How likely are you to use D&D for your next game?

[Theory of Games]

Of course the answer many of them would give you if it got down to it is "We don't care. We're enjoying what we're doing, we see no reason to change just because you want us to."

Fine and dandy. I had friends growing up who only listened to Sabbath. I get it.

 

[aramis erak]

What's crazy is there are hundreds of tabletop rps now.

Over 10,000, actually, based upon the database at RPGGeek.com.
And yet, one dominates about 1/3 of discussions, and 60% of online play.... the #3 to #11,000+ are about 10-15% of VTT play....

 

[TheSword]

What's crazy is there are hundreds of tabletop rps now. D&D is just one and yet it's all people talk about on these forums. "D&D this" and "WotC that". It's not even the best ttrpg because "best" has always been subjective and wishy-washy.

They keep saying "Well D&D is the 800 pound gorilla of the ttrpg community". But you do realize D&D is popular because Hasbro spends about $100,000,000 in marketing to keep D&D (and its other products & services) popular.

So the 800 pounds is actually cash weight. Try other games, people.

There is a difference between marketing and advertising. Marketing is really important for all products irrespective of the size of the brand.

I’m not going to try a product unless it interests, excited and inspires me. For that they need to do a bit more marketing.

The greatest failure of the spin offs, clones, retro-clones and indies - is that they can’t articulate their unique selling points. What makes Weird Wizard or Tales of the Valiant, fundamentally better than another system for instance. If you can’t articulate the why, how can you expect folks to invest time, effort and money in something? For the record, not D&D is not a unique selling point.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There is a difference between marketing and advertising. Marketing is really important for all products irrespective of the size of the brand.

I’m not going to try a product unless it interests, excited and inspires me. For that they need to do a bit more marketing.

The greatest failure of the spin offs, clones, retro-clones and indies - is that they can’t articulate their unique selling points. What makes Weird Wizard or Tales of the Valiant, fundamentally better than another system for instance. If you can’t articulate the why, how can you expect folks to invest time, effort and money in something? For the record, not D&D is not a unique selling point.

A5e has IMO done a pretty good job of articulating its selling points, particularly as a "crunchier" version of 5e than what WotC offers (2014 or now).

 

[Thomas Shey]

The greatest failure of the spin offs, clones, retro-clones and indies - is that they can’t articulate their unique selling points. What makes Weird Wizard or Tales of the Valiant, fundamentally better than another system for instance. If you can’t articulate the why, how can you expect folks to invest time, effort and money in something? For the record, not D&D is not a unique selling point.

I suspect in the case of the D&D-adjacents is it can be a lot of little individual things that can be hard to summarize. I can summarize the things I liked better with SotDL, but they won't mean much in a simple blurb.

With non-D&D-adjacents, its often easier to summarize, but it can also be something that seems pretty alien to D&D fans, and potentially unattractive (even in cases where someone might appreciate it in play).

 

[TheSword]

I suspect in the case of the D&D-adjacents is it can be a lot of little individual things that can be hard to summarize. I can summarize the things I liked better with SotDL, but they won't mean much in a simple blurb.

With non-D&D-adjacents, its often easier to summarize, but it can also be something that seems pretty alien to D&D fans, and potentially unattractive (even in cases where someone might appreciate it in play).

That is the challenge and why a bit of time/money is worth spending on marketing. Because if you can’t summarize it with a few sentences to appeal to folks then it is far less likely to sell.

For instance Micah Sweet suggested Level Up is a crunchier version of 5e. Not sure if it is or not, but you can certainly market that… if that’s what people actually want.

 

[CleverNickName]

We are staying with 5th Edition D&D for our main campaign, with the very occasional one-shot game of something else every 6-8 months.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That is the challenge and why a bit of time/money is worth spending on marketing. Because if you can’t summarize it with a few sentences to appeal to folks then it is far less likely to sell.

For instance Micah Sweet suggested Level Up is a crunchier version of 5e. Not sure if it is or not, but you can certainly market that… if that’s what people actually want.

Some people certainly do.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

The question posed is addressing a singular person ("you"), but every answer available suggests a response is made by a group ("we"). That changes the perspective from individual preference to group consensus. Should the question have been "How likely is your group..."?

Personally, I don't have a group to consult with, and it is highly unlikely I'll ever run or play again. But if the opportunity presented, I'd have to consider my role in a potential game, as well as expectations of the game itself. One shots, for example, could be anything. Longer campaigns, I'd want a system that I would at least be interested in using or learning for some time.

As a player, I would happily play whatever system is offered. System mastery was never my concern, and I enjoy roleplaying interesting, quirky, and entertaining characters more than rolling dice for everything. I'm playing a character first. Filling a role for party composition is secondary.

As a GM, I would be most comfortable with a system I am familiar with and enjoy using. System mastery matters more behind the screen, thus I would not want to squander a rare opportunity to run for others unless it was a system new to everyone. That said, I could run a 5e D&D with little effort, but it has never been very exciting to me. I've zero interest in using the new version of the rules, which I will not spend money for. My choice would be a 4e D&D, or FFG Star Wars, which are my favorites systems to use. I had dipped my toes into Starfinder shortly before the 2e was announced. I think it still has potential, with the right adventure and the right group.

I would absolutely love to try something like Sword World after reading about it recently. It's such a cool, casual, and different kind of fantasy RPG experience, one that can be enjoyed and satisfied in single sessions without a lot of prep, build, or planning.

I've always wanted to get into Shadowrun, but the rules system and world building always felt clunky and disjointed. Shadowrun Anarchy had an interesting approach, but unfortunately never got more traction.

I'm happy with board games that feature campaign with co-OP or solo modes, but that's going off the rails now. I guess this is just to say that I still have more games left in me than I have gaming.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The 5E campaigns I'm involved with as a DM or player have finished or are "on hiatus" for various reasons. No-one is discussing running 5E, whether 2014 or 2024. Obviously that's just people I know, but it does surprise me a bit. 2024 seems to me to largely be a decent upgrade, but it lacks that "We gotta try this cool new thing" factor. Ironically I think WotC's heavy work to make it not be a new edition might have backfired here somewhat.

Honestly revising my guess that 6E (and yeah formally touted as a "new edition" this time) is more like 5-6 years out, max, rather than closer to 10. It could be as few as 4, depending on how the sales go in 2025 and 2026.