D&D General D&D's Utter Dominance Is Good or Bad Because...

[Thomas Shey]

The thing to take away from this discussion is, there's nothing more important than getting as many people in the world as possible to play WotC D&D, and anyone with different priorities needs to figure that out, apparently.

Right?

Well, as I've said, there's a certain zero-sum view of available player pool that will always view--sometimes without even being aware of it--any discussion of this nature as a mindspace war.

 

[OB1]

I think as long as competitors create systems that are primarily Medieval/Renaissance Fantasy based, they'll have difficulty with pulling away market share from D&D. That said, I think a good Sci-Fantasy or Modern Superhero Fantasy system would have a shot at capturing total TTRPG market share away from D&D (and likely grow the entire TTRPG space in the process). Horror based fantasy does this a bit, but IMO that genre is a bit too niche to pull significant interest.

That to me is the more interesting discussion than whether it's good/bad that D&D has such a large share of the market.

 

[Minigiant]

I won't say that's not true, or that they may not be trying to horn into some other extent game's turf (the last two I backed were clearly trying to eat Shadowrun's lunch), but even the ones that do are usually trying to grab part of D&D's market they perceive as poorly served. Basically, only in the D&D-sphere does everyone think D&D is well-designed for every fantasy campaign.

I'm not saying D&D is best designed for every fantasy campaign.

I am saying that is precisely why other game publishers should attempt to get in on being gateways instead of fully and obviously attempting to eat D&D's lunch. Or the lunch of some other RPG that already bit D&D's lunch.

Because that just fuels D&D's dominance.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Winning is nice, but I don't have less fun if I don't. Maybe that's just me.

Nah. That is ok. It is totally ok not to win all the time. But a hard earned victory is the best.

 

[Oofta]

The thing to take away from this discussion is, there's nothing more important than getting as many people in the world as possible to play WotC D&D, and anyone with different priorities needs to figure that out, apparently.

Right?

No.

 

[Minigiant]

I think as long as competitors create systems that are primarily Medieval/Renaissance Fantasy based, they'll have difficulty with pulling away market share from D&D. That said, I think a good Sci-Fantasy or Modern Superhero Fantasy system would have a shot at capturing total TTRPG market share away from D&D (and likely grow the entire TTRPG space in the process). Horror based fantasy does this a bit, but IMO that genre is a bit too niche to pull significant interest.

That to me is the more interesting discussion than whether it's good/bad that D&D has such a large share of the market.

You'd think a big Superhero RPG would break out with streaming show and fan animations to pull itself into the mainstream as groups get together to fight named supervillians and villain teams. Just books and books of Rogues Galleries.

 

[MichaelSomething]

D&D may cast the largest shadow, but those among the underground of indie TTRPGs do have small places where they can meet and play together. Those places and games would certainly welcome your support.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Look at The One Ring and its 5E counter part. Every review I’ve read says the TOR version emulates Tolkien’s world better. They could have just as easily just made a 5E version.

Yeah, I wish more companies were like that.

 

[Kurotowa]

I'm not saying D&D is best designed for every fantasy campaign.

I am saying that is precisely why other game publishers should attempt to get in on being gateways instead of fully and obviously attempting to eat D&D's lunch. Or the lunch of some other RPG that already bit D&D's lunch.

I'm not sure how viable that is as a growth strategy. For over a decade, video game companies went to great expense to launch a "World of Warcraft killer" that would supplant it at the top of the lucrative MMORPG market. Every single one of them failed. The Network Effect says that people aren't just using the dominant market entry because it's the best, but because everyone else is using it. So being just a little better isn't enough to trigger a mass migration. Especially not when the big dog is offering a buffet of options and most competitors can only manage being better at one thing at the cost of something else.

The closest thing that's come to killing WoW is WoW itself. Or rather, the company that makes WoW growing bloated and corrupt and being ruthlessly milked for monetization by a corporate owner that doesn't care about the players. Which is usually how it goes. The big dog grows ill and decrepit, users start to drift away or look into alternatives, and that leaves an opening for a vigorous young rival to move in. The last time I saw a new big dog claim a throne purely on overwhelming merit was when Google first hit the search engine scene 25 years ago. And Google's looking a little unhealthy these days, with the search results junked up by ads and SEO and AI gibberish.

It's nice to dream of being king, but it's usually better to plan around the big dog existing than plotting for its downfall. Those opportunities come rarely and unpredictably, and are usually more due to internal rot than external pressure. Instead, find a niche the big dog isn't serving well and focus on it. Pick a genre or playstyle that D&D doesn't cover and deliver it. I mean, that's why Pathfinder is doing as well as it does.

 

[OB1]

I'm not sure how viable that is as a growth strategy. For over a decade, video game companies went to great expense to launch a "World of Warcraft killer" that would supplant it at the top of the lucrative MMORPG market. Every single one of them failed. The Network Effect says that people aren't just using the dominant market entry because it's the best, but because everyone else is using it. So being just a little better isn't enough to trigger a mass migration. Especially not when the big dog is offering a buffet of options and most competitors can only manage being better at one thing at the cost of something else.

The closest thing that's come to killing WoW is WoW itself. Or rather, the company that makes WoW growing bloated and corrupt and being ruthlessly milked for monetization by a corporate owner that doesn't care about the players. Which is usually how it goes. The big dog grows ill and decrepit, users start to drift away or look into alternatives, and that leaves an opening for a vigorous young rival to move in. The last time I saw a new big dog claim a throne purely on overwhelming merit was when Google first hit the search engine scene 25 years ago. And Google's looking a little unhealthy these days, with the search results junked up by ads and SEO and AI gibberish.

It's nice to dream of being king, but it's usually better to plan around the big dog existing than plotting for its downfall. Those opportunities come rarely and unpredictably, and are usually more due to internal rot than external pressure. Instead, find a niche the big dog isn't serving well and focus on it. Pick a genre or playstyle that D&D doesn't cover and deliver it. I mean, that's why Pathfinder is doing as well as it does.

As long as it's in the same genre, the problem will persist, but EVE online has successfully captured a big share of the MMORPG market by appealing to a completely different group with a different type of game. That's why I'm wondering why no one is seriously going after a Modern Superhero or Sci-Fi TTRPG system.