Help me with my MA thesis...on D&D!

[Biohazard]

As my title suggests, I'm starting an MA in Sociology and I'm planning on doing a thesis on the Dungeons & Dragons subculture. I'm especially interested in the different versions of the game and the groups of players who are dedicated to them.

Having been a D&Der off and on for close to 20 years, I've seen the hobby both from the inside and from the outside.

One thing I've observed is that every time a new edition of D&D has come out, the subculture has divided (or at least split in some form). OD&D morphed into AD&D and B/X D&D. AD&D morphed into AD&D 2e. B/X D&D morphed into RC D&D. AD&D 2e and RC D&D both disappeared, replaced by D&D 3.0 (not really a morphing, so much as an entire reworking of the game). 3.0 morphed into 3.5.

It seems to me, based only on observation and the gamers I've encountered over the years, that most gamers "upgrade". Most gamers want to play the latest version of the game.

Yet some (many??) gamers stick with previous versions.

This is the first question for my MA thesis and I'm trying to get some insights, and hoping you folks would be kind enough to give your thoughts, opinions, stories, perspectives.

The question is: How many D&Ders are playing previous versions of the game, and why are they staying with those versions?

I know that exact numbers are impossible to find. Yet even checking the traffic on websites can be revealing. I've been lurking in three groups:
dragonsfoot, mortality, and planetadnd. All three (seem) to be strong pre-3.0 communities. Yet all three have very little traffic compared with enworld.

So are the AD&D 2e and OD&D and RCD&D and AD&D 1e fanatics a tiny minority? Or are they out there in larger numbers than we realize? And why are they playing what they're playing?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Terwox]

I highly expect that you'll get a biased sample even on messageboards like these, and I'm rather sure that people playing older versions are a rather vocal minority.

I'm really unsure as to whether or not you'll find much in the way of reliable general population info on a messageboard -- except for the population of messageboard followers. Now there's a population you could study more easily.

 

[VirgilCaine]

You could also try the WotC boards.

 

[ssampier]

Better in real life

Hey, nice to meet a fellow major. I earned my Bachelor of Science in Sociology this past Spring. Your study sounds interesting, but I'm not positive it is graduate level. I would suggest that you use the Internet only as a portion of your sample.

I would instead do a qualitative research study using the snowball sampling technique. You would interview one "old time gamer" (you can qualify that any way you want) and they refer you to another old time gamer, etc.

 

[KMageau]

I am a 20+ year veteran of D&D. I have used several incarnations of the game rules. Boxed sets, AD&D, 2e and now testing out 3.5e. If you would like to create an interview document or some other method I am interested in helping you out. Let me know, PM me.

 

[was]

-It's a very interesting proposal. I am very curious to see what defining characteristics you would list that would categorize gamers as a distinct 'subculture'.
- Our groups range from 20-45 yrs of age and play several different editions from basic to 3.5.
-One of the most amazing things that I have witnessed in gaming is simply that it seems to appeal to members of almost every age, ethnic and socio-economic group. I have gamed with many others who are older than I, are members of differing ethnic groups and differing nationalities. I think that it it has provided me with some insight and knowledge that I may not have been exposed to otherwise. Just look on these boards for example, people from all over the world united by a love of gaming. In my opinion, that almost universal acceptance and tolerance of individuals is among its greatest defining characteristics. That and persecution by radical Christian groups.
-Who knows, maybe we'll get world peace through gaming.
http://www.3rdedition.org/articles/viewer.asp?ID=67
http://web.archive.org/web/20011116065046/www.religioustolerance.org/d_a_d.htm
...these might help on your research, there are reference lists on each at the bottom...

 

[Wombat]

Second try...

Let's see if my connection holds this time

I am rather a mixed bag. There are some games I have upgraded on, others I have not. Consider my D&D career:

1975 got OD&D
1977 pretty much stopped playing D&D (no upgrade)
2000 got 3e for Xmas, began playing again (have not upgraded to 3.5 and probably won't)

Then there are my other games.

Pendragon -- have kept current with each incarnation, but prefer 2nd edition (pre-magical characters)
Ars Magica -- have kept current with each incarnation (least happy with 3rd ed); looking forward to 5th ed! Yeah!
Paranoia -- Started with 2nd ed, later got 4th ed, but kept playing 2nd (liked the mechanics better)
RuneQuest -- Started with 1st ed, moved over to 2nd ed (few changes anyway), moved onto 3rd ed, but switched back to 2nd ed
Star Trek -- Started with FASA, moved onto LUG, quickly moved back to FASA, moved to Decipher, moved back to FASA, contemplating moving back to Decipher again

Like I said, a real mixed bag...

 

[Knoxgamer]

As much as I love gaming, as a fellow social science researcher i'd urge you to focus on a more serious topic than D&D. Not only would accurate data be very difficult to obtain, it wouldn't be a very effective career booster. There is no shortage topics to choose from.

Ssample and Terwox are on top of it. Amongst the group you wish to study you will not find a representative sample using the Internet.

Also, if you're wanting to study pen and paper roleplayers as a subculture perhaps you should diversify beyond Dungeons and Dragons.

I hope I don't sound too harsh, but social science research is a subject i've always taken very seriously due to the volume of poorly done research i'm routinely exposed to.

 

[Turanil]

As much as I love gaming, as a fellow social science researcher i'd urge you to focus on a more serious topic than D&D. Not only would accurate data be very difficult to obtain, it wouldn't be a very effective career booster.

I second this opinion. Especially if your study is only about percentage of gamers who don't upgrade to D&D 3.5. At least, if it was to know which kind of people (gender, age, social class, profession, etc.) do play RPGs, it would be more interesting.

 

[Warden]

As much as I love gaming, as a fellow social science researcher i'd urge you to focus on a more serious topic than D&D. Not only would accurate data be very difficult to obtain, it wouldn't be a very effective career booster. There is no shortage topics to choose from.

I hope I don't sound too harsh, but social science research is a subject i've always taken very seriously due to the volume of poorly done research i'm routinely exposed to.

I disagree with that. I may not have any background in social sciences, but I have talked with some people who are taking such courses, and such a topic could be interesting. Despite the fact that roleplaying may be much more mainstream than before (as you can find D&D books in bookstores and Wal-Mart now), the roleplayer's culture is still viewed with suspicion, if not misunderstanding. How many of us out there can really say out loud what we enjoy doing in the professional world or freely discuss our gaming in high schools without the possibility of downgrading our status in their eyes? Most of my staff still listen to me talk about it and think "Geez, this guy's my boss?" It may be better than when I was younger (10-15 years ago), but there is still a stigma attached to it. While I may not know the technical terms, that still puts us in a subculture that would be worth studying for thesis, I find. The trick is probably how it is looked at.

As for the attachment for older editions of the game, it's like everyone remembering their first car/favourite sports teams/anything else from our youth. My group plays both 3.5 and AD&D 2E -- there is a nostalgia in playing the "old game" as that is the one that most of us started with. Every time that we play it, we reflect back to the good ol' days while we attempt to create new memories that are just as good as those we remember -- remarkably, the new games just never seem to have the same attachment as the old ones, no matter how much they may have actually sucked. Everyone creates an attachment to memories and the physical objects that reflect on them, so it doesn't surprise me that many people prefer the old games, even if newer versions have more detailed rules and may work "better" (which is the reason that I use 3.5 in my campaign, but would gladly pick up any of the old rulebooks and step back to 1990 all over again...for a game, nothing else, those were mostly bad times for me).

However, human culture is progressive. We buy computers that run faster, cars that get better mileage, and RPG games with new rules. It's not surprising, I find, that the majority of gamers are using the new rules and visiting sites like EN World over PlanetAD&D because this latest version of the game is much more adaptable and expandable than before. Ten years from now, when D&D 4.0 comes out or the system goes belly up and everyone starts playing another game altogether, there will be many of us from the present looking back with a smile to the old 3.5 game that brings back so many fond memories.

Like the old saying goes: My two cents.