conversation has moved on to the next shiny thing for most folks, and I really like talking about D&D. Now I'm inundated with talk about the playtest, and upcoming WotC products, and VTTs, and poster after poster talking about how great something I really dislike actually is. And I get that my opinion doesn't matter, but it still hurts.

 

[mamba]

It doesn't matter how you slice it, 40% < 60% and that 60% spends more money than the 40% because it has a lot more to spend. If you're going to be teen only like your argument above implies, then you end up with 25% < 75%. It's impossible for that 25% of 17 and under players to be outspending the other 75%.

new players need stuff old players already have, so it is not impossible. By now you are conflating several things though, new and young, old and grognard.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sure, but if you focus on the young people with no money to the exclusion of the older ones with money, you go out of business. A good mix skewed towards those with money is what you need.

Um…stuff made for kids is perhaps the most successful type of “petty things no one needs but folks do enjoy having” in all of retail.

MtG makes most of its sales from casuals who never try to get into any tournaments. You think those are mostly middle aged and older?

When were you last in an FLGS? Who knows where the kids get the cash, but they do be buying D&D books, minis, dice, and a soda and chips while they’re at it.