Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 8613383" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Gary initially assumed that the people who would want to play D&D would be the same wargamers (not monolithic, but mostly college-age and older) who played Chainmail. They found out within the year of publication that this wasn't going to be the case. Gary, having no specific druthers against including other age groups in his buyer base (his kids played, after all), would have loved to capitalize on this. He/TSR just weren't exactly good at it (they ended up doing so, but my personal experience says they could have done better, as I had lots of friends try it, but then drop out before becoming lifelong fans/customers). I alluded to this in my first <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/d-d-and-who-its-aimed-at.687720/page-2#post-8611662" target="_blank">post</a> -- AD&D obviously had the prostitute table and exposed female nipplage that post-oD&D basic/classic line D&D didn't have, but they were otherwise predominantly the same beast: same lethality (possibly slightly less lethal in AD&D, what with bigger hd and negative hp and bracers of protection on the MUs, etc.), same insta-kills, same game built around play assumptions people not in EGG's immediate circle often didn't realize they were supposed to play, etc.  Sure later 2e put on a paper thin veneer of 'paladins and princesses' thematics and Bruce Heard era BECMI had it's fair share of flying castles and such, but overall neither the mechanics nor the thematics changed much despite the realization that the game wasn't being sold far and away majority to adults. If Lanefan cut their teeth on that era of gaming, I can see why they might prefer that style.However,... as others have mentioned, that 'aimed at adults' game never (even in '74) was particularly serious, mature (or immature, it should be noted), stoic, or anything else. Sure elfgames and flumpfs, but also monsters built off dime store kaiju monster toys and gelatinous cubes and dwarven thrower hammers which were clear allusions to Marvel's Thor and trap dungeons that make no sense except as funhouse challenges for PCs. It's the same adults and adulthood who would go see Star Wars dozens of times and argue if Bakshi's Wizards was a better fantasy film than Krull. FWIW, all the things levelled at WotC D&D here were initially levelled at D&D by wargamers -- and before D&D, Chainmail was the recipient of these barbs for including a fantasy supplement (were as real grown ups were supposed to want to replicate the battle of Waterloo or Agincourt).There never really was a golden age of D&D seriousness. However, that doesn't mean that there isn't a tonal or visual shift. I think you've just stirred an idea in my mind -- this later 5e period hasn't been disney-ified, is has been <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Simpsons" target="_blank">Simpsons</a>(or <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101084/" target="_blank">Doug</a>, or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_Time" target="_blank">Adventure Time</a>)-ified, with a hefty dose of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_Ghibli" target="_blank">Ghibli</a>-ification as well. I think TSR-era D&D represents kind of a fantasy overlay on the dun-colored past that movies sometimes project on the medieval and renaissance eras, whereas this modern era is bright with pastels (and playable races of colors not seen amongst IRL humanity). That is definitely something, and something upon which one can have a preference.  It's not, however, something where one is grown up and the other is not.The game is still about fighting and killing opponents (minus the times you instead evade or negotiate with them, just like every other edition), and each every case the blood and gore exists in the storytelling ability of the DM. The only thing that has changed is the lethality. It is true that the game (can*) be much more readily survivable than TSR-era D&D. Since the OSR has come out and people have started to wax nostalgically about various aspects of ye old days, I've noticed a lot of people talk favorably about the funnel. What I remember of gaming and the discussion around gaming (including online with USEnet and later AOL and stuff) is that this was one of the most-frequently-complained about aspect of the game, or more frequently the thing that got addressed by houserules such that it wasn't the case (starting with max hp at L1, starting at level 3, etc.). Regardless, that's one single thing that WotC D&D has done in comparison to TSR that Disney sometimes does sorta (lots of deaths in Disney narratives, even if not a lot of onscreen gore). I don't think that's really what people tend to mean when they say Disnified.*Again I'll harp on the notion that 5e has very well-explained rules right there in the DMG for ramping up the difficulty when desired is a perfectly reasonable way to have a game with varying difficulty, and that the default being set to easy means very little.</blockquote>

Verification