Edition Fatigue

[His Dudeness]

Whoa, really?

"I draw from the Fortune Telling Card deck."'

"Okay. It's 'Winds of Change' - next time you are hit with an attack you may shift one square and gain a +2 bonus to all defenses, and your girlfriend is going to leave you and take your favorite band shirt."

You are missing the point. TSR published Planescape in order to milk the consumer. Wizards published fortune cards.

 

[JeffB]

I think the negative stigma of being a "D&D player" by the general public who is even familiar with the name of the game is probably THE thing that will keep D&D from ever becoming as successful and mainstream as we would like it to be.

The original "boom" in the late 70s, early 80s was new- fresh. And the many people not involved had no way to form an opinion of the game yet- and the stereotypical players of said game.

30 years later it's quite different. Oh sure you have a few moderately successful actors who play, some who mention they used to play, etc. But the general public does not have nearly the bias towards other entertainment like board games, and computer/video games because those products have been ingrained in our culture for people of all stripes and types as "normal"- whereas D&D is still seen as "dorky, geeky" etc. Sure properties like HP, LOTR and SW have sold to the extremes to the masses, but going to the movies (IOW- mostly are "books" for people who don't feel like reading- present company not included) and RPGs are very different things,

Then on top of that you have all the issues of modern complex systems with big barriers to entry, time & scheduling necessary to play, and getting everyone together to do so on a consistent basis.

So, IMO, Ain't gonna happen- until there is a wholesale turnaround in the perception of the D&D name, and stereotypical gamer image it conjures, by the masses of non-gaming public.


Addition- I think for RPGs to hit that mainstream, we will have to see a different game with a different name, made by some very clever people. I don't think there will be another lightning strike for D&D.

 

[Sacrificial Lamb]

Trained goats will hunt us out and butt us until we change to the new edition.

Butt us right over the edge.

That won't work. I own all the trained goats.

 

[ggroy]

My opinion is simply that a new edition over decade or so isn't a bad idea. It's changing the system every edition thats the problem. There really is no need for it.

Planned obsolescence in action?

 

[Argyle King]

Settlers has had a number of expansions. These are not necessary to play. So once you buy into Settlers, there's more to buy (but nothing required). However, Settlers has remained... Settlers. It has expansions, it has spinoffs, it has sibling games, but the game has, actually, remained "ze same".

I feel like I'm repeating myself a lot lately, but there are games which take that approach. If it is your personal opinion that you prefer that approach over what D&D is doing -having a set core and then optional expansions- it may be a good idea to support one of those other games.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I think the negative stigma of being a "D&D player" by the general public who is even familiar with the name of the game is probably THE thing that will keep D&D from ever becoming as successful and mainstream as we would like it to be.

The original "boom" in the late 70s, early 80s was new- fresh. And the many people not involved had no way to form an opinion of the game yet- and the stereotypical players of said game.

30 years later it's quite different. Oh sure you have a few moderately successful actors who play, some who mention they used to play, etc. But the general public does not have nearly the bias towards other entertainment like board games, and computer/video games because those products have been ingrained in our culture for people of all stripes and types as "normal"- whereas D&D is still seen as "dorky, geeky" etc. Sure properties like HP, LOTR and SW have sold to the extremes to the masses, but going to the movies (IOW- mostly are "books" for people who don't feel like reading- present company not included) and RPGs are very different things,

Then on top of that you have all the issues of modern complex systems with big barriers to entry, time & scheduling necessary to play, and getting everyone together to do so on a consistent basis.

So, IMO, Ain't gonna happen- until there is a wholesale turnaround in the perception of the D&D name, and stereotypical gamer image it conjures, by the masses of non-gaming public.

The negative gamer sterotype is not the real obstacle, it does not stop people playing WoW, which is a similar enough activity to be identical in the eyes of the disinterested bystander.

No, the real obstacles are, it is difficult to explain, particularly in a sound byte fashion. Go ahead, try it; write an explanination of rpgs in 100 words or less.

The buy in to any rpg requires an investment of 50 to 100+ bucks and to read at least one 300 page manual (Red Box aside)

One player need to enjoy being a facilitator/cat wrangler and to be engaging and creative enough to draw in the other players and keep them interested in the game/story.

I think people that mentioned a simpler but complete beginner game, but completely compatible with an exisitng advanced game has some merit.

If you strip 4e down to its essential core, keep the skills, cut down on feats and powers. Start off with a generic class but a themed advancement structure so that at 10th level you finish up with a fullblown first level regular 4e class. It could possibly be done in 150 ages or so and call it Basic D&D and then rebrand the normal 4e as Advanced D&D.
Just a thought induced by insomnia.

 

[ggroy]

So what do we need to do to get "Topology: an introduction with application to topological groups" into every household?

A "Topology for Dummies" book?

Using a Klein bottle for the lemonade jug?

 

[BryonD]

The Fantasy Trip: In the Labyrinth was, what...40 pages? 60?

And it was a fully realized FRPG. Not perfect, no, but easy to learn and fun to play. So it CAN be done.

I 100% agree that it can be done. But, I'm highly skeptical of it being done AND showing as a true major, lasting name in the market. It is a different point.

The negative gamer sterotype is not the real obstacle, it does not stop people playing WoW, which is a similar enough activity to be identical in the eyes of the disinterested bystander.

No, the real obstacles are, it is difficult to explain, particularly in a sound byte fashion. Go ahead, try it; write an explanination of rpgs in 100 words or less.

I certainly agree with your first point. But not the second.
It may be true that it takes some effort to put in writing. But that notwithstanding, I've yet to meet anyone who didn't grasp the concept is very short order.

I can't say why, and won't even try, but the fact of the matter is that a great majority of the population have no interest in sitting around a table playing pretend to be an elf. Yes, obviously they ARE willing to sit at a computer and pretend to be an elf for hours on end. But there are massive differences. Not the least of which is MMOs don't really require even a hint of roleplaying. In my experience the "RP" realms for WOW tend to be less popular, are frequently mocked by players on other realms in the same cliche manner table top gamers are mocked in meat space, and don't tend to resemble D&D anyway. MMOs tend to be more about personal empowerment by avatar/proxy and virtually nothing about being "in character".

 

[ggroy]

Addition- I think for RPGs to hit that mainstream, we will have to see a different game with a different name, made by some very clever people. I don't think there will be another lightning strike for D&D.

A Harry Potter rpg?

 

[Aus_Snow]

Planned obsolescence in action?

Among other things, most definitely.

The game vs. "the industry", or what's left of it. I know which one I'm backing. I am also unable to be unaware which "they" are.

And so it goes on.