WotC Mike Mearls: "D&D Is Uncool Again"

Monster_Manual_Traditional_Cover_Art_copy.webp


In Mike Mearls' recent interview with Ben Riggs, he talks about how he feels that Dungeons & Dragons has had its moment, and is now uncool again. Mearls was one of the lead designers of D&D 5E and became the franchise's Creative Director in 2018. He worked at WotC until he was laid off in 2023. He is now EP of roleplaying games at Chaosium, the publisher of Call of Chulhu.

My theory is that when you look back at the OGL, the real impact of it is that it made D&D uncool again. D&D was cool, right? You had Joe Manganiello and people like that openly talking about playing D&D. D&D was something that was interesting, creative, fun, and different. And I think what the OGL did was take that concept—that Wizards and this idea of creativity that is inherent in the D&D brand because it's a roleplaying game, and I think those two things were sundered. And I don’t know if you can ever put them back together.

I think, essentially, it’s like that phrase: The Mandate of Heaven. I think fundamentally what happened was that Wizards has lost the Mandate of Heaven—and I don’t see them even trying to get it back.

What I find fascinating is that it was Charlie Hall who wrote that article. This is the same Charlie Hall who wrote glowing reviews of the 5.5 rulebooks. And then, at the same time, he’s now writing, "This is your chance because D&D seems to be stumbling." How do you square that? How do I go out and say, "Here are the two new Star Wars movies. They’re the best, the most amazing, the greatest Star Wars movies ever made. By the way, Star Wars has never been weaker. Now is the time for other sci-fi properties", like, to me that doesn’t make any sense! To me, it’s a context thing again.

Maybe this is the best Player’s Handbook ever written—but the vibes, the audience, the people playing these games—they don’t seem excited about it. We’re not seeing a groundswell of support and excitement. Where are the third-party products? That’s what I'd ask. Because that's what you’d think, "oh, there’s a gap", I mean remember before the OGL even came up, back when 3.0 launched, White Wolf had a monster book. There were multiple adventures at Gen Con. The license wasn’t even official yet, and there were already adventures showing up in stores. We're not seeing that, what’s ostensibly the new standard going forward? If anything, we’re seeing the opposite—creators are running in the opposite direction. I mean, that’s where I’m going.

And hey—to plug my Patreon—patreon.com/mikemearls (one word). This time last year, when I was looking at my post-Wizards options, I thought, "Well, maybe I could start doing 5E-compatible stuff." And now what I’m finding is…I just don’t want to. Like—it just seems boring. It’s like trying to start a hair metal band in 1992. Like—No, no, no. Everyone’s mopey and we're wearing flannel. It's Seattle and rain. It’s Nirvana now, man. It’s not like Poison. And that’s the vibe I get right now, yeah, Poison was still releasing albums in the ’90s. They were still selling hundreds of thousands or a million copies. But they didn’t have any of the energy. It's moved on. But what’s interesting to me is that roleplaying game culture is still there. And that’s what I find fascinating about gaming in general—especially TTRPGs. I don’t think we’ve ever had a period where TTRPGs were flourishing, and had a lot of energy and excitement around them, and D&D wasn’t on the upswing. Because I do think that’s what’s happening now. We’re in very strange waters where I think D&D is now uncool.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

How dare you be reasonable and clear headed, in stark wfiance of all our most cherished traditions.
I just like pointing out that probably 99% (hyperbole used) of posts here in the boards are just people talking about why D&D and WotC sucks, or why D&D and WotC are great... none of which actually accomplish anything of subtance. They are doing it purely to get the pat on the head from everyone else.

It's ego. That's all it is. Just ego that requires massaging.

And yes, I am one of the 99%. ;)
 

When I run "One D&D" vs "D&D Next," I get different results and the curves look closer to the point where I'm not sure there's anything to conclude here. (Sorry, blue and red are inverted in my graph.) WotC talked about "D&D Next" longer than "One D&D." Interest in both pseudo-brands waned as the real product plans came into focus.

As for BG3, this data strongly suggests that massive interest in the video game hasn't carried over to tabletop D&D in any appreciable way. That doesn't surprise me at all. I strongly believe that TTRPGs offer a completely different value proposition from CRPGs--one of my major disagreements with the WotC C-suite. (And FWIW, there is barely any D&D branding on BG3.)

I zapped the image to save space.

For the trend search, if it's not a topic that's preloaded in the search Google treats it like a typical text search. Putting the word in quotes slices out all the other searches that include those two words along with anything else. You can see the One D&D searches hitting years before the product launch because it's capturing a subset of overall D&D search that has D&D, the word one, and any other words.

The videogame -> TTRPG play thing is weird. When I worked on D&D, we'd see that coordinated marketing helped the video games and products that were tied in, but the opposite didn't seem to be true. Neverwinter would get a nice boost in users, but I think that was mostly TTRPGers picking it up. We didn't see Neverwinter players hopping into tabletop.
 

Marketing is all about managing expectations and putting your best foot forward. There's nothing wrong with it. Within the context of D&D, it's not like the product promise to cure a disease or make you healthier. There's a world of difference between a game company talking about a release in a way that broadcasts success and a company blatantly lying about the effectiveness of their blood testing technology.

In terms of the messaging around 5.5, I think the root problem goes back to something Ray talked about in another thread, where the team was stuck trying to build and promote a new edition that was not a new edition due to leadership meddling in the business.

I think D&D Next worked because it had a very clear story. The D&D community was fractured and fighting, so WotC stepped in to bring that community back together. There were a lot of questions on whether that was possible, and the release of 5e brought that story to a close. By and large, it worked.

With One D&D, the OGL and the mismatched directives made it impossible to create a clear story. The community was left to create its own narrative, and subsequent events made that story turn very negative. It's not clear what WotC is supposed to talk about after the release, because their story isn't clear to begin with.

I think the less they talk about the core rulebook shift in the future, the better. If I was in their shoes, I'd focus on 100% new content. If the old stuff works, just let it work. Don't keep bouncing the topic back up into people's attention. If anyone asks, just say it works with any 5e PHB. It's the same game.
 

Yes but the term weasl words implies they are being dishonest or at the least misleading... what is misleading about the statement?
I don’t think the word is ‘fastest’ selling but ‘product’. It’s probably more something along the lines of counting printed books, DDB, Roll 20, Fantasy Grounds and Foundry altogether when in 2014 digital did not even exist, and if they were comparing books only, they could not make the claim. Only a guess though
 

Who's claiming that the OGL mess had no effect on fans and the community? Nobody.

The D&D movie didn't tank. It wasn't successful enough for Hollywood to merit immediate talks of a sequel, due to complicated reasons, including less-than-stellar marketing, post-pandemic changes in movie-going, a sluggish economy, and competition with Mario.

Folks certainly boycotted the movie due to being upset with WotC . . . but enough folks to significantly affect the box office? I'd need reliable evidence for that one.

Folks certainly canceled their D&D Beyond accounts over upset with WotC . . . and it was certainly something that gave WotC a bit of panic in the short-term . . . but has it made a long-term difference in the growth of D&D Beyond? Again, I'd need reliable evidence for that claim too.
Demanding that people support their random claims with actual evidence? This is the Internet, sir!
 


Not an apt comparison at all, so far as I can tell. They didn't apply some kind of restrictive qualifier to it. Instead they used certain words that some people seem to think means they're being deceptive, but no one has provided any evidence of that.
Yeah there's marketing and then there's deceptive marketing and I'm trying to understand where the marketing speak around the PHB is being deceptive.
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top