D&D 5E 5e and the Cheesecake Factory: Explaining Good Enough

[TwoSix]

It's the bard of DnD editions.

5th edition, 5th wheel class, makes sense.

I think this makes 1e the thief, 2e the cleric, 3e the wizard, and 4e the fighter.

 

[Blue]

I see and agree with everything you are saying. But I don't think it's the most important part.

D&D is the McDonalds/Waffle House. Whenever you are hungry, you can find one.

Really, I love 5e. But it's not even my favorite "High Fantasy D&D-like game", much less displacing all other games for all other genres.

But the majority of groups I can find are 5e, pretty exclusively. My 20+ year old group isn't and isn't D&D-centric, but even there it's hard to convince others to try new systems. But most groups formed in the last few years go D&D first and often foremost.

I'm running a game for my kids, niece and nephew, teaching them TTRPGs. I'm teaching them 5e. Are there, in my opinion, better systems out there for teaching? Yes. Are there ones that embrace new concepts of the industry more? Also yes. But I want them to be able to find groups - and that means D&D. Once you have a group, other things are possible.

Again, I love 5e, Been playing since Red Box Basic and it's my favorite edition. I'm not putting it down. But how popular D&D is - synonymous with RPG to the general public, is the biggest single factor in how popular 5e is. 5e is standing on the shoulders of giants - the previous editions - and since it is a really good "Cheesecake Factory" system, it leverages that wonderfully.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't play many other games than D&D. Are all the other games out there one flavor and you cannot deviate from that flavor? It seems to me that many, if not most games out there would also have multiple flavors, even if those multiple flavors are different flavors than D&D.

Someone who likes chicken might be able to go to D&D for Honey Garlic Chicken and to another game for Creamy Herb Chicken.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't play many other games than D&D. Are all the other games out there one flavor and you cannot deviate from that flavor? It seems to me that many, if not most games out there would also have multiple flavors, even if those multiple flavors are different flavors than D&D.

Someone who likes chicken might be able to go to D&D for Honey Garlic Chicken and to another game for Creamy Herb Chicken.

Depends. There are a lot of games which share resolution engines, but each iteration is considered a different game because the trappings are totally different and the system will be tweaked from game to game. (Much like the d20 engine and its various permutations since 3e.) I'm thinking stuff like the Year Zero Engine, or the PbtA system. No one would usually consider Monsterhearts and Uncharted Worlds to be the same game, although they both use the PbtA framework. You could use a generic resolution system to then make your own game, but that would usually be considered its own thing, not a different flavor of a similar game.

 

[prabe]

I don't play many other games than D&D. Are all the other games out there one flavor and you cannot deviate from that flavor? It seems to me that many, if not most games out there would also have multiple flavors, even if those multiple flavors are different flavors than D&D.

Someone who likes chicken might be able to go to D&D for Honey Garlic Chicken and to another game for Creamy Herb Chicken.

Yes, there are games so narrowly focused.

Old-school, Call of Cthulhu comes to mind. Even if you write your own adventures, the game is still focused on investigation and hidden knowledge that drives people mad. That's pretty much what it does (Delta Green aside, I suppose).

Newer games, Blades in the Dark is narrowly focused on criminals doing heists, to increase the power and prestige of their gang of criminals. That's pretty much the only sort of story that's likely to emerge from play, best I can tell (and I don't care for the game, so I might not be the one to trust here). Pretty much everything Powered by the Apocalypse is also going to narrowly focused as to what type/s of story can emerge from play.

 

[fearsomepirate]

I don't think that's so far off (COD is actually similar in that it offers a wide variety of modes and builds to suit a decent range of play styles). That said, the main thing DnD has going for it is that it simply is The Roleplaying Game. It defined and continues to define what the hobby is; all other products exist in relation to it. Somebody trying to get you into a new game will typically describe it in terms of how much it is or is not like DnD. New products come out, and their designers consciously seek to do things well they feel DnD does poorly. In fact, a staggeringly large number of products are simply modifications of one of the free versions of DnD.

I feel like tabletop RPGs have never left the sort of era first-person shooters were in for a bit during the 1990s, where a lot of people just called them "Doom clones."

 

[Imaculata]

I think D&D's success has been helt back for a long time by its nerd stigma, and lack of accessibility. I don't think 5e's success is a matter of it just appealing to a lot of people.

It already had the benefit of name recognition. Social media have rapidly changed the perception of D&D and removed the stigma, while lowering the barrier to entry by showing how it is played. Simultaneously, D&D itself has met the audience halfway, by removing a lot of its complexity and streamlining the rules, while increasing its social media presence.

So in a matter of speaking, D&D went surfing when the tides were right, and brought the right new surfboard. Now all it needs to do is ride the wave of success.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Yes, there are games so narrowly focused.

Old-school, Call of Cthulhu comes to mind. Even if you write your own adventures, the game is still focused on investigation and hidden knowledge that drives people mad. That's pretty much what it does (Delta Green aside, I suppose).

Newer games, Blades in the Dark is narrowly focused on criminals doing heists, to increase the power and prestige of their gang of criminals. That's pretty much the only sort of story that's likely to emerge from play, best I can tell (and I don't care for the game, so I might not be the one to trust here). Pretty much everything Powered by the Apocalypse is also going to narrowly focused as to what type/s of story can emerge from play.

In PbtA's defense - that's kind of the point. It's not a diner, it's a pop-up celebrity chef restaurant that makes five versions of one dish, but dang if this isn't the best enchilada you've ever tasted. (Burritos are down the street).

 

[Krachek]

All the arguments given in the OP could be used to view 5ed as an amazing product that allow so many different play styles. Doing so is not the mark of a lesser product. And the best about it is that the game is fluid enough to allow switch as the players mood and experience evolve. 5ed allow also a wide variety of quality in term of engagement, so not only a wide menu, but also an overall wide variety of quality.

 

[Dausuul]

D&D is the only game a lot of people have heard of, it's the first one they play, it's the one everybody else plays, and they're not really exposed to anything else because what they have works for them.

This explanation is insufficient when you look at D&D's history. 5E didn't just rely on newcomers and 4E players; it also clawed back a lot of people who had left 4E for Pathfinder. That can't be explained by simple inertia. And while it's hard to find data on this, I'd be willing to bet a fair amount that 3E also reclaimed a bunch of players who had decamped to other games during TSR's decline.

That isn't to say D&D doesn't benefit from player inertia and brand recognition--of course it does. But I don't think that is a huge factor over the long haul.

I just do not think it's true that provides some middle ground experience where everyone can get a little bit of what they want. I think it's like Monopoly, Big Bang Theory, Mario Brothers, Call of Duty or CSI. It provides a specific experience that is easy to get into and a lot of people enjoy. It does not have to be more complicated than that.

Again, I think 4E undercuts this argument. 4E was laser-focused on the "core experience" of D&D--the dungeon crawl--and it executed on it very well. No other edition holds a candle to 4E for exciting, dynamic battles. But 4E failed, while 5E succeeded despite being much less focused.

I'm with @Snarf Zagyg - 5E succeeds because it offers a good-enough experience to many types of players. There's crunchy combat for the wargamer, extensive lore to support the story enthusiast, a (reasonably) simple core system for the casual gamer, and it allows newbies and wallflowers to participate at whatever level they feel comfortable with. There are other systems that do each of these things better, but not many that do all at once.