D&D General D&D's Utter Dominance Is Good or Bad Because...

[Oofta]

I think it’s bad that people will get into 5E and have a hard time with other RPGs that aren’t massive power fantasies.

Which I read as "It's bad that people get into 5E and enjoy something other than my preferred style of play." The vast majority of people who play are not gaming geeks (being a gaming geek is not at all a bad thing). They don't give a fig about "innovative" or "clean" design, they just want to sit down with a game with others that they have fun playing.

I've introduced quite a few people to D&D, especially 5E, over the years and the vast majority simply enjoy the game for what it is. Since most of them are, and always will be, casual players, I personally think D&D's overall design and themes have a lot to do with it's popularity. Many other games target much more of a niche or enforce an overall style, D&D is more flexible than many of those games. There is no monopoly power to D&D, the TTRPG market is very open. Currently D&D dominates but as others have said there have absolutely been times when other games could have risen to dominance and they didn't. Shows like Critical Role certainly play a part in that, but there's nothing from stopping people streaming any game they choose.

In any case, one thing I do think happened that stifled diversity is the OGL. We can't go back in time to see what effect the OGL had, but it seems like the majority of creatives that want to do something in the same basic target niche as D&D have reinforced the brand by using the OGL instead of doing something new.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If someone wants to create a different analogy, feel free. But the actual point stands-- we wouldn't ask the more popular thing to become less popular just to move other stuff higher up the list. If that other stuff deserves to be higher... then it can earn its popularity, not just wait for the ones above it to fall.

I really don't think anything in the gaming community needs to be as popular as WotC D&D.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I really don't think anything in the gaming community needs to be as popular as WotC D&D.

Nope. Better have your niche hobby you only play in the cellar with only special people. So you can feel more elite.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Of course. Noone likes beating the game on hard mode. You do it for the way there...

Dude, the point of playing is to enjoy the experience. The point of playing on hard mode is to enjoy the experience with more challenge. That can mean winning, but it doesn't have to. If that weren't true, the only time anyone would ever enjoy playing a challenging game is when they win.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I really don't think anything in the gaming community needs to be as popular as WotC D&D.

Okay. That's fine. Nothing says you have to believe otherwise.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Dude, the point of playing is to enjoy the experience. The point of playing on hard mode is to enjoy the experience with more challenge. That can mean winning, but it doesn't have to. If that weren't true, the only time anyone would ever enjoy playing a challenging game is when they win.

The goal is to beat it at some point.
And I am not your dude.
And only speaking of "Two options". Try reading your own sentence. I bolded the relevant parts.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Nope. Better have your niche hobby you only play in the cellar with only special people. So you can feel more elite.

I refuse to engage in more of your polar arguments. Why do you continue to insist on extremes in everything you're posting? Nothing we're talking about here is solely black and white.

Sorry about the dude thing. Wasn't trying to offend.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I refuse to engage in more of your polar arguments. Why do you continue to insist on extremes in everything you're posting? Nothing we're talking about here is solely black and white.

Nah. For you it is all black, when speaking of WotC or current D&D.

 

[Swanosaurus]

Which I read as "It's bad that people get into 5E and enjoy something other than my preferred style of play." The vast majority of people who play are not gaming geeks (being a gaming geek is not at all a bad thing). They don't give a fig about "innovative" or "clean" design, they just want to sit down with a game with others that they have fun playing.

I've introduced quite a few people to D&D, especially 5E, over the years and the vast majority simply enjoy the game for what it is. Since most of them are, and always will be, casual players, I personally think D&D's overall design and themes have a lot to do with it's popularity. Many other games target much more of a niche or enforce an overall style, D&D is more flexible than many of those games. There is no monopoly power to D&D, the TTRPG market is very open. Currently D&D dominates but as others have said there have absolutely been times when other games could have risen to dominance and they didn't. Shows like Critical Role certainly play a part in that, but there's nothing from stopping people streaming any game they choose.

Which I read as "what you want from RPGs is marginal, please leave me alone with it, no one but you and your two friends are interested in that."

I'm not begrudging anyone their D&D style fun. There's lots of aspects to it that I like (though I prefer to find them in Troika! and DCC, which do a better job at distilling them). But lots of people not already into RPGs these days to think they know what RPGs are - they're D&D, and if they're not interested in what is presented as D&D (power fantasies and eclectic, over-the-top fantasy trappings, heroic "class" archetypes, levelling until you're a demi-god), you've often already lost them. And that is a pity.

 

[Remathilis]

If someone wants to create a different analogy, feel free. But the actual point stands-- we wouldn't ask the more popular thing to become less popular just to move other stuff higher up the list. If that other stuff deserves to be higher... then it can earn its popularity, not just wait for the ones above it to fall.

There is a theory that the more popular something becomes, the more they have to "sell out" what made them good to achieve that popularity. For example, the truest expression of a band is their indie era before they get signed because once they do, they sacrifice their uniqueness for an album and even more for a hit single. It's called Hipster Theory and it exists because people who believe it think popular and good have an inverse relationship.

Couple that with Nostalgia Theory (things were always better in the past, when you first were exposed to something) and you get the Grand Unified Theory of Fandom: the point you discovered something is the peak of that thing's quality and it is destined to only get worse the longer it goes. Bands change sounds, media evolves, etc. The answer is of course a paradox: for something to remain good and "pure", it must die. Bands break up. Games stop getting updates. It lives in a perfect state in our memory, nostalgia buffing off the rough edges. We move on to the Next Thing which goes through the honeymoon of discovery, the disappointment of aging, the death of resentment and the eternal life of memory. Live fast, die young, and leave a good looking corpse.