Draogn's Eye View 7/31: Transmedia Experience

[I'm A Banana]

John Schindamindadingdong (last name misspelled) goes into corporate buzzword territory in his article about D&D as more than just a game:

Linkie-poo.

 

[I'm A Banana]

So, as may be expected, I've got FEELS about this.

Let me say right off the bat: yeah, it totally makes sense for Drizzt and other D&D thingies to jump across media. We can have Drizzt action figures and comic books and novels and video games and TV shows and feature films. And it makes sense and is really interesting to find out what bits are important to signify "Drizzt" and what things that, when changed, make him unrecognizable.

It doesn't make much sense for D&D itself to have a "consistent experience" though.

Because D&D isn't one world. It isn't one experience. Variation should be expected.

So, to make a comparison: Drizzt is like, say, Frodo in Lord of the Rings. Totally makes sense to be transmedia. Zoom out a little bit to the Lord of the Rings itself -- still totally within the realm of transmedia. LotR videogames, LotR TV shows, whatever. Good good good.

But don't stop there. Zoom out to the level of New Line Cinema. Does it make sense for New Line Cinema's brand to be transmedia? To have a consistent experience across all of its films? Do Frodo and Sam have to expect a consistent experience with Reefer Madness and A Nightmare on Elm Street? What about if you zoom out farther to Warner Bros. Entertainment? Does LotR need a consistent experience with The Maltese Falcon and Duck Amok?

Or even within Hasbro's own camp: does it make sense to pretend that My Little Pony, GI Goe and Transformers all exist in the same reality as each other, and that you need a consistent experience when moving between them?

Heck no.

D&D is not a world. It is more of a network. It contains within itself many worlds. It doesn't make any more sense to make D&D itself a consistent experience across media than it does to make Turner Broadcasting a consistent experience across media.

The Forgotten realms is a world. It can have a consistent experience across media. But D&D is not a world, it is a diversity of worlds, all sharing nothing bigger than a network. D&D contains within it worlds and characters and settings where the transmedia experience makes a whole lot of sense and can be really awesome. D&D itself is not that, though. It is too changable, too flexible, to personal, too local, too variable. You can't expect a consistent experience from D&D anymore than you can expect a consistent experience from every movie Warner Bros. produces. there are multiple things under this umbrella.

 

[Remathilis]

It doesn't make much sense for D&D itself to have a "consistent experience" though.

Because D&D isn't one world. It isn't one experience. Variation should be expected.

D&D is not a world. It is more of a network. It contains within itself many worlds. It doesn't make any more sense to make D&D itself a consistent experience across media than it does to make Turner Broadcasting a consistent experience across media.

Yes and no.

You are talking about two very different things in essence. The first is a consistent "feel" across the spectrum of media, and the second is a consistent feel of the game in play. The former is desirable, the latter no-so-much.

The first thing is an expectation of design, aesthetics, and trade dress. Or, to put it another way, a D&D goblin should have a certain look, attitude, and style and that should be consistent no matter the game, media, or branding. A D&D goblin is different than a Paizo goblin; a D&D orc is different than a Warcraft orc or a Warhammer Orc or a Tolkien Orc. This is something WotC has done since 2000 successfully imho. While 2e AD&D had a multitude of artists creating unique visions for each world (be it Elmore's Dragonlance, Detrilizzi's Planescape, or Brom's Dark Sun) they lacked a unified whole. In a world of multimedia, having a definitive "look" is preferable, and not entirely shocking since I own posters, CDs, DVDs, mini's etc from the 3e era and they all have a unified "look".

The latter is the idea that D&D should have one feel. We went down that road once in late 3e and early 4e. One World, One Game. Rules as written, mildly flexible, but providing a unified experience no matter who was DM and in what setting (home, encounters, RPGA) played in. This was a terrible idea and deserved to be banished. D&D is not WoW, or even Monopoly where you can assume a certain "experience" every time you play. The game should be flexible enough to encompass most deviations of play style; intrigue, dungeon crashing, immersive storytelling, steam punk, gothic horror, sword and sorcery, high fantasy, etc.

I can see the author's point. You want a picture, an action figure, or a movie to scream "this is D&D". But you don't want a game to perscribe only high-fantasy dungeon-crawling and say "this is D&D."

 

[JeffB]

I have written and deleted several responses before posting this. I just cannot find much nice to say when it comes to Jon's articles and viewpoint on the D&D aesthetic.

I will say this WOTC (Hasbro?) corporate desire to homogenize and sanitize D&D's look and story for a "uniform experience" makes me want to go give Ryan Dancey a bro-hug for his vision , and fire up a gigantic bag of dog crap on Peter Adkison's doorstep for selling WOTC.

That was not nice either, but that was the most PG way I could post it.

 

[Morrus]

Since when did D&D have a consistent experience? My game is different to your game. As it should be - my brain is not your brain.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

The suicidal dwarf is on target -- while D&D writ large has elements that apply to multiple media, and some individual properties can cross over, there's no way to have a standard experience on all media without fundamentally destroying and homogenizing D&D.

WOTC Fail. Anyone want to light my torch? I'm busy sharpening my pitchfork.

 

[Savage Wombat]

After the articles we've been reading - this comes as no surprise at all.

 

[JeffB]

And with this recent string of proclamations about the D&D brand, and it's uniformity, it is probably a good sign we will not be seeing a 3rd party SRD type document for use with NEXT. That would totally dillute the uniform D&D experience.

Certainly we cannot have any non sanctioned Orcs running around who do not worship Gruumsh and do not follow the Corporate Monster & NPC Dress Guidelines WOTC will be providing in the next playtest packet.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Did Jon talk about a uniform D&D experience? All I can see is his assertion that a story can be told transmedia, with a consistent art direction. But maybe the coffee hasn't boosted my reading comprehension yet.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Certainly we cannot have any non sanctioned Orcs running around who do not worship Gruumsh and do not follow the Corporate Monster & NPC Dress Guidelines WOTC will be providing in the next playtest packet.

I take that as proof that Hennet the sorcerer (aka Mr. Buckles) will not return.