D&D 5E Do you care about setting "canon"?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Shasarak]

I think you're doing that whole, "arguing for the sake of arguing," thing.

As everyone on these threads is aware, WoTC (Hasbro) would very much like to launch a D&D movie (like, a real one, that makes money, and can sustain a franchise ... not like the previous attempts).

For the value of the Marvel IP, start with this article-
http://www.newsarama.com/24999-disney-s-4-billion-marvel-buy-was-it-worth-it.html

There aren't any good valuations on the D&D IP. That said, the IP is the total value that can be brought in. Movies, board games, action figures, TV shows, theme parks, and so on.

So yes, by the sole criterion of making money, then Marvel (Disney) is so far ahead of D&D (WoTC/Hasbro) it's not even worth getting into a semantic argument about. Which is ... obvious.

Since we are talking about setting canon, and since you seem to want to compare FR canon with Marvel canon then it would be a good idea to look at similar products.

As far as I am aware the last time that the Marvel RPG even made the top 5 list was back in 2012 for just 1 quarter to then sink and never be seen again. And yet this is the standard that we should be using? How does that even make any sense?

Or I guess we can go back to using completely irrelevant stats like how Disney makes as much money as Kukulastan or how the highest grossing movie is Avatar or some such useless trivia.

 

[Shasarak]

That's kind of it, however.

In the end, I don't think your expectation vis-a-vis canon will be met. Because D&D doesn't have that in popular culture.*

Sorry but that is obviously not true because Forgotten Realms is the best selling setting; which means it is making the most money; which means that it patently does have a culture of people that are buying it.

As compared to say the Marvel RPG which is not a best selling setting; which means it is not making much (?any) money; which means that it does not have a culture of people buying it.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Shasarak]

Because we're talking about the IP. Marvel licensed it to Margaret Weis Productions; they weren't making it directly. Just like they don't make certain bed sheets directly. Just like they don't make the toys ... they're licensed by ... wait for it ... Hasbro.

But it's Marvel's (Disney's) IP. Your attempt to quibble over this is completely meaningless, as you know. Why not compare the popularity of D&D movies and Marvel movies? D&D TV shows and Marvel TV Shows? D&D-branded products and licenses and Marvel ones? I could keep going, but I think you get the point.

Or, heck, just the relative popularity of FR books and Marvel Comic Books in terms of sales?

But when a single movie, such as Doctor Strange, pulls in $640 million worldwide, and (1) it's not the most popular character in the Marvel universe, and (2) it's not even the top Marvel movie this year, you quickly realize that D&D and it's handful of employees at WoTC (a subsidiary of Hasbro) is just a rounding error. Sorry.

So then if popular movies are best with the most popular culture behind them being made by the biggest companies then why do we not see those RPGS then?

No popular Marvel RPG.
No popular Mickey Mouse RPG.

Where are they if biggest is best?

 

[Shasarak]

*Seriously, it's like someone saying that because D&D is more popular than Star Wars for TTRPG, therefore ... what, D&D is more popular as a movie property? The facepalming is strong with this one.

Have I mentioned DnD as a movie property at all?

You can quote me if you like.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Shasarak]

There is literally no way for you to know if I would be disappointed with a FR movie or not. I just dont see how you would be able to tell that.

And I just have to ask: If DnD and WotC are just a rounding error compared to the Dr Strange movie, then why exactly are you doing here talking with me about FR canon?

 

[pemerton]

what point are you making?

As [MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION] said, the point I'm making is that the frequent rebooting/reimagining of comic characters doesn't seem to have done any harm to revenue for Marvel characters (whether that accrues primarily to Disney or other studios).

And the lore of Marvel characters isn't consistent in the film era - look at the X-Men, for instance, which do not have a consistent lore across the films. This doesn't seem to have done much harm.

Tony Stark can't be wounded in Vietnam.

This reminded me of the fact that (per early X-Men comics) Prof X fought in the Korean War, yet (per 80s/90s X-Men comics) was a middle-aged man 40 years later. The subtle revisiting and readjustment of timelines that is part-and-parcel of long-running comic series doesn't seem to cause problems.

Which is probably more evidence that there is no very strong correlation between tight fidelity to canon and popular, commercial or literary success.

Wolverine is a trope. His precise age, the minutiae of how he was infused with adamantium, etc, are details that can be (and have been) fuged.

if the canon and lore are inconsistent, ever changing and sometimes contradictory it creates a barrier for casual entry

I don't know of any evidence for this. What "barrier for casual entry" is created by the fact that, in X-Men Origins Xavier can walk and use his powers, and Wolverine and Sabretooth are brothers, whereas the other films imply that Wolverine and Sabretooth are strangers and that Xavier can only walk by taking a drug that suppresses his powers.

When pemerton mentioned what makes a Greyhawk game was basic geography and history (like Hardby being ruled by the Gynarch and the Bright Desert being settled by Suel tribesmen) - that's canon every bit as minute as minutiae that he says he doesn't care about. So while some canon doesn't matter to him, other canon clearly does.

As I said in the OP, and some posts not long after it, I don't care about canon. But I do care about tropes (that's one reason why my RPGing is mostly FRPGing).

Why do I say that I don't care about canon? Because changes to GH don't bother me. Where I don't care for them, I just ignore them. Where I don't care for what Gygax wrote (eg that the vikings are really Suel tribesmen) I ignore that too - my Suel are classical pulp-style Egyptians (along the lines of REH's Stygians), and my vikings are vikings, not albino Stygians.

Why do I use GH as the baseline for my S&S/pulp-y FRPGing? Because I'm familiar with it. And because it has good trope-laden geography - the central region of the maps has Furyondy/Iuz (for some French/Gondorian knights vs orcs action), GH (for some city of thieves-type action), the Bright Desert and surrounding hills (for sand dunes, nomadic tribesmen, pyramids, etc), the kingdom of Celene (for elves) and the Wild Coast (for more orcs, but pulpy rather than epic, plus galleys and pirates sailing out of Highport).

As I said, I care about tropes, not canon.