Expanding the Pie: Thoughts on Retaining and Attracting People to Gaming

[pogre]

I teach at the high school level and I use lots of games in my World History class. For example we are playing Diplomacy as we head into our World War One unit. Students really enjoy these games and many of them seek them out to buy later. Eventually, some kids find out that I play D&D, and somehow knowing that the football and track coach play D&D makes it seem more OK.

GAMA used to have an outreach program to schools. I tried to send them a couple of e-mails, but I have never received a reply. I think offering free games with lesson plans is an awesome way to introduce kids to pen and paper table top games. I even have another teacher in my social studies department running Diplomacy! If Gama would reinvigorate this program I think it could be very successful.

 

[James Heard]

I am speaking from personal experience only here, but I as a DM, and those in my group that do DM, like to keep the number of players down. Eight being the maximum. It’s easier on us this way.

Just to throw a cog in this perception, my most successful "introduce a whole heaping pile of people to roleplaying" experience was in the early 90s running my Cyberpunk game. I swear, most of those games now feel like full blown parties to my slowly aging perceptions. 20-30 people in a session, running sometime during the weekend mostly with the same people we'd cart around to clubs and drink with together. The drinking probably blurred over any mistakes and the general irreverance that we treated the subject (like the player who showed up every session with a new character and then proceeded to show everyone how to "go out with a bang". Every.stinking.time.), but a I know quite a few of them went on to become roleplayers for years afterwards even if they never got into anything remotely resembling D&D. Vampire LARPS also have introduced a lot pf people to my D&D games over the years, some of those games attracted people literally off the street that would walk past the store and see something going on at 4am and wander in to see. Given all that anecdotal evidence, I think what might do a lot for the hobby would be simply allowing people to watch more roleplaying. However convenient it might be for the FLGS crowd to put their gaming tables in the back where the players won't be disturbed I think it might be preferable to have them way out front so that passerby can look in and watch people through the window and try to keep people playing all the time.

 

[Umbran]

And, speaking as a consumer, for me this is a good thing. I want to be catered to... as long as my needs are met, I don't care about anyone else. (Selfish? Heck yeah - but again, this is my consumer side speaking. I spend money to have my needs served.)

Ah. That's not your consumer side talking. That's consumer myopia talking

In addition to the economics mentioned by others - that more gamers mean more and cheaper gaming products, there's the reverse. Too few new gamers mean a shrinking market. A shrinking market means fewer publishers and authors can manage to print.

In other words, your needs as a consumer are being served by attempts to expand the hobby. In the medium to long run, failing to recruit new players (and thus expand or maintain the hobby market) means the publishers cannot serve you, as they are busy being bankrupt.

In some ways, I have to agree with this. Expanding the RPG customer base is really the publishers' and retailers' concern

It is our concern, because if new players aren't found to buy products, the gaming publishers die out. The publishers and retailers certainly should bear much of the burden, but as you note, they aren't the ones in the best position to do anything about it.

 

[William Ronald]

And I thought you were expanding the Orc and Pie adventure to bring in new gamers!

Bringing in new gamers isn't really that hard; I've had a lot of people recently express interest in joining my group. Of course, they're mostly former gamers, so I don't know if "new" really applies to them.

Hmm, I would have to get Monte's permission first. Also, we could throw in some cookies, a few brownies, and maybe have Bagel Golem make a guest appearance. Good to see you on the boards, and I hope your games are going well.

My former group was fairly good at bringing new players in by having people in the group bring in their friends. Or just running a game at a local gaming shop. I think friends can help dispel some of the stereotypes about gaming as embodied in the Entertainment Weekly article. (This stereotype, mind you, is a lot better than some of the stuff thrown at our hobby in the 1980s.)

buzz, I think being active is a good idea to get people into any hobby. I have meet some great people at EN World Gamedays and other events. Also, I have seen a few people just walk in to a store, and later join a gaming group. I think that publishers as well as individual gamers can have a role in promoting our hobby.

James, this reminds me of something from high school about 20 years ago. A local branch of the Chicago Public Library let us run games, and we agreed to check out more books. This meant higher circulation for the library, and it helped them out. One day, my old friend Jim started a game that grew larger and larger as people from our high school showed up. By the end of the game, we had Jim, another player, and myself serving as DM to about 40 people. The program with the library eventually ended, in part to DM exhaustion, but I think we introduced a lot of people to gaming. (It helps to have good DMs, and good stories. A good first gaming experience can make people interested in coming back for a second helping ... of pie. I mean gaming. )

However, Gunton the Terrible does have a point in that it is sometimes wise to limit the number of players. I think giving a new player a chance to role play as well as to fight a few battles is important.

Firelance, it is good to have an economist commenting on this thread. I think that more gamers will perhaps not only help in terms of product price, but might spur creativity among game publishers. (I see a lot of great ideas out in the market now.)

pogre, I think your use of gaming is interesting and also evocative of a few theories on education. (I am going into teaching, and using Diplomacy to help teach history sounds like an idea that some educational psychologists would endorse.) I know TSR put out some stuff back in the 1980s that a few people I know used to explain our hobby. Maybe GAMA might be interested, or a few publishers might want to pick up the torch.

Maybe a good idea for WotC or other companies that have their products being used for videogames is to have a brief commercial or tie in to their main gaming products. Maybe some of the people who play Baldur's Gate as an electronic game might be interested to know about the game behind their videogame.

 

[James Heard]

Of course another good reason why entry into D&D and roleplaying is so limited and declining is simply the fact that for every great game we've got going on for 20+ years there's a couple of poor schmuck guys running awful games for their friends and not connecting with them or even scaring them off. Part of that is that the whole 'geek' factor isn't a complete fabrication, there are undersocialized folks trying to run games unsuccessfully when the whole activity essentially hinges upon juggling the competing expectations and demands of a group of people. The other part is that running a game is an awful lot of work some times, I've had to give up running games for years occassionally due to demands upon my schedule by real life. Roleplaying isn't something like a sports game where you go for the game and it's over in an hour or so, I don't know if I've ever seen a roleplaying session that lasted less than three hours and a lot of them have had mandatory hour 'pregame' portions just for waiting for people to show up and fixing character sheets and such.

 

[bweenie]

I think that the way to describe it in thirty seconds is to explain that it is essentially interactive storytelling where dice are rolled to determine random events. Give them a LOTR example...ie one person would play Aragorn, one Legolas, one Frodo...and the game master describes the scene, sets challenges and plays all the other characters...and that the rules are there to help you but you don't need to know them to jump in.
But this is assuming that is what you are doing...if you are focused heavily on combat and rules, a lot of people who might be interested in story or roleplaying will be turned off.
I'd agree with the thought that the best way to bring people in is through showing them a good game. But I think that with everything, bringing in ulterior motives will sabotage your efforts from the beginning. Bring people into your hobby because you enjoy it and want to share something with them...not to get cheap source books.

 

[buzz]

It is our concern, because if new players aren't found to buy products, the gaming publishers die out. The publishers and retailers certainly should bear much of the burden, but as you note, they aren't the ones in the best position to do anything about it.

I know it concerns us, but is it really our responsibility? Sorta playing Devil's Advocate here... I mean, are there other industries that expect the consumers to do the lion's share of "advertising", as it were?

 

[buzz]

GAMA used to have an outreach program to schools.

I definitely like to see this revived. Heck, I'd like to see WotC simply donate 1000 copies of the PHB to various school libraries around the world.

 

[buzz]

However convenient it might be for the FLGS crowd to put their gaming tables in the back where the players won't be disturbed I think it might be preferable to have them way out front so that passerby can look in and watch people through the window and try to keep people playing all the time.

My wife and I occasionally sit around and brainstorm ideas for a combo game store and coffee shop. When we lay out the store, I generally want to put gaming tables where people can see them, Ideally bridging the border between the games and the coffee.

 

[Arnwyn]

Ah. That's not your consumer side talking. That's consumer myopia talking

Nice try, but actually it's not, as I'll illustrate below.

In addition to the economics mentioned by others - that more gamers mean more and cheaper gaming products, there's the reverse. Too few new gamers mean a shrinking market. A shrinking market means fewer publishers and authors can manage to print.

As a Senior Financial and Economics Analyst in my company, believe me, I know how the "economics" works. However, the economics posted above, as well as your commentary, make some inappropriate assumptions as they relate to me as a consumer.

One note above was about lower prices. This doesn't apply to me, and certainly isn't a guaranteed "Good Thing". Why would I value a cheaper product that doesn't cater to me? This is valueless. I would much rather pay more for a product that meets my needs - price is not a motivator for me in this market.

Further, you note above that "a shrinking market means fewer publishers and authors can manage to print". Agreed, this is definitely a possible consequence. Again, though, if the publishers aren't meeting my needs, I don't care if there are fewer of them.

Further, the final assumption assumes that game books must continue to come out for me to be able to play. This assumption is the most erroneous of them all.

In other words, your needs as a consumer are being served by attempts to expand the hobby.

As noted above - no, they're not (not necessarily, at least). My prime concern is that as long as the books meet my needs - which may or may not meet newcomer's needs (these two needs are not necessarily mutually exclusive) - I will continue to care and buy. If not, then I will not purchase, and what happens in the industry has no bearing on me (since they weren't meeting my needs in the first place). The neat thing is, the market will always balance itself based on consumer demand (to the chagrin of some, but such is economics).

In the medium to long run, failing to recruit new players (and thus expand or maintain the hobby market) means the publishers cannot serve you, as they are busy being bankrupt.

Yes, that's one of many possible results... and not a concern nor responsibility of mine as a roleplaying consumer (who, as noted above, does not need constant new books to continue playing - an important distinction). It is a concern of the publishers.

(Now, all that is speaking only on my part as a consumer - obviously, many people *do* care that products keep coming out so they can play - whether those products meet their needs or not. However, this is a form of consumer activism that I care little for - in this case.)