• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D: big as it ever was? (Forked Thread: So...How are Sales of 4E Product?)

I could have swore my DVD disagrees with that statement, and WotC approved and gave the rights to the movie to that director as TSR turned him down.

The movie rights were sold to Sweet Pea Entertainment (Solomon's company) in 1995 by TSR.

I am sure WotC had a good bit of input for that movie as one of the WotC/D&D execs was a supervisor for it.

The consultant you're talking about was Dave Arneson, who also had a cameo in the movie as one of the mages. He did not represent WotC in any way.

I watch DVD extras once, and then never again. How many years ago was that? So of course this is all fresh in my head.

Then maybe you should spent the 2 minutes it takes to verify some of these things on Google, since you've been absolutely wrong in regards to the D&D movie in this thread.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So true since I play in one campaign of it. :eek:

I just don't think it is D&D that much. ;)

Well, you certainly seem to be cheering for it to fail.

And let's not have this thread fall into another "Is it really D&D?" argument. It is. It's officially D&D. Every edition of D&D is a change. We still kill monsters and take their stuff. It's D&D.
 

Whoa whoa whoa!! Not liking D&D novels makes you a gronard? I thought that just meant you had decent taste in literature. :devil:
Ah, no. Not what I said. I have friends who are rpg grognards. These friends do not read or care for any of the D&D novels. I also have a grognard buddy who obsessively collects every novel (and just about anything with a D&D connection). No where did I state or imply that grognard = novel hater.
 

I think this is broadly the same sort of defense I heard around the 2E era in the early 90's.

Ahhhh, yes? When 2e came out there was a vocal minority of fans who refused to accept anything good about the new edition. Same thing happened again when 3e came out, and again when 3.5 came out . . . and oddly enough, the pattern repeats itself with 4e! Shocker!

Whenever the 5th edition of the game comes out (you know, the holographic edition), we'll see the same denial of reality by 4e holdouts all over again.
 

Ahhhh, yes? When 2e came out there was a vocal minority of fans who refused to accept anything good about the new edition.

You're subtly changing your argument. Your original comment was about sales figures:

I think the folks who persist, despite common sense, to claim D&D 4e is not a success, is not selling well, or that there are less players today than yesterday just can't accept the fact that their individual tastes regarding D&D aren't necessarily shared anymore by the majority of roleplayers.

And my point is that the critics of 2E were, business-wise, proven to be correct by the late 90's.
 

My take(s) on the "D&D Popularity: Now vs the 80s" issue:

1) Anecdotal story: There was a brief time, when I was in 5th-6th grade (1985-86) when D&D was a huge fad in my school -- tons of kids had dice, and rulebooks, and created characters, and played the game during lunch & recess. In my grade alone there were probably 30-40 people who at least expressed some interest in the game and created a character during this period, which lasted for a few months. By a year or two later (1987-88) the fad had died, almost everybody had lost interest, and there were only about a half-dozen of us still playing D&D. However, in the fad days the vast majority of those 30-40 people didn't own any rulebooks (or at least a full set -- any given kid might own a copy of Oriental Adventures or Fiend Folio and nothing else, some might not own any rulebooks at all but might have a random module or Dragon magazine issue, and the majority had no D&D products at all) and didn't have any real idea of the rules or how the game really worked, they were just interested in something new (and vaguely illicit) that the other kids were into. Whereas, later on when there were only 6 of us, we all owned full sets of the rulebooks, modules (even those who never DM'd owned at least a couple modules), and a couple of us were subscribers to Dragon, RPGA members, and even went to the local sf/gaming con. It's a fair estimation that TSR saw as many or more sales from just the 5-6 of us in 1987-88 as from the 30-40 people in 1985-86. This is, of course, purely anecdotal and statistically meaningless, but I suspect it holds fairly true for the larger population -- in the 80s a lot more people were "involved" with D&D but weren't necessarily turning that involvement into product purchases; nowadays there are fewer total people but they're more fully invested in the hobby and buy a lot more products per player (and are more likely to go to cons -- even of our 6 dedicated D&D players in my school only 3 of us ever went to a gaming con, and only I ever went to GenCon).

2) Another point: in the fad days of the 80s, D&D was popular almost exclusively among kids (up to college age) -- there was a cadre of adult fans (mostly the early adopters from the 70s -- D&D's original target audience) but they were a tiny fraction of the total fanbase who were buying D&D sets at toy-stores (I'm guessing way less than 10%, probably more like 1%). Nowadays, D&D has a very significant adult fan-base (every demographic survey here shows that most of us are in our 30s and started playing in the period 1979-86) that's by and large completely separate from the current youth fan-base (which I have no idea how big or dedicated it is) so it could very easily be the case that while neither the adult nor the youth fan-bases of D&D are individually as big as the youth fan-base was in the 80s, the combined fan-base could be bigger.

These two factors, especially in combination, could easily explain why D&D sales are as strong, or stronger, than ever, but the game "seems" less popular than in its fad days.
 

And my point is that the critics of 2E were, business-wise, proven to be correct by the late 90's.

2e didn't kill TSR. Poor management making decisions like Buck Rogers, or purchasing a needlepoint distributor, or not taking in any market research (that Dancey could find), or investing in boxed sets that cost more to produce than they took in, or creating a dozen variations on D&D settings and trying to support them all fully, or moving a popular setting from its normal system (D&D) to a brand new one (SAGA), or attempting to compete with M:tG with a poorly designed card game (Spellfire), or Dragon Dice, or the multitude of other decisions TSR made that pushed them into the grave. Suggesting that the 2e critics, who said the same things about 2e that 3e critics said about 3e and so on (dumbing down; for the ADD generation; soulless; etc, ad nauseum), were correct about it killing TSR ignores the actual history of the company's decline and bankruptcy.
 


I've reported justanobody on his prosletyzing his religious views. Anyone whose arguments are based on unseen principles not supported by any evidence but their own meandering experience despite significant objective evidence is clearly advocating a religious ideology, and I f I can't promote CHristianity here, then he can't promote his, even if he wrote it.
 

All I can say is that in Alabama, in the late 70s, early 80s, D&D was EVERYWHERE. The local library hosted a game, kids had D&D books at school, sometimes played a quick game at lunch. Even if you didn't play, you had friends that did. A bit later, late 80s at college, there were notices posted all over the place for games, games were being hosted in dorm rooms, you couldn't walk down the street without seeing some kid with a monster manual. This was in the middle of the Bible belt, too. If sales are higher now, I think it's because those same kids who mowed lawns to buy the player's handbook - with a push mower, mind you - are the same people playing now, whatever the edition is. Only now, they have the money to buy anything they want. After all, when you drive a $30,000 dollar car, a couple hundred bucks for gaming is NOTHING. Hell, I'm broke, but every time we try a new game, I manage to scrape up enough cash for at least the core book for whatever game it is, be it D&D, Warhammer, Atchooloo, etc. Sales do not equal popularity.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top