D&D General Why grognards still matter

[Chaosmancer]

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?

If someone is complaining that a vegan taco joint doesn't sell beef tacos... it isn't the fault of the restaurant, or a sign that their tacos are bad. And if you sit down and harass the wait staff every week... you are no longer just expressing your mild opinion on your taste.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm missing something here, I think. Are you saying grogs don't (generally) want new settings? And if not, what are you saying?

How are you defining want? Yeah, I have generally not seen self-identified Grognards advocate for WoTC to make new ideas. Maybe some have said "they should make something new" but that's vague and unhelpful really. And, I specify WoTC making it, because many of them HAVE created their own settings which they have run for decades.

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.

This may seem like splitting hairs, but it isn't. You would have no problem with it =/= you are advocating for something else. You are essentially apathetic to the idea. Expressing a "well, I wouldn't hate it if they decided to do it" isn't advocating for something.

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.

Highly Specialized is a very odd phrase here. Dark Sun and Birthright are also highly specialized settings. Yet out of those four ideas, only two of them have been published, one of which is affiliated with modern DnD and getting a new expansion book here soon. So, really, if we were going to set Dark Sun, Birthright, Humblewood, and Wandering Tavern next to each other and gauge their market success over the last 5 to 10 years.... Humblewood is killing it.

And Wandering Tavern is also interesting, because in looking for the title of that again... I also found The Mystery of Yokai Vale, Obojima: Tales from the Tall Grass, and Eyes Unclouded. All of these are DnD products made with inspiration by Miyazaki from different creators. So, yes, it is a specialized concept, it isn't generic, but it is a concept that speaks deeply to a lot of people, because we have a half dozen options currently being sold for it.

 

[Chaosmancer]

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.

That is kind of an overly paternalistic take. "Well, you only like this thing because you haven't really considered it deeply enough."

The truth is, a lot of things people call out as "flaws" or "weaknesses"... aren't. They just simply are not those things. They are just different choices from what we had before.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm more likely to buy supplements that have some cool idea I haven't seen or a module that I like that could be incorporated into a current game. Especially when the world take's all my prep time. I think WOTC misses the mark by not having a virtual gaming store where thier stuff is for sale and 3rd party store fronts can sell thier stuff. Basically Amazon for DND. But for now they are dead set on selling all the players as many books as they can. Really feels like TSR just before WOTC took them over.

Um... Isn't that what DnD Beyond is?

DnD official digital marketplace selling DnD products alongside 3rd party creators.

And if that isn't enough 3rd party for you, what about DM's Guild?

Still selling Core DnD rules, and 3rd party material, AND older material.

And there is ALSO DriveThruRPG for people who don't want to buy from something WoTC owns. So.... how are they missing the mark when they have TWO digital marketplaces that do what you say?

 

[jasper]

Start working on it now. Homebrew settings are the One True Grog way.

WrONG TDIS ! TrUe grog 9Hey that rum9 way sAY CaNnEd Add Ventures ONLY waY!

 

[Maxperson]

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.

And even less so with the variant rules from the 5e DMG taken out of the 5.5e DMG.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

This paints with broad strokes something that shouldn't be painted so broadly. There are a good number of us here who just want the DMG and PHB to supply tools to support a variety of playstyles, not just our preferred style of play.

 

[Maxperson]

Start working on it now. Homebrew settings are the One True Grog way.

Well that's simply untrue.

 

[DinoInDisguise]

This paints with broad strokes something that shouldn't be painted so broadly. There are a good number of us here who just want the DMG and PHB to supply tools to support a variety of playstyles, not just our preferred style of play.

I agree, I likely aimed a bit broadly with my comments. My comments were not directed at the entire community, but at a subset that speaks with authority and condescension towards those who like certain systems. A subset that tells me why I like something and how I'm wrong.

Maybe I should have prefaced my comments with the specific target. Fair criticism. In the future I will try to do better.

 

[Maxperson]

I agree, I likely aimed a bit broadly with my comments. My comments were not directed at the entire community, but at a subset that speaks with authority and condensation towards those who like certain systems. A subset that tells me why I like something and how I'm wrong.

Maybe I should have prefaced my comments with the specific target. Fair criticism.

And I do see a good number of those who you were talking about.

One of the issues I encounter here is that I am often lumped in with those who just hate, because I may disagree with how WotC did something and one of the haters posts in agreement with me. I can't tell you how many times I've been responded to with, "But X agreed with you. How can you have that opinion if they said Y?" It's as if people can't or don't want to understand that people can agree in part, but not in total. It's frustrating.

Not that I'm saying you do that.