D&D General Why grognards still matter

As I said above, not only are younger players far greater in number, they're also potential life-long gamers (and consumers). We--that is, anyone who has been playing for 10++ years, are already a bird in hand, but...the bird in hand shouldn't be forgotten about and still matters.
Regardless of what the actual numbers are, older players (25+) still make up a significant percentage of purchasing, whether that is 25% or 55% of sales.
I believe that older players still matter and buy a significant amount of product - at least enough to "matter."
I don't really understand what you are advocating.

I mean, if it's true that "grognards" (however broadly defined) are buying stuff from WotC, then what are you suggesting that WotC should be doing differently? In particular, what should WotC be doing differently to acknowledge that these customers matter?

If the answer is nothing - that WotC should just do what they do and rely on selling to completionist grognards as well as other customers - then what is your point? If the answer is something, then what do you think that something is? And how do you know that WotC is not already at the point where it can't cater more to grognards without losing a larger volume of sales to other customers?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't really understand what you are advocating.

I mean, if it's true that "grognards" (however broadly defined) are buying stuff from WotC, then what are you suggesting that WotC should be doing differently? In particular, what should WotC be doing differently to acknowledge that these customers matter?

If the answer is nothing - that WotC should just do what they do and rely on selling to completionist grognards as well as other customers - then what is your point? If the answer is something, then what do you think that something is? And how do you know that WotC is not already at the point where it can't cater more to grognards without losing a larger volume of sales to other customers?
I suspect that it’s about WotC throwing away all “outdated” modes of play and primarily focusing on character development, instead of offering a true toolbox for a DM to use and play with, ala 2e or 3e. Variant rules! One could argue that 3e was all about character development, but it also provided a wealth of tools and ways to customize your game. 5e out of the box…not so much.
 

I suspect that it’s about WotC throwing away all “outdated” modes of play and primarily focusing on character development, instead of offering a true toolbox for a DM to use and play with, ala 2e or 3e. Variant rules! One could argue that 3e was all about character development, but it also provided a wealth of tools and ways to customize your game. 5e out of the box…not so much.
This is of course, completely wrong. Early D&D was simple and rules lite. Why Grandmaster Grogs would want anything as overcomplicated and slow as 3e? That's the sort of thing Johnny-come-lately whippersnapper Journeyman Grogs like!
 

I don't really understand what you are advocating.

I mean, if it's true that "grognards" (however broadly defined) are buying stuff from WotC, then what are you suggesting that WotC should be doing differently? In particular, what should WotC be doing differently to acknowledge that these customers matter?

If the answer is nothing - that WotC should just do what they do and rely on selling to completionist grognards as well as other customers - then what is your point? If the answer is something, then what do you think that something is? And how do you know that WotC is not already at the point where it can't cater more to grognards without losing a larger volume of sales to other customers?

Exactly. When making a statement, there are really only two things that can be the goal. One is to simply present a neat statement, "Oh hey, did you hear that there is a planet that rains diamonds due to atmospheric pressure?" Neat. Cool to know.

Otherwise, you are making a statement to lead into an action... and the action was left unstated in this case, meaning we just have a neat statement that older people buy things.
 

I suspect that it’s about WotC throwing away all “outdated” modes of play and primarily focusing on character development, instead of offering a true toolbox for a DM to use and play with, ala 2e or 3e. Variant rules! One could argue that 3e was all about character development, but it also provided a wealth of tools and ways to customize your game. 5e out of the box…not so much.

You could make a car as complicated and customizable as a tank. That will not help you sell more cars. That will not appeal to people looking to buy cars.

Dungeons and Dragons is a weird game, in this respect. The point of DnD rules is largely to codify specific actions. In some other systems, I can run a goblin, an orc, a demon, an ancient dragon, an acient dragon having consumed a demon who is currently pretending to be a goblin, a tribble... anything I want, all using the same simple rules. DnD takes each of those things, and gives it unique rules. But at the end of the day... you simply cannot have a single rule set that covers everything.

And this creates a weird disconnect I think, where people are pissed at WoTC, which is like twenty people at this point, for not creating literally every single unique rule. And I find it weird, because most people seem to have very specific, very clear things they want from these rules.... but won't be happy unless WoTC makes them. And yeah, even the people who scoff at that and claim they don't care, you still come and complain month after month after month that WoTC isn't doing it right. They hold up the game that gives them the precise rules they want, and claim that this is the new DnD killer that will topple WoTC who dared not make this specific thing that they wanted.

I know this is throwing a live grenade into a fireworks factory, but consider just for a moment the gnashing of teeth that happened when "Drow" was no longer a statblock, and how almost immediately multiple voices were quieted when WoTC announced they were going to have an evil drow statblock in a future book. Meanwhile, the entire time, everyone who was so pissed off knew EXACTLY what the "Drow" statblock they wanted looked like. They could list every ability of the drow, the proper stats for them, their proficiency bonus, what equipment they used and their average hp... but they were not satisfied because they couldn't turn to a page, printed by WoTC specifically for the 2024 Revision, that had that statblock already created for them.

DnD 5e is highly customizable, incredibly so actually because the math is very very solid. Hundreds of people have created custom content for it, ranging every genre, desire, and niche thing you might care to imagine... but human imagination is infinite, and just like a coastline, the more you try and break it down into smaller and smaller bespoke rules, the more infinite it becomes. WoTC cannot create everything. WoTC plus every homebrewer on the planet, from those selling hardcover rulebooks to those on reddit making posts about super vampire anti-paladins cannot create literally everything. Give me a few minutes googling, and I could play a pretty pony wielding an anti-material rifle fighting Mech-Dinosaurs while trying to stop Unicron from eating the planet. Those rules already exist.

This isn't to say I don't understand. I do. Making the tools to make the things you want to make is time consuming and annoying. It is so much easier to have someone make it for you. I will still advocate for an actually functional crafting system for this game from WoTC, so I can stop cobbling together a rule set then trying to sell a DM to use it. Be really nice. But I don't think WoTC has done anything WRONG by not creating a better crafting system. Because in the end... the game is what we make of it. And they have made something that is going to LAST.
 

And this creates a weird disconnect I think, where people are pissed at WoTC, which is like twenty people at this point, for not creating literally every single unique rule. And I find it weird, because most people seem to have very specific, very clear things they want from these rules.... but won't be happy unless WoTC makes them. And yeah, even the people who scoff at that and claim they don't care, you still come and complain month after month after month that WoTC isn't doing it right. They hold up the game that gives them the precise rules they want, and claim that this is the new DnD killer that will topple WoTC who dared not make this specific thing that they wanted.

I agree 100%. You put it way more eloquently than the post I was writing.

People want their specific vision and anything that is not their specific vision is bad. We see this in these forums over and over again. Every time 5e comes up we see people scream from rooftops about how bad it is. It doesn't matter how many people enjoy the system, if it's not my preferred system it's a bad system. The fact others seem to enjoy it, in large numbers, must be the product of either ignorance or black magic, because it can't be good. It can't be good because it doesn't match what I want.

We see this exact argument on repeat. Even down to the claims of ignorance being the reason. All the while, WotC continues to follow the masses as you so eloquently put. knowing full well that other publishers can handle more fringe uses of the system. To WotC, chasing the dragon of trying to please everyone is a waste of time and money when so many third parties will do that for them.
 

I agree 100%. You put it way more eloquently than the post I was writing.

People want their specific vision and anything that is not their specific vision is bad. We see this in these forums over and over again. Every time 5e comes up we see people scream from rooftops about how bad it is. It doesn't matter how many people enjoy the system, if it's not my preferred system it's a bad system. The fact others seem to enjoy it, in large numbers, must be the product of either ignorance or black magic, because it can't be good. It can't be good because it doesn't match what I want.

We see this exact argument on repeat. Even down to the claims of ignorance being the reason. All the while, WotC continues to follow the masses as you so eloquently put. knowing full well that other publishers can handle more fringe uses of the system. To WotC, chasing the dragon of trying to please everyone is a waste of time and money when so many third parties will do that for them.
It can't be good enough for that person if it doesn't have what that person wants. It may be be good enough for lots of other folks. But why would that matter to the person for whom it isn't?
 

Because I have never seen a self-identified DnD Grognard state that they want WoTC to bring Glorantha into the fold. Or to bring back the Nentir Vale. Do you think I pulled the examples of Mystara, Birthright and Darksun out of the Aether? Those are real things, really proposed, by real people, on this forum. Does that mean they spit upon other settings before grinding them into the mud with disdain? No. I never said that, that you projecting your biases onto me. However, none of the self-identified Grognards proposed DnD should make a new setting featuring cutesy animal people in a forest. None of them proposed a Miyazaki inspired setting. Once exposed to them, they may like the ideas, but they did not COME UP with the ideas.
I'm missing something here, I think. Are you saying grogs don't (generally) want new settings? And if not, what are you saying? :)

For my part, I suppose I'm a grognard and yet I'd have no problem with WotC bringing back Nentir Vale as a setting and-or points of light as a setting concept. Or Glorantha, but they might have a hard time getting their mitts on it as someone else owns the copyright; ditto Golarion, which also has quite a bit going for it as a generic setting.

Highly-specialized settings such as your ideas of cutesy animals in a forest or Miyazaki-inspired are only going to appeal to a niche within whichever part of the gaming population you look at, be it the grog subset or the "brand-new-to-it" subset or the greater gaming community as a whole.
 

I agree 100%. You put it way more eloquently than the post I was writing.

People want their specific vision and anything that is not their specific vision is bad. We see this in these forums over and over again. Every time 5e comes up we see people scream from rooftops about how bad it is. It doesn't matter how many people enjoy the system, if it's not my preferred system it's a bad system. The fact others seem to enjoy it, in large numbers, must be the product of either ignorance or black magic, because it can't be good. It can't be good because it doesn't match what I want.
To a point, this is true.

There's also the many who enjoy 5.xe simply because it's what they have, and-or have been exposed to, without looking at it very deeply or really considering its strengths and weaknesses.

This is similar to 1982 when all kinds of people really enjoyed 1e because it's what they had, or had been exposed to, even though hindsight now tells us the game design itself had some rather large holes and flaws in it.

The difference today is that while anyone who cares enough to look can find some holes and flaws in 5.xe design, we have much better and more immediate means of communication to discuss, analyze, and propose fixes for those issues; and in arenas much bigger than our own home tables.
 

I suspect that it’s about WotC throwing away all “outdated” modes of play and primarily focusing on character development, instead of offering a true toolbox for a DM to use and play with, ala 2e or 3e. Variant rules! One could argue that 3e was all about character development, but it also provided a wealth of tools and ways to customize your game. 5e out of the box…not so much.
I don't really agree with your characterisation of those earlier editions of D&D . . . but putting this to one side, how are WotC's decisions about what to publish some sort of evidence that grognards still matter?

It can't be good enough for that person if it doesn't have what that person wants. It may be be good enough for lots of other folks. But why would that matter to the person for whom it isn't?
And ditto to this - the fact that what WotC is doing doesn't matter to someone who doesn't care for it may be true (though to be honest it does seem to matter to many of those people); but why would this be evidence that grognards still matter to WotC?
 

Remove ads

Top