D&D General Mike Mearls' blog post about RPG generations

The point was that those genre didn't have games popular or well known enough to cause a wave of popularity within the total FRPG community. Can't be a wave if you don't make a splash.

Feel free to name RPGs that made waves in genres not represented.

----+

So with recent examples
  1. Sword and Sorcery (1E & early 2E) 1974-
  2. Horror Fantasy (CoC) 1981-
  3. Epic Fantasy (Mid 2E) 1984-
  4. Dark Fantasy (Late 2E, WOD) 1991-
  5. Urban Fantasy (WOD) 1991-
  6. Dungeon Fantasy (3E) 2000-
  7. Mythic Fantasy (Exalted, Scion) 2001-
  8. Adventure Fantasy (3.5E, PF 1&2) 2003-
  9. "Paragon" Fantasy (4E, 13A, Draw Steel) 2008-
  10. Heroic Fantasy (5E) 2014+
  11. Grim & Gritty Fantasy (OSR, DCC Shadowdark) 2024-
  12. Superheroic Fantasy (Daggerheart) 2025-

Any more?
There's a lot of "whirlpools in your waves": Conan was long identified as Sword & Sorcery, but his stories also included Horror and were also considered 'dark, grim & gritty' by many literary scholars (and fans).

Adventure Fantasy & Epic Fantasy run right into each other with LotR. Your list is a little off IME.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think the real difference for the "Character Creation Focus" of 3e and the explanation of all these 'generations' is very simple and has little to do with what videogames were doing:

AD&D was a new version of D&D that tried to give you as much of everything D&D did as possible with the core rulebooks.... while putting it into a new system. There were also some outright improvements, like making Dwarf a race instead of a class, which made most people happy!

2e and the Revised version thereof were attempts to do the same thing: Consolidate as much as possible what improvements were made.

3e did that, too, while doing a couple -huge- changes to attack rolls and saving throws by making both more easily understood and managed. Gone was 7/2 and in was +20/+15/+10/+5.

And then 3.5e was just taking changes that had been added to 3e over the years and adding them in to a new official product, same as 2e.

4e, on the other hand, was mostly Heinsoo, Collins, and Wyatt trying to do something daring and avante-garde! 3e was already the 'culmination' of the current class structure paradigm and something new had to be built! Specifically one that could be heavily monetized through peripherals like 1st party miniatures, battle mats, maps, and more!

It certainly had NOTHING TO DO with Pathfinder gaining success and Hasbro/WotC wanting to shift the paradigm to keep as much of the D&D and TTRPG income in-house with the new GSL to replace the OGL and the aforementioned 1st party minis and maps and other accoutrements for playing 4e D&D.

It was also streamlined for easy conversion to computer gaming, but that has less to do with it, I think, than wanting to rebuild the wall around their garden.

And that went over like a lead balloon, which is why 5e came back as essentially an updated 3.5e with a few new mechanics.

None of it is seismic shifts in playstyle representing specific generations who wanted something 'new' or 'specific' from D&D. Just the slow accumulation of feature-creep across half a dozen editions.

Hell. That's why people are still clamoring for old classes and campaign settings for 5e: The desire hasn't changed, only the availability has. Some stuff got kept, some stuff got left behind. And the people who played it back then still want to play it, now.
 

I think I get where Mearls is going. But I disagree with his characterization of 2nd and 3rd generation. The Known World Gazetteer line and the Forgotten Realms books both debuted in 1987 (May 1987 for the Known World) and both sold A LOT.

I don't agree that the "settings era" started in 1991.

Known World Gazetteers/boxed sets by year (the GAZ line):
1987 4
1988 6
1989 3
1990 1
1991 1

Forgotten Realms books/modules by year (the FR line)
1987 3
1988 5
1989 2
1990 3
1991 1
1992 2
1993 1

Combined thats:
1987 7
1988 11
1989 5
1990 2
1991 3
1992 2
1993 1

That's A LOT of settings books for two settings.
 

Though one can argue something else is going on there given how many of those and the ones in the prior poster were mecha oriented.
I had those same thoughts at the time - most of the other examples I could think of the PCs typically? weren't directly in the line of the war, more it was running on around them. Or it's more of a secret war game where PCs are more like strike teams.

Star Wars, Mutant Chronicles, Torg, Renegade Legion, Star Ace...

I suspect that Mecha is common there because the source Genres are the ones where the PCs are likely movers and shakers...
 



There's a lot of "whirlpools in your waves": Conan was long identified as Sword & Sorcery, but his stories also included Horror and were also considered 'dark, grim & gritty' by many literary scholars (and fans).

Adventure Fantasy & Epic Fantasy run right into each other with LotR. Your list is a little off IME.
Part of the problem is that certain categories have characteristics that fans often ignore (fans usually going off the tone of the story rather than its inherent characteristics). In the taxonomy of literature, both Conan and LotR are classified as sword & sorcery even though most fans put LotR in as high fantasy. It makes discussing sub-genres rather difficult.
 

There's a lot of "whirlpools in your waves": Conan was long identified as Sword & Sorcery, but his stories also included Horror and were also considered 'dark, grim & gritty' by many literary scholars (and fans).

Adventure Fantasy & Epic Fantasy run right into each other with LotR. Your list is a little off IME.

This is why I also considered the design intent and execution of the mechanics being able to create the genres's vibes.

A game can call itself heroic all at once but if the PCS can barely survive one or two hits and really have a chance to show their heroics then claiming it is creating a wave of heroic RPGs would be wrong.

Same with something like Conan even if it has horror elements if that is not displayed in the RPG itself it did not create a wave of horror RPGs.
 

My take (and I'm not really caught up on the discussion) is that I broadly agree about the OGL and 2024 triggering a major generational shift in RPGs, and I think that he's sort of the right about people bifurcating toward rules-lite games on the one side and more complex games on the other.

But I don't think I agree with him about characterizing the rules lite games as a newer generation, I'd guess that if anything, we're still at the start of an era where tooling moots a lot of their strengths, and the move towards VTTs like foundry and players embracing apps makes the more complicated character build and long term games compete better on accessibility.

To my mind, I think that games like Shadowdark are a latter part of 5e's general movement towards courting old fans and trying to keep things light and homebrew heavy, along with the PBTA surge of interest and now culminating in Daggerheart as well, but then there's been the ongoing backlash to that, that's made games like Lancer, Pathfinder 2e, Fabula Ultima, and so forth popular with players-- joined now by Draw Steel.

Everyone always said 4e was ahead of it's time in some ways, I think we're arriving at that time, in this sense I guess if 3e/4e were fourth gen games, 5e through Shadowdark and Daggerheart are 5th gen games, and those 4e-like games I listed are actually sixth gen games, owing their generational difference to 5e blowing up before they released-- I guess you could call 4e sixth gen then, but things get weird, and it's mostly because 4e wouldn't be imitated as strongly until later.
 

I had those same thoughts at the time - most of the other examples I could think of the PCs typically? weren't directly in the line of the war, more it was running on around them. Or it's more of a secret war game where PCs are more like strike teams.

Star Wars, Mutant Chronicles, Torg, Renegade Legion, Star Ace...

I suspect that Mecha is common there because the source Genres are the ones where the PCs are likely movers and shakers...

Yeah, I expect the fact even if they aren't decision makers, mecha pilots have almost always a disproportionate impact. That also applies to the pilots in Warbirds. The tendency in those genres for vehicle individualization also probably doesn't hurt.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top