D&D 5E I think we can safely say that 5E is a success, but will it lead to a new Golden Era?

[broghammerj]

A few random thoughts as a lapsed DND gamer (hated 4E and life got more complex with kids around 2007). I didn't do any playtesting but have read a bit about it here and there.

1. I am excited about this edition. Fan involvement couldn't have been handled better. The marketing/playtesting have been totally different compared to 4E. I don't get the sense that what I used to do was bad/not fun/wrong and this edition will be super cool! I think this will help to bring back old timers like me and boost sales.

2. I think DnD can't enter another golden age until they can make a kid version that gets the future generation involved. I've got a 3, 6, and 7 yo. The 7 yo can read and is very bright (sounds narcissistic but my other kids are pretty average). I would love to play some form of DnD with them. The board games don't really cut it. Until they have something that can sell the DnD brand to them there won't be another golden age. For example, the older two both play Settlers of Cataan Junior and love it.

3. DnD has to capture some sort of wave of recent changes in pop culture. Game of Thrones is super popular. We've had the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Harry Potter, Walking Dead, all Marvel movies, etc. All of these things essentially represent the fantasy/sci-fi stuff that has become pretty mainstream. Imagine if I would have told you that one of the most popular fantasy series of modern time would become an HBO hit, the classic fantasy series that spawned the idea of DnD would become a set of blockbuster movies, a comic book would be transformed into one of the most popular TV shows, etc. You would have told me that I was crazy. Somehow DnD has to break through that culture barrier to become mainstream.

 

[Mercurius]

Much of the issues with 4e was in presentation and that's not an issue this time around.

I agree, although think the actual game itself was an issue for many. 4E was, for better or worse, rather specific in flavor and relatively narrow in its appeal. It was almost as if WotC was so fixated on the goal of creating a certain type of game and appealing to a certain type of gamer that they forgot that half or more of the community preferred a different approach. I remember someone saying that 4E would have worked better as a completely different RPG, or as a variant form of D&D - but the problem was that it veered too far from tradition to be the flagship. I have come to agree with this and think that Mearls & Co have learned from the mistakes of the past and rectified them.

Whether this will greatly expand the community remains to be seen, but I do think it will bring some folks back and strengthen the existing fan-base.

The game isn't even out yet. Most people haven't seen the books let alone had chance to properly go through them. Now if there was something immediately stupid like the print coming off the pages like what happened in 4e then we might be hearing of that by now, but the release date for the FIRST BOOK is august 19th. We are 10 days before the average person can get ahold of the first book of the game.

Beyond that, fans who were going to rush out and get the product as soon as possible are just that, fans. They're more likely to be hyped and excited about the product more than the average player. So, it is certainly possible the game is good or amazing but it is equally possible the game is crap but we have virtually no way of knowing it so early.

I think you're missing something here, or veering away from the original point - at least that I was trying to make. I'm talking largely about the reaction of the diehards on places like ENWorld and other internet communities - folks who have, to a large extend, checked out the Starter Set and/or Basic D&D, seen at least the PHB previews if not the book itself. The "word on the cyber street" is generally quite positive, far more so than it was in the early days of 4E (remember the PDF leak?).

Now whether or not D&D takes with the extended community remains to be seen - that will show up in sales over the next six months or so. But we can already start getting a sense of how the "core community" feels, although you're right in that we'll know more in a month or two.

A golden age for the game? Wow, that is such a premature statement.

I think you're over-reacting a bit about the use of "golden age." We're just speculating about possible trajectories going forward. No one is, or at least I am not, saying that we are heading for a golden age - we are (or I am) asking whether it is possible and if so, how.

She's truly blessed. Seriously. Does she have any idea how lucky she is? I wish I could forget those things.

Ha ha, no kidding.

A few random thoughts as a lapsed DND gamer (hated 4E and life got more complex with kids around 2007). I didn't do any playtesting but have read a bit about it here and there.

Welcome back!

1. I am excited about this edition. Fan involvement couldn't have been handled better. The marketing/playtesting have been totally different compared to 4E. I don't get the sense that what I used to do was bad/not fun/wrong and this edition will be super cool! I think this will help to bring back old timers like me and boost sales.

I hope that there are many others in a similar boat.

2. I think DnD can't enter another golden age until they can make a kid version that gets the future generation involved. I've got a 3, 6, and 7 yo. The 7 yo can read and is very bright (sounds narcissistic but my other kids are pretty average). I would love to play some form of DnD with them. The board games don't really cut it. Until they have something that can sell the DnD brand to them there won't be another golden age. For example, the older two both play Settlers of Cataan Junior and love it.

I think you are right, although the challenge is how to draw young 'uns in? When I discovered D&D I was about 9 years old and it was the early 80s when video games were quite primitive; coupled with the fact that I've just never been drawn to them, there wasn't a lot of competition for my young imagination except for comic books and fantasy novels - both of which augmented my interest in D&D.

Young people born in the 90s and 00s have more competing entertainments. If you're 9-12 years old, it is a lot easier to get into video games than RPGs, in a similar way that it is a lot easier to buy fast food than it is to learn how to cook. Once you learn how to cook you realize how much more enjoyable, delicious, and healthy a home-cooked meal is than fast food, but the problem is the learning curve.

The Starter Set is a good start, but I don't think it is enough for mass appeal.

3. DnD has to capture some sort of wave of recent changes in pop culture. Game of Thrones is super popular. We've had the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Harry Potter, Walking Dead, all Marvel movies, etc. All of these things essentially represent the fantasy/sci-fi stuff that has become pretty mainstream. Imagine if I would have told you that one of the most popular fantasy series of modern time would become an HBO hit, the classic fantasy series that spawned the idea of DnD would become a set of blockbuster movies, a comic book would be transformed into one of the most popular TV shows, etc. You would have told me that I was crazy. Somehow DnD has to break through that culture barrier to become mainstream.

I just read that MTV is creating a Shannara series in the vein of Game of Thrones. How about Showtime or some other big network, or perhaps Netflix, getting behind Dungeons & Dragons as an ongoing series? I think either a series or movie(s) would work well, as long as they were well done and not brimming with gamer-speak and in-jokes.

 

[broghammerj]

I just read that MTV is creating a Shannara series in the vein of Game of Thrones. How about Showtime or some other big network, or perhaps Netflix, getting behind Dungeons & Dragons as an ongoing series? I think either a series or movie(s) would work well, as long as they were well done and not brimming with gamer-speak and in-jokes.

Sounds interesting. I still think that the Dragonlance series would have the best opportunity to put DnD on the map (FYI, I have not seen the animated movie). It has all the makings of a great movie and is pretty much an amalgam of all the great cliches in novels and film. I also think it is a spin off of the X men and Star Wars:

The feuding siblings (Kitiara vs Caramon/Raistlin)
Raistlin the brooding loner battling his own demons. (Wolverine)
The Sturm/Tanis/Kitiara love triangle (Cyclops/Jean Grey/Wolverine)
Lord Soth (I mean Darth Vadar)
Tasslehoff/Flint- (R2D2/C3P0)- Comic relief without all the horribleness of the DnD Movies

It would require a bit of darker tones which are already there but were sort of softened since they were kids books.

 

[pemerton]

4E was, for better or worse, rather specific in flavor and relatively narrow in its appeal. It was almost as if WotC was so fixated on the goal of creating a certain type of game and appealing to a certain type of gamer that they forgot that half or more of the community preferred a different approach. I remember someone saying that 4E would have worked better as a completely different RPG, or as a variant form of D&D - but the problem was that it veered too far from tradition to be the flagship.

I find that this sort of statement is very post-facto. It describes an outcome, but I don't think it explains very much. After all, sales of 4e PHBs were stronger than those of 3E PHBs (or 3.5?) in their respective launch periods, according to WotC (from memory, it was Mearls who said this).

At the time, therefore, there seemed to be quite a good reception and wide appeal.

I'm talking largely about the reaction of the diehards on places like ENWorld and other internet communities - folks who have, to a large extend, checked out the Starter Set and/or Basic D&D, seen at least the PHB previews if not the book itself. The "word on the cyber street" is generally quite positive, far more so than it was in the early days of 4E (remember the PDF leak?).

If, in fact, WotC's market position is so vulnerable to the 'word on the cyber street' among a certain sort of D&D diehard, I think that in itself can tell us something about the nature of the market and the prospects for success.

For instance, I've found many LotR/Tolkien fans to be quite critical of Peter Jackson's movies, but I don't think they are good barometer for how the movie franchise overall will succeed.

 

[Stormonu]

Sounds interesting. I still think that the Dragonlance series would have the best opportunity to put DnD on the map (FYI, I have not seen the animated movie).

Keep it that way, it is very, very disappointing. Dragonlance brought me back into D&D when I was starting to get bored with the endless dungeon questing. Bringing epic storytelling to D&D via Dragonlance opened my eyes to a part of D&D I hadn't considered before. The cartoon killed all that imagery I had about DL with the poor CGI and ...frankly... poor acting.

The vibe I am getting from 5E makes me feel like we are in for a bronze age revival of D&D; The early 80's being the gold age and 3E's release being the silver revival. I don't think 5E will make as big a splash as the previous two times, but I do think it will quell the edition wars - for a time.

I'm really, really curious what the DMG will bring us.

 

[Hussar]

With all the Realms stuff being touted, I wonder if a movie version of the Baldur's Gate saga wouldn't make a pretty decent show.

 

[grimslade]

D&D is too linked to pastiche and puns. I don't see how you can overcome the D&D movie or all the bad 80's fantasy that has been released. No studio is going to release another D&D movie. A Forgotten Realms movie, maybe. Dragonlance has the cartoon to hold it back plus D&D connection.

I could see an ongoing cartoon on FX or Adult Swim, but I think D&D is linked to bad movies and Community references. I don't see how you can resurrect the brand in a TV or movie sense.

 

[Mercurius]

I find that this sort of statement is very post-facto. It describes an outcome, but I don't think it explains very much. After all, sales of 4e PHBs were stronger than those of 3E PHBs (or 3.5?) in their respective launch periods, according to WotC (from memory, it was Mearls who said this).

At the time, therefore, there seemed to be quite a good reception and wide appeal.

I would agree with you if the sales of the PHBs during their respective launch periods was the defining factor in the overall success of the edition. But it is not, imo. It is one factor among many, and probably not even the most important one. f it was it would be like saying a product is successful if the initial run sold out, even if people don't like it after six months.

By all accounts 4E initially sold well, I think even better than 3E as you say. But it also only lasted three and a half years and involved more controversy and edition warring than any other editions, so it can't be considered a long-term success. I mean there's a reason that it only lasted three and a half years - and we don't need to go into the virtues and flaws of the game itself to find an explanation. It simply wasn't embraced by the community as a whole; in other words, it wasn't a long-term success.

Smart companies want happy customers, not just lots of initial sales. Happy customers are repeat customers, while unhappy customers move on. During the tenure of 4E, a lot of WotC's customers moved on, which is why they decided to create a 5E that, they hope, will lead to happier customers and a revitalized community. But it all remains to be seen! My view is that he signs so far are promising.

If, in fact, WotC's market position is so vulnerable to the 'word on the cyber street' among a certain sort of D&D diehard, I think that in itself can tell us something about the nature of the market and the prospects for success.

Word-of-mouth is huge in the Information Age. Just ask Richard Gere about the gerbil! Evidently it was a teenager in the early 90s that started the rumor.

For instance, I've found many LotR/Tolkien fans to be quite critical of Peter Jackson's movies, but I don't think they are good barometer for how the movie franchise overall will succeed.

You seem to be equating "success" with finances alone. This may be fine with movies, but with RPGs it isn't so simple. A PHB of any edition will pretty much be guaranteed to sell a few hundred thousand copies, because there are a few hundred thousand serious gamers out there who want the latest version of D&D. But the key is A) Whether people beyond that core group will buy it, and B) how many of that core group (and others) will continue to buy.

If you're WotC you want to not only sell as many PHBs as possible in the initial launch, but both continue to sell PHBs (through increasing the fan-base) AND sell other products (through creating a strong, happy customer base). In a way, they want "subscribers," not just as many first issues sold as possible. I suppose the closest analogy in cinema is DVD sales, but even that has a limit.

I think perhaps a better analogy than film for D&D is a vegetable garden. If you're settling down and planting a garden you don't just want a quick yield of one or two vegetables. You want a garden that will continue to produce through the summer and fall, and then be ready for planting again in the spring (in other words, you want it to be able to weather the fallow time of winter and be prepared for a new season).

This illustrates the crucial difference between a sustainable and non-sustainable approach. Americans are used to the latter, which of course has led to all sorts of problems. But the trend is more and more towards sustainability, and we can hope that WotC is "hip to the times" and not just looking for a quick buck, but building a sustainable future.

In baseball this would be the difference between the non-sustainable approach of focusing on signing high priced free agents and always trying to "win now," vs. focusing on the farm system and building from within. It isn't either/or, but I think one does have to choose which approach to emphasize. I suppose my bias is clear!

 

[The Black Ranger]

Success? No no no no no no.

If it were a one time product then you could call it a success, but this type product has to rely on long term sales of it's continuous products. Also, people can't fully judge a product until they actually own it so of course it will sell, also Amazon selling it cheaper is a good factor as well. If you can get the book in the 25 to 30 euro range then why not? But if the book was sold at 50 only then I think you would have a lot less sales.

Anyway, D&D is not out of the woods yet because players now a days have other alternatives to the D&D. Only time will tell.

 

[pogre]

I know this is not your angle exactly, but I think if one is generous and includes the PF folks in the D&D fold this could be a golden era. Having played both, it does seem like there is a fair amount of folks playing both and less outright hostility from both camps. This definition of golden age basically says there are lots of folks playing and enjoying a flavor of D&D RPG.

A less generous view would say D&D would have to expand and mostly capture the entire fantasy rpg market. If that is your standard for a golden age, then no, it will not happen.