Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Zander" data-source="post: 3037631" data-attributes="member: 1364">WotC is not obliged to do anything but it would make a great deal of commercial sense if they did adhere to &quot;often-used stereotype<s>&quot;. D&amp;D became popular in part because it appealed to the &quot;purity of concept&quot; that you at once deny and accept exists. </s><s></s><s>Certainly, being the first RPG was an advantage. After that though, it wasn't until 3.x that D&amp;D was highly regarded for its mechanics. Indeed, much of the mechanics that distinguish 3.x from earlier versions existed in other RPGs first. For the best part of its history, D&amp;D's mechanics were behind other RPGs, not ahead. So if D&amp;D was mechanically clunky, why did it continue to be the most popular RPG? There were certainly challengers. In the early 1980s, for example, Runequest was seen as a potential rival. One of the reasons (perhaps the primary reason) that Runequest and those other RPGs failed to dethrone D&amp;D was that D&amp;D represented a more core (or, if you prefer, stereotypical) fantasy. The fantasy in D&amp;D was already known to the greatest number of people. Whether or not those people labelled the elements they found in D&amp;D that they were familiar with as &quot;mythology&quot;, &quot;epic poetry&quot;, &quot;modern fantasy&quot; or whatever wasn't relevant. What was, was that those elements were familiar and could be easily incorporated into D&amp;D's fantasy. Indeed, D&amp;D's ventures into non-core fantasy settings such as Spelljammer and&nbsp; Darksun have not been as popular as their core fantasy settings such as Greyhawk and FR. </s><s></s><s>It is a well known dictum in psychology that people like what they're familiar with. If WotC want D&amp;D to thrive, they could do a lot worse than having halflings with hairy feet.</s></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Zander, post: 3037631, member: 1364"] WotC is not obliged to do anything but it would make a great deal of commercial sense if they did adhere to "often-used stereotype[s]". D&D became popular in part because it appealed to the "purity of concept" that you at once deny and accept exists. Certainly, being the first RPG was an advantage. After that though, it wasn't until 3.x that D&D was highly regarded for its mechanics. Indeed, much of the mechanics that distinguish 3.x from earlier versions existed in other RPGs first. For the best part of its history, D&D's mechanics were behind other RPGs, not ahead. So if D&D was mechanically clunky, why did it continue to be the most popular RPG? There were certainly challengers. In the early 1980s, for example, Runequest was seen as a potential rival. One of the reasons (perhaps the primary reason) that Runequest and those other RPGs failed to dethrone D&D was that D&D represented a more core (or, if you prefer, stereotypical) fantasy. The fantasy in D&D was already known to the greatest number of people. Whether or not those people labelled the elements they found in D&D that they were familiar with as "mythology", "epic poetry", "modern fantasy" or whatever wasn't relevant. What was, was that those elements were familiar and could be easily incorporated into D&D's fantasy. Indeed, D&D's ventures into non-core fantasy settings such as Spelljammer and Darksun have not been as popular as their core fantasy settings such as Greyhawk and FR. It is a well known dictum in psychology that people like what they're familiar with. If WotC want D&D to thrive, they could do a lot worse than having halflings with hairy feet.[/s] [/QUOTE]

Verification