Evolution/Revolution of industry

[scourger]

I would say that the WotC buyout of TSR and the subsequent release of 3.0/3.5 has been the most recent "real" revolution to help build and gain new customers. However, I would agree with you that it isn't that "big" of a deal in the grand scope of things. The average gamer is still aging, which is not good for our hobby.

As an aside, I think the aging gamer is part of the reason why Wizards thinks there is now a market for adventure modules, where in the past there wasn't. As gamers reach middle age and have serious careers and families and responsibilities, they have less time for planning their own games and are starting to look more at published adventures than they did when they were in college or high school.

Here are some views from a relatively high-volume consumer (especially in the past 5 years) and old school gamer (c. 1980). The d20 system & license definitely revitalized the paper RPG hobby. I call it a hobby and not an industry because it is a hobby for me as a player & DM (in other words, a consumer). The D&D brand flourished, and many other companies and products were able to come to the new market for the betterment of the hobby with swords & sorcery as well as other genres.

The problem is that the system gets too big over time. The three core 3.0 books are 766 combined pages. I read it all before playing or DMing d20. That is a lot of information to process, much less master; but is possible. Adding just one setting sourcebook of comparable size brings the total up to about 1,000 pages. That borders on too much information. A campaign setting that adds a dozen (or two or three) more books is too much information, especially when a good portion of it is new rules. That is why I tend to run a "core" game. I just use the 3 core books plus one (core) setting book, if any. I use published adventures exclusively, regardless of the genre or setting. I am not a computer, and I don't need my tabletop RPG to simulate a computer game. The system needs to be less complicated, not more complicated.

I also believe that adventures grow the market whereas setting books exploit the market. The development model of more and more setting books with fewer and fewer adventures will eventually crush a game under its own weight. I believe that is what is happening with WotC's settings and many other third party d20 settings. I find OGL games are worse for this kind of marketing. Perhaps they have a niche within this niche fo the RPG hobby, but it isn't with me or anyone I know. Conversely, adventures get people playing and keep people playing. The common justification I read for publishers not printing adventures is that only DMs buy them as opposed to setting books which everyone buys. I think this is very short-sighted because an uplayed game is a dead game.

I find a poignant example in Shane Hensley. His Deadlands game exploded on the scene around 1996. Within about 5 years, it and two spinoff games encompassed about 100 books. It was a great game, but it's just too much. Plus, there weren't that many adventures (not that I can find now). After a less successful stab at the d20 market, he rethought his startegy and came up with Savage Worlds--a game that is designed to be easier to play (and, more importantly, to run) and that accommodates the notion that gamers are older and have less time & effort that they can or want to devote to the hobby. The core book is 140 pages. It enables any setting. Setting books include some additional rules and are an entire plot-point campaign. These features make me want to buy more books. If I don't like one setting, I can leave it and pick up another. And the company hasn't invested in an entire line of books in that particular setting, which frees its assets (time, effort & money) to produce other settings that may appeal to me (and my money, time & effort). This strategy is wise since one gamer's trash is another gamer's treasure. Also, people get bored of a game after about 6 months. It's been my experience that I and others in my game group are finished with game after about six months. Some are revisited after they "cool off" for a while, but most are just over. Some should over, but we go back and beat the dead horse to see if it will get up & run again. A campaign is a lot of work for 6 months play, especially with d20 D&D or a derivative. But, it's the nature of the hobby for me. A simple, comprehensive game system with a single, combined setting & adventure book is ideal for the contemproary paper RPG enthusiast.

The d20 system could have these features, but not in its current shape. WotC fragmented the basic rules with d20 Modern, Star Wars, Wheel of Time, Call of Cthulhu, etc. Even Forgotten Realms presents many new rules and variants that are not really portable even to other D&D games much less other genres. I've tried combining d20 games. It doesn't work as well as it could (or should). A DM really has to gloss over a lot to play most third party d20 or OGL adventures in a core D&D game. There are some exceptions, but it is usually not worth the effort for me.

In summary, these are the two points that I believe are necessary for the next evolution or revolution in gaming. First, we need a game that is easier to play but more comprehensive as to genre. Second, the game should be supported by combined setting and adevnture books that are portable to and within the core system.

 

[Poster Bard]

It doesn't work as well as it could (or should). A DM really has to gloss over a lot to play most third party d20 or OGL adventures in a core D&D game. There are some exceptions, but it is usually not worth the effort for me.

Adventures that use the Core Rules only? Here's three for FREE -

Cooperative Dungeon 01 - Terror and Blasphemy

Cooperative Dungeon 02 - Halls of Anarchy

Cooperative Dungeon 03 - Crypt of Damnation

 

[eyebeams]

Video games have broader market appeal because they are dumbed-down and simplified, just like hip-hop music and Paris Hilton. They appeal to the largest common denominator. That doesn't make them "better."

Not really, no.

Hip hop is popular because it's an innovative style that cuts across cultural lines and has the ability to convey moods and messages that can be both universal and tightly referential. Hip hop is both more sophisticated (requiring new technologies, innovative use of old technologies and raw ability) and culturally relevant than RPGs.

Paris Hilton? Not fond of her myself, but I note that the majority of her fame comes from irony, not adoration.

What both "products" have in common is that they're pushed with a certain amount of cultural intelligence that doesn't alienate a core too much, is subject to a great deal of interpretation (Hilton's existence is loaded with observations about class and gender in the US). Paris Hilton is more culturally relevant -- even in the sophisticaed sphere -- than RPGs.

This reminds me of how people once jeered wrestling.

Furthermore, most RPGs just aren't that complicated. You are not a special person for playing them. Guaging possible game results from baseball statistics is more mathematically challenging.

We have a lot to learn from pop culture, really.

 

[scourger]

Adventures that use the Core Rules only? Here's three for FREE -

Cooperative Dungeon 01 - Terror and Blasphemy

Cooperative Dungeon 02 - Halls of Anarchy

Cooperative Dungeon 03 - Crypt of Damnation

Thanks for the links. Adventures like those probably fall under the exceptions. There is no shortage of adventures that use the core rules: the ones you link, the free downloadable ones at the WotC web site, Dungeon, Necromancer, Goodman, etc. I should have been more clear that I was speaking of third party adventures for a specific campaign setting (or another (OGL) game altogether) to convert to the core D&D d20 rules system. But even those are better than nothing if I'm interested in a particular setting, which is rare. For me, it is too much work for not enough play. That imbalance is starting to be true for d20 games in general. I don't like it, but that's how I feel at this point. It just takes too much work to play the game. Even a core game with published adventures requires a lot of preparation time in addition to the effort of actually running the game. Maybe there's a better option. Maybe not. I still think a smaller multi-genre rules system with combined setting and adventure books would be better. Ancient Kingdoms: Mesopotamia and Last Hero in Scandinavia are the closesst d20 offerings I've found in that vein. I would be more excited about them if the rules were a little easier, though (and in fairness those publishers can't really do anything about it). I have considered lowering the massive damage threshold (as in d20 Modern) to make combat quicker and more dramatic. But, that's getting a little off-topic...

 

[Bloodstone Press]

But what is McDonalds trying to be superior at? Are they the best upscale restaurants? No, they are trying to do that. Are they the best at serving an inexpensive hamburger? Yes. And they have that market locked down. If you really want to go to the extreme, McDonalds is not even really about burgers, it is a real estate. McDonalds has some of the best real estate in the world. Just think about how much land they have store on.

that's my point. I first made the statement that video game were "clearly inferior."

Arnwyn disagreed with that because her definition of "superior" means, "makes more money."

Since I first used the term in this conversation, I get to define what it means. And my definition of "clearly superior" is a lot broader than just how much money a product makes or how many customers buy it.

I agree with Warden's points about how PnP games are much better tools for creativity than video games. In this regard, they are clearly superior.

This reminds me of how people once jeered wrestling.

Do they not jeer wrestling anymore?

Say what you want about hip hop. I'm sure "I like to move it, move it" repeated endlessly over the same inane house-beat that all other hip hop music uses is good music to some people.. I am just using it and ms Hilton as examples of pop culture, which video games are also part of.

Stupidity, violence, and sex sells.. They sell a lot more than math problems do.

 

[Bloodstone Press]

The problem is that the system gets too big over time.... The system needs to be less complicated, not more complicated.

i agree with a lot of what you say, especially this.

I think that the trend in the past few years has been as you describe (more settings than modules), but I think that is about to change as well. WotC is doing more modules (or so they say) and other d20 publishers have been and are still making modules. I did 3 short ones last year, and I'll probably do 3 more this year.

However, they don't sell well. Not only because only DMs buy them. But only DMs who are looking for ideas buy them. That's the part that kills it. Most people shopping on RPGnow are DMs. But few of them buy adventures.

Great! Now I gotta toss all my video games.

No way! You need to keep your eye on the enemy.

Should our industry cater to the lowest common denominator, like hip-hop, Paris Hilton, and video games? Or should we take the "high road"? MY answer to both is a resounding "NO!"

I tend to agree with you. However, I do think it would have broader appeal if it were more user friendly, less complicated, faster to calculate, easier to envision, A simpler smoother interface is what is needed to compete with video games.

 

[eyebeams]

Do they not jeer wrestling anymore?

No, not really, especially considering that there is, in fact, an organized industry pro wrestling fanclub that meets at major cons.

Say what you want about hip hop. I'm sure "I like to move it, move it" repeated endlessly over the same inane house-beat that all other hip hop music uses is good music to some people.. I am just using it and ms Hilton as examples of pop culture, which video games are also part of.

Uh, no. Perhaps you've been watching too much TV:


. . .where image takes precedence over wisdom
Where sound bite politics are served to
the fastfood culture
Where straight teeth in your mouth
are more important than the words
that come out of it
-- Disposible Heroes of Hiphoprisy, "Television, Drug of the Nation."

Hell, Ice Cube knows his math; he has a degree in architectural drafting. Perhaps if your analysis of gaming was as superficial as that of hiphop (limited to whatever you involuntarily derived from popular media) you'd think it was a hobby for loser nerds.

Stupidity, violence, and sex sells.. They sell a lot more than math problems do.

Games do not have particularly difficult math. Baseball's math is harder. Football's organizational and strategic demands exceed those of RPGs.

The horrible truth is that gaming is not an elite hobby. Gamers are not particularly smart or insightful people (and it's worth nothing that the last 3 gamers I've met have been through my job as a remedial educator). The only observation I can make about gamers as a group is that, in groups, they tend to be bad tippers and embarass me at restuarants (this is so well known that a few years back Gareth plead with Gen Con goers to improve the reputation of attendees by tipping decently).

Stupidity, violence and sex? Violence is considered so essential to play that Greg Costikyan wrote a short game to parody it. Sex? Have you looked at RPG covers' portrayals of woman compared to anything besides fannish art and porn (and the occasionally overly close intersection between the two)?

The basic narrative elements of RPGs are not alternatives to anything. They are emulations of the most popular print and filmic entertainment genres in the world. Hell, Paris Hilton was tagged to star in the D&D movie sequel, wasn't she? The most popular SF game is based on the most popular SF film series.

We *are* pop culture -- a niche of it that's concerned itself with irrelevant convolutions in its form instead of its essentials. One that has been, by and large, defensive about its right to exist but ashamed of its distinctiveness. In the 90s we got lots of bad mechanics because everyone wanted RPGs to be justified as artistic narrative. Now the pendulum of shame has swung the other way, so that having any "artistic" ambition is considered arrogant. The only thing left between these two poles is the very pop culture mediocrity you decry, but fan-approved practices contribute to.

It should not be beneath gamers to sup from the very pablum they ground between the two halves of their self-loathing.

The entertainment industry does have the advantge, though, because it is hungry for something gamers are not: novelty. Novelty may be a new coat of paint on an old surface, but it *is* new. And this hobby's failure to renew its image -- its hatred of any change to its image -- means that it can't do that.

Even wthin the limited subset of D20 and WotC OGL-derived games, this creative bankruptcy is pervasive. Mike Mearls has commented on how the system is rarely used to its potential in favour of continuing retreads. Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed showed that having even the minimal bravery to abandon frickin' elves has a payoff, but with almost anyone else I can expect a long march of books about copyright-sanitized drow or an endless selection of 5x5 flagstone floorplans (with the occasional archway or stalagmite for "originality").

I'll say what I've said before: I understand the need for broadly appealing products, but if publishers can't go past that and make a leap of faith into something distinct ( not even original), then you should give up. You're dead weight.

For the ones that will take that step, though: Good luck.

 

[sirfrancisdrake]

I agree that creativity is much needed, if not most important for growth of just about anything. I wonder if OGL was really a great revolution for the industry, since people don't have to worry about coming up with their own worlds, since they can use a pre-existing one.

Mike

 

[Warden]

Stupidity, violence, and sex sells.. They sell a lot more than math problems do.

There is an exceptional documentary out there called "Stupidity" that examines the cultural impact and constant demand for stupidity. Par example, they take a look at the Jackass phase from a couple of years back. If you can find it for rent, check it out -- it's a bit of an eye-opener.

 

[Arnwyn]

that's my point. I first made the statement that video game were "clearly inferior."

Arnwyn disagreed with that because her definition of "superior" means, "makes more money."

Oops. And that where you're wrong ("he", BTW) and misinterpreted my statement.

I didn't say "makes more money" (and, in fact, made sure I didn't say that). I said, essentially, that they're not inferior because they're more popular - for good reasons. Video games, for me (and, as I noted in my first post, many others) are actually the superior format, for many reasons - and it should come as no surprise that it blows the niche market of PnP games out of the water.

Video games are comparable in price (per product item) to PnP games but require far less work to use, don't require another person to actually put the game together and run it (the far-too-overworked DM), doesn't require any other people to play, involve no scheduling conflicts, provide a multi-media experience (music and visuals), and more often than not include a story that most DMs, IMO/IME, couldn't hope to base a game on (and run successfully).

IMO, video games are in no way inferior to PnP games, and there should be no surprise as to their popularity. And it isn't simply because they "make more money" (though that is the final result). Overall, they provide a superior experience. And that's what's important.

(Note, though, that PnP games do provide a "different" experience - and even if providing an inferior overall experience for "the masses", has strengths (that you alluded to) that video games couldn't hope to compete with. Accentuate the strengths, and PnP has a chance. But as a direct competitor to video games? Nuh-uh. PnP games are dead before they even get out of the gate.)

Since I first used the term in this conversation, I get to define what it means. And my definition of "clearly superior" is a lot broader than just how much money a product makes or how many customers buy it.

Rightfully so.

I agree with Warden's points about how PnP games are much better tools for creativity than video games. In this regard, they are clearly superior.

I also agree with this. But "better tools for creativity" has little to do with improving the lot of the PnP game industry when put against video games (especially if you're considering video games as an actual competitor to PnP games - are they?).