Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SlyFlourish" data-source="post: 9280652" data-attributes="member: 54840">I'm not sure how we define utter dominance. Significantly more popular? Sure. Orders of magnitude even.Why is it good? I don't know that the dominance part of it is good. It does help many or even most players coalesce around a single game – sharing the same knowledge of how it's played and that sort of thing. There's a shared experience that we might miss if everyone was spread thin across a lot of different RPGs. The massive popularity of D&amp;D also means Hasbo can market to areas no one else can – in-school programs, movies, AAA video games, and so on.Why is it bad? As long as there's no true monopoly on the game, and right now there isn't, I don't think it matters. Nothing stops a group from deciding to play a different RPG. Sure, sometimes you have players who only know D&amp;D and only want to play D&amp;D but is that D&amp;D's fault? I think a good group of open-minded players are willing to try other RPGs if the GM is willing to run them. From the surveys and polls I ran, that was the case. Players are willing to run other RPGs with GMs they trust.I worried that D&amp;D's dominance would draw more players towards their own digital tools – D&amp;D Beyond in particular. I feared that would lead to a platform lock-in in which players don't want to leave or try other systems, variants, or material for 5e that wasn't published by WOTC or their favorite selected partners. So far, though, that doesn't seem to be the case from the polls I've conducted. More than half of surveyed players use non-WOTC character options for their 5e games. That's a pretty good number given D&amp;D's dominance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SlyFlourish, post: 9280652, member: 54840"] I'm not sure how we define utter dominance. Significantly more popular? Sure. Orders of magnitude even. Why is it good? I don't know that the dominance part of it is good. It does help many or even most players coalesce around a single game – sharing the same knowledge of how it's played and that sort of thing. There's a shared experience that we might miss if everyone was spread thin across a lot of different RPGs. The massive popularity of D&D also means Hasbo can market to areas no one else can – in-school programs, movies, AAA video games, and so on. Why is it bad? As long as there's no true monopoly on the game, and right now there isn't, I don't think it matters. Nothing stops a group from deciding to play a different RPG. Sure, sometimes you have players who only know D&D and only want to play D&D but is that D&D's fault? I think a good group of open-minded players are willing to try other RPGs if the GM is willing to run them. From the surveys and polls I ran, that was the case. Players are willing to run other RPGs with GMs they trust. I worried that D&D's dominance would draw more players towards their own digital tools – D&D Beyond in particular. I feared that would lead to a platform lock-in in which players don't want to leave or try other systems, variants, or material for 5e that wasn't published by WOTC or their favorite selected partners. So far, though, that doesn't seem to be the case from the polls I've conducted. More than half of surveyed players use non-WOTC character options for their 5e games. That's a pretty good number given D&D's dominance. [/QUOTE]

Verification