• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Ben Riggs: 'The Golden Age of TTRPGs is Dead'

9781250278050.jpg

Ben Riggs, D&D historian and author of Slaying the Dragon: A Secret History of Dungeons & Dragons has posted an essay widely on social media entitled 'The Golden Age of TTRPGs is Dead'.

Note that Riggs uses the term '6th Edition' in this essay to refer to the 2024 core D&D rulebooks but says that "I am by no means married to the 6E nomenclature. It's just shorter than saying "the new books coming out this year" again and again and again."

We are watching a bright and special time in the TTRPG industry pass away before our eyes.

Around the start of the 2010s, we saw the dawn of a new golden age of tabletop roleplaying games. Since then, huge numbers of new players have found the hobby thanks to Stranger Things and actual plays like Critical Role. These new fans discovered a vibrant and thrumming TTRPG industry. There was the D20 fantasy family of games, dominated by D&D 5E, but rich with other games published under the OGL and the fertile depths of the Old School Renaissance. There were other mainstream publishers with storied brands, such as Call of Cthulhu, Deadlands, and Shadowrun. Lastly, there was a flourishing indie TTRPG scene that revolutionized what a TTRPG was, such as Apocalypse World.

This influx of gamers created a rising tide that lifted all boats. Novice gamers started out playing D&D 5E, yes, but went on to discover other great games. Because of the OGL, countless companies and designers could make money creating for D&D 5E. Because of the increasing number of gamers, even strange, freaky, or weird TTRPG ideas could find an audience. Have you heard of Apollo 47 Technical Manual the RPG?

But recent developments make clear that this radiant golden age is ending, as surely as the steam engine ended the age of sail, or hobbits bearing a ring ended the Third Age of Middle-earth.

The Doom of Our Time Approaches

In the wake of the Open Gaming License scandal of this past winter, a number of companies have successfully launched new TTRPGs intended to move them past the possibility of Wizards of the Coast ever threatening their businesses ever again. Some of the games grossed millions in crowdfunding campaigns. All have been positively reviewed.

Some cite the success of these games, which are intended to replace 5E/OGL content for the companies involved, as signs of the continued health and growth of the TTRPG industry.

They are not.

Rather, they are signs that the industry has peaked, and may be about to enter a decline.

Why?

After the Open Gaming License crisis of 2023, I became pessimistic about the damage the attempt to kill the OGL had done to our hobby. Others told me that the result of the crisis would be the blooming of a thousand flowers. Discouraged from using 5E by Wizards of the Coast’s attempt to kill the OGL, we would all get amazing new TTRPGs.

Maybe every single one of those new TTRPGs is going to be amazing. Maybe every one will be so fun and so captivating that lawns will go unmowed, pets unfed, and diapers unchanged because we are all so busy playing one of those games.

The problem is the TTRPG business is devilishly difficult. Only very rarely does the creation of a phenomenal game actually lead to financial success.

And the death of the OGL and the creation of these games has fundamentally changed the industry in such a way that it will be harder for those companies to make money in the future. A difficult business is about to become more difficult.

Consider the state of the industry a mere eighteen months ago; countless publishers, from MCDM and Kobold Press to Wizards of the Coast, were all making 5E material; it was easy to purchase products from multiple publishers because if you were running 5E, you could use the work of all these companies at your table; this made it easier for companies to share customers.

The new TTRPGs birthed by the OGL crisis are about to make that sort of customer sharing much, much harder. MCDM is publishing a TTRPG where you roll 2D6 to hit. Pathfinder’s 2nd edition remaster has no alignment and changed ability scores. Critical Role has dropped 5E like a dead cockroach and is playtesting its own new fantasy game, Daggerheart, which uses 2D12s, and a horror game named Candela Obscura.

And of course, there is the rising Godzilla that is 6th edition D&D, which scientists say will attack our shores in the spring of 2024. So far, there is no hint of an OGL for whatever that game will be.

The problem is, 5E was not just a game. It was a massive community of players. Countless companies could thrive making products for that community.

These new games are a shattering of that community. Instead of countless companies working to make your 5E game better, they are now asking you to become MCDM, or Darrington Press, or Paizo, or D&D 6E players. We are entering an era of division, faction, and balkanization.

The companies are now asking fans to choose sides. It also means that it is going to become more difficult for them to share customers. How interested will a Pathfinder fan be in an MCDM product? Or 6th edition? History suggests these sorts of barriers depress sales.

All This Has Happened Before

In the 1990s, TSR, the first company to publish Dungeons & Dragons, embarked on publishing setting after setting after setting for the game. By 1997, over a dozen settings were sold by the company. Fans stopped being fans of D&D, and instead became fans of a particular setting, and would only buy products for that setting. In 1997, TSR was near death as setting releases had plummeted from the hundreds of thousands of copies in the 1980s, to a mere 7,152 copies sold for the Birthright campaign setting in its first year of release. D&D was only saved from a terrible fate by Wizards of the Coast and their fat stacks of cash. They purchased TSR in the summer of 1997.

Some might say it is unfair to compare the different settings of the 90s to the different systems of today. Settings and systems are different, after all. And I do agree with the point. Switching systems is a BIGGER ASK than switching settings, therefore this change should have a LARGER IMPACT ON SALES.

And it is all happening again. The TTRPG audience is fracturing at the seams, and it will hurt sales and growth.

To focus only on MCDM, this current BackerKit is likely the most successful campaign the company will ever see. Every campaign after this will struggle to get the same sort of sales numbers as people slowly bleed away to the competition. Paizo will say check out our competing fantasy game. WotC will batter us all with a punishing wave of marketing trying to convince all of us of the newness and hotness of D&D 6th edition. (May it be both new and hot! But I have my doubts…) And fans will bleed away.

Furthermore, what will happen to the YouTube channel that is the foundation of MCDM’s success? Matt Colville is a master communicator and was a major evangelist for D&D in his channel’s heyday. He is passionate, intelligent, and inspiring. If Dungeon Masters could go into the locker room and get a pep talk from their coach in the middle of a game of D&D, that coach would be Matt Colville.

How much time is Colville going to devote to D&D now that it is essentially his competition?

In the past year, he has put out less than 20 videos on his channel. Those videos now range widely in topic, from TV reviews and interviews with language scholars to some D&D content, and a discussion of the creation of his new RPG. Go back five years, and Colville was putting out video after video after video of fantastic advice about running D&D, usually with 5E as the default. He dispensed some of the best advice on TTRPGs I have ever seen.

But it appears his content is fundamentally shifting, and he is asking that his audience go with him somewhere new.

Let’s look at MCDM’s recent efforts from the point of view of Wizards of the Coast. It is all ruin, disaster, and calamity. Master communicator and D&D fanatic Matt Colville has gone from convincing people to try D&D, and explaining how best to play D&D, to instead asking his 439,000 subscribers to stop playing D&D and play his game instead.

Not to mention that Critical Role—a huge reason for the recent surge in popularity of D&D—is likewise stopping their support of D&D, and asking their 2.1 million YouTube subscribers to start playing one of their two new games instead. I will not mention that, lest it further trouble the sleep of the D&D people at Wizards of the Coast… (What if 2.1 million people simply don’t buy 6th edition?)

In summary, all these events are interfering with the developments that created the golden age of TTRPGs. The removal of D&D from Critical Role likely hurts everyone involved. For years, Critical Role’s pitch was “Watch voice actors play D&D!” (A concept even my 80-year-old Aunt Sonja understands.) Now, the pitch is “Watch voice actors play Candela Obscura!”

But what is Candela Obscura? (If asked, Aunt Sonja might guess Candela Obscura was a potpourri scent.) The brand recognition that drove people to Critical Role is gone.

Simultaneously, the splintering of the D&D 5E community will make it harder for new designers to break into the industry, and harder for established companies to attract new customers. Growth in the TTRPG field will slow.

What the Future Might Look Like

And if I’m right, and this is how the golden age of TTRPGs dies, certain things follow naturally from these events. Here are my predictions—Prophecies?—that I may be held accountable for my rashness in writing all this down. I may be wrong, but if I’m right, the following things seem likely to pass:
  • Sixth edition will not do as well as 5th edition. Even more firings will follow. Wizards, which struggled to know what to do with D&D when it was a success (No Honor Among Thieves Starter Set? Really?) will be flummoxed by what to do with it when it is perceived as a failure.
  • No MCDM RPG crowdfunding campaign will ever do better than this initial campaign to fund its TTRPG.
  • Kobold Press’s post-OGL game, Tales of the Valiant, has been criticized for being too similar to 5E. For Kobold Press, I see two futures. Perhaps they will slowly bleed fans in the same way that MCDM will. But if D&D 6th edition is too different, and people really don’t want to move on from 5E, Kobold has positioned themselves to be the next Paizo, and Tales of the Valiant, the next Pathfinder.
  • The frequency of million-dollar TTRPG Kickstarters will decrease.
  • Attendance at major gaming conventions will plateau.
  • TTRPGs will become less interesting. Less exciting. Less creative. And despite all the new systems, it will also grow less diverse as it becomes even harder to make money in a TTRPG community broken into factions.
And so a golden age ends sputters out.

Unless something truly dramatic and game-changing hits the industry.

What could change this grim future? I suppose a group of publishers coalescing around a single system might change matters.

Or something truly inconceivable, something like giving 6th edition D&D an OGL, or putting the rules in the Creative Commons.

And after last month’s blood sacrifices upon the altar of profitability, who is even left at Wizards with the power and experience to advocate for such a thing?

It has been a grand era to be a gamer, one which we have been fortunate to live through.


There are a few inaccuracies in the essay--Critical Role does still play D&D, for example.

Numerous industry professionals have also posted thoughts in response, some agreeing and others disagreeing--you can see their comments on the original Facebook post, which is publicly viewable.

Mike Mearls, who was laid off from WotC a few weeks ago responded "WRONG! The age of fixating on one company and its decisions is dead. Now the audience is in the driver's seat. Let us hope they hit the gas."

Shannon Appelcline, of Designers & Dragons fame, said that he thought "the reports of the OGL's death are greatly exaggerated." He went on to say that fandom has kept WotC "from destroying the Golden Age".

Keith Strohm, D&D brand manager in the early 2000s, and later COO of Paizo, commented that it was "an exceptionally astute analysis" and that it was like "watching history repeat itself". He talked about the intent of the OGL and ended by saying "I don't want to be a prophet of doom, so I'm rooting for all of these companies, many of whom are either founded by or employ my friends and colleagues. However, I wouldn't launch a new system in this current environment."

Marvel Multiverse RPG designer Matt Forbeck said that "It might herald the end of a golden age of D&D, but other games may yet thrive".

Industry veteran Owen KC Stephens remarked "This is a well-considered, well-reasoned analysis. I disagree with almost all of it."

James Lowder, who directed various lines for TSR in the 80s and 90s, feels that "It's a Second Golden Age for game design and variety." He commented on WotC's possible plans for a digital-first edition of D&D--"If Hasbro/WotC tries to make the new edition a subscription-based, highly monetized walled garden, with radically increased direct-to-consumer sales, they will likely blight the market and the hobby--this is likely to happen whether they succeed or fail. This kind of move will roll back the overall audience for everyone and could well remove RPGs from many stores that rely on D&D sales in order to justify devoting the shelf space to RPGs."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I know. This has been debated on every other thread on this site for the past year and a half. I'm just saying that saying "6E" is a choice that he knows is loaded with baggage.
Is there a term that wouldn't be loaded? Even 50th anniversary edition has the term "edition", though it's probably less extreme than 6e. So does 2024 edition, or 5.5 or 5.25 edition.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Is there a term that wouldn't be loaded? Even 50th anniversary edition has the term "edition", though it's probably less extreme than 6e. So does 2024 edition, or 5.5 or 5.25 edition.
Maybe, but I think "2024 edition" is about as neutral as it gets, as it's a descriptor, and little more. If Riggs' goal was just to designate which version he was talking about, he could have done that.

But as his entire thesis is "this is the moment that will mean the end of the Age of Man," I don't think he's really predisposed to neutral descriptors here.
 

Is there a term that wouldn't be loaded? Even 50th anniversary edition has the term "edition", though it's probably less extreme than 6e. So does 2024 edition, or 5.5 or 5.25 edition.
No, none of those are more loaded than using 6E; which was the point. I'd maybe except the lazy excuse if it wasn't part of an essay that goes into some detail about the community. Are we to believe Mr Riggs cares and is this knowledgeable about the community, but not on this particular subject?
 


Maybe, but I think "2024 edition" is about as neutral as it gets, as it's a descriptor, and little more. If Riggs' goal was just to designate which version he was talking about, he could have done that.

But as his entire thesis is "this is the moment that will mean the end of the Age of Man," I don't think he's really predisposed to neutral descriptors here.
Didn't he refer to Gygax as "St. Gary" in his book?
 

Yes and no. Choosing 6E over "2024 edition" (which he could do via find and replace) is taking a stand. And it certainly lines up with his underlying thesis that the new books are a big breaking point, which many people, on all sides of the issue, would take issue with.
I'm not so sure Riggs is taking a stand on this issue . . . how much of a change the 2024 books are going to be.

We've hashed this out to death on the forums, both how different we think the new books are going to be and what we should call them. But how dialed into all of that is Riggs? If he's fully aware, then going with "6E" is definitely a choice, one that turns me off from his entire post. That was certainly my first impression.

But, even though he's part of the industry and writes about it, that doesn't mean he's as aware of forum drama as we all are here on ENWorld. I have friends like that, who are aware we're getting new books, and just assumed they would be a 6th Edition, and are completely unaware of all the forum drama over this.
 

Many here are really making too much of the author's shorthand "6e" to stand-in for "5.5e," "the 2024 revision," "OneDND," or whatever you want to call it. It's nitpicking of the highest order. If you don't like it, do a "Find and Replace" and change the nomenclature to fit whatever term you prefer. Let's discuss the actual issues he raises instead of this surface level word choice, which he has already explained earlier.
A whole new edition with no CC or OGL license would be HUGELY different than what we are actually getting, so no, this really isn't a nitpick. Calling what is coming 6e is extremely meaningful, albeit incorrect,
 

good article and I think captures a lot of the sentiments and anxieties about our hobby that I have.
one interesting point is that recently Matt Coville posted a video on 'Your edition is changing' which also mirrors industry wise what is happening right now. I have really (nor does my group) NO interest in changing our D&D game to any other system. As much as I admire MCDM I have no immediate desire to switch to his game. I too fear that history is repeating itself and it is inevitable. TSR was known in its heyday to be highly litigious and it fractured the community, but then the community rallied again only for it to repeat itself. The good thing about being as old as I am is that this naughty word doesn't matter to me. I always feared that D&D was becoming too popular and Hasbro got greedy.
My predictions:
My group and I will continue to play D&D 5e and adopt the 2024 revisions;
the 2024 revisions are not going to fundamentally change anything in 5e, but it will not sell as well as the 2014 rules;
My other group and I will continue to play Vampire 5e and Werwolf 5e;
I will go to GenCon for the first time since Covid;
I will buy things to support the games Im currently playing.

Oh, and yeah, I'll keep buying dice.
 

Since there's no such thing as "6th edition D&D", the author's entire thesis sort of collapses.
there have been many editions, though if you discount .5 revisions there are technically 6:

Dungeons & Dragons version history
1974 Dungeons & Dragons—original edition
1977 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons—1st Edition Dungeons & Dragons—Holmes Basic

1981 Dungeons & Dragons—BX version / Moldvay Basic
1983 Dungeons & Dragons—BECMI version / Mentzer Basic
1989 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition
1991 Dungeons & Dragons—Rules Cyclopedia version
1995 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition—Revised
2000 Dungeons & Dragons—3rd Edition
2003 Dungeons & Dragons—3rd Edition Revised (v.3.5)
2008 Dungeons & Dragons—4th Edition
2010 Dungeons & Dragons Essentials (compatible with 4th Ed.)
2014 Dungeons & Dragons—5th Edition
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top