Are Gognards killing D&D?

[Fifth Element]

I like 'edition hugger'. Fits the description nicely.

 

[baradtgnome]

QFT. In fact, I'm a second generation gamer, myself.

So before anyone out there writes off grognards as irrelevant, consider this: those grognards might not be buying any new D&D products for themselves, but what are they buying for their children? And what will their children be buying over the next few decades?

Thank you. Where do most new RPG gamers come from I wonder. Is it WoTC marketing efforts direct to potential gamers, or do more come from the loins of us Grognards? My 19 old son was raised a gamer, and now is bringing in new blood as the central point of his own group.

 

[Fifth Element]

If you step back and look at it globally, it's a positive thing to have currents of traditionalism and innovation co-exist. The key is respect. Older players who pine for the days of 1E don't "bring D&D down" any more than groups of young players coming into the hobby who carry new influences from video games and other RPG systems.

It's not the old players who pine for 1E that bother people. It's the old players who actively crap on 4E threads that are the problem. If anyone has implied that all players who prefer older editions are bad, then that's untenable. What's bad is the subset of those players who aggressively campaign against 4E.

 

[baradtgnome]

New players ARE needed to grow the franchise. But at the same time the single largest force that keeps D&D going is its ESTABLISHED base of fans. The Grognards. ................so why they are ignoring this in the design and development of 4e..

I do not see how they are ignoring us. I may or may not move to 4e, but clearly the items in 3e that we complained about are being addressed. If they address them in a way that fits our homebrews, view of how D&D should be, improves our gaming experience, then we'll buy. simple.

 

[Ty]

It's not the old players who pine for 1E that bother people. It's the old players who actively crap on 4E threads that are the problem. If anyone has implied that all players who prefer older editions are bad, then that's untenable. What's bad is the subset of those players who aggressively campaign against 4E.

I highly doubt that the idea of the 4th Edition is what is being aggressively campaigned against by the "Grognards." Rather, there is a subset of players of all ages, with varying degrees of favorite editions who are derogatively coined "grognards" by people. Think on it this way, if they didn't care about 4th Edition, why would they actively and purposely come onto a board, post their thoughts and observations, and basically make themselves an inviting target for others?

The rhetorical answer of course, is that they ARE interested in a 4th Edition but are NOT pleased with the proposed changes. The question Mearls and Co. have to answer is how to meet both audiences expectations. Most of the "grognards" around here are not saying No to Dragonborn, Golden Wyvern Adept, Teifling history, Eladrins, or whatever. They are saying No to the way they are being presented to us.

Another part of the "grognard" problem is that it seems many of us are told to shut up, sit down, and buy the new edition but you aren't allowed to participate in the discussion. There have been many suggestions put forward by the "grognards" as options for the designers to examine. Heck, Green Knight technically is a "grognard" because he was complaining about the short shrift Torm received. Now that his proposal for axing Tyr and replacing the deity with Torm has been acted on, it's as though he is treated as a champion of 4th Edition. The point is that minimizing criticism of what is shown is not the way to market something. GM tried that and it didn't quite work.

If you show teasers and provide snippets of information, people are going to jump to conclusions. If you really have a bona fide reason to change something as a designer and it's criticized, most rational people doing the criticizing will accept a real answer rather than puffery. Mearls and Co. don't have to justify their choices in development to us if they don't inform us. However, if they put that info out there for us to see, they are probably trying to gauge the public reaction to some extent, for good or ill. By beating down dissent and only allowing praise of a decision, you're not doing the game a favor. The only thing you are doing is creating a skewed perception for the designers, the game community, and the people actively involved in the observation and analysis of 4th Edition.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

In reply to the question in the thread subject:
As much as it pains me to say this, no, they aren't.

 

[Maggan]

I bought every single WOTC rules book until the announcement. PLUS about 95% D20 paper-printed books. Who else has helped these companies survived this much ?

I did. And I'm stoked about 4e.

There are people who have played the game for ages and ages, who's got lots and lots of stuff (oD&D, AD&D, D&D, what have you), who's very dedicated to the hobby ...

... who thinks it's fun to see the game change, to see new stuff. And to buy new stuff.

So "old gamer" is not the same as "grognard" and "I spent tons of cash on D&D already" is not the same as "WotC can look on the moon for more money from me".

Just saying, because I think it always seems to boil down to "us old guys have done everything for this game and we're being trampled on", when there are plenty of "hey, we're also old guys whose done as much or more for the game and we think seeing the game evolve is fun!".

/M

 

[baradtgnome]

First, let me say that I deeply respect the opinions of our most veteran players and DMs. A recent poll of ENworld showed that over 80% of members played 1st edition. This seems really bad for the hobby as a whole. If you started playing the game when it first came out, this means you would be in your forties by now.

True enough. Half my gaming group is AARP material.

Why is this bad? Well, I can tell you as someone who is 22, forty seems really old.

As someone who was once 22, and now <ahem> a little more than forty I don't see it as bad. I trust you will live to be on this side of the discussion some day, and still be able to enjoy the hobby if you choose.

There is a generational gap (or two) between the majority of players and people who are just now playing the game for the first time.

I think there is actually more of a style gap between different style players than a generation gap. It can be difficult to game with folks of a different age group for social reasons, I'll grant that. However I think being old or young doesn't align on the view of 4e. To me it seems like other factors on what you want from a game are more important.

Since it seems that have the greatest numbers, and greatest disposable income to spend on the game, they have the most say within the gaming community on how the game advances (or doesn’t).

as has been said many times more eloquently than I, for WoTC this is a business; they are in it to sell product. We have been told they make their most profit during the rush to buy new edition core books. Ergo, there is great pressure on them to deliver a new edition as soon as the market would accept it.

I would guess that a very large number of the 4e core rule books sold in the first six months will go to existing D&D gamers, not new RPG gamers. What does that say about who their target really is?

If the hobby is going to survive as a whole, then it needs to attract new, young players and DMs.

I do agree with that. Although I don't agree with your assumptions on how to accomplish it. Put an easier to play, more fun edition in current gamers hands (Grognards or no) and that will generate word of mouth sales, retention of gamers that are frustrated, and possible lower the threashold for newbies to join.

As was also pointed out many times, WoTC could use its marketing power to generate additional sales of 3.5e to new RPG gamers. It does not require a new edition to expand your market. I will acknowledge that marketing and sales folks do like the 'new & improved' sticker on a product; it gives them something to talk about.

I'm still wait and see on 4e. I promise not to cop a 'gronard-itude' on you if you choose to stick with 3.5e or move on to 4e.

 

[sjmiller]

Perhaps Luddite, curmudgeon or even better 'edition hugger' might be more appropriate?

As a grognard and an official curmudgeon, I don't think either term is appropriate for what you are describing. Neither is Luddite, as they are not any technology. Edition Hugger might work.

 

[baradtgnome]

As a grognard and an official curmudgeon, I don't think either term is appropriate for what you are describing. Neither is Luddite, as they are not any technology. Edition Hugger might work.

It might. Even as I typed the others I knew they were not right. I just couldn't put my finger on the right word. This is a clever bunch, I'm sure a better name will arise.