If the D&D brand became too hot to handle,what would be the next 80 pound gorilla?

[Staffan]

If fantasy as a dominant genre fell away then sci-fi would probably be next in terms of mass appeal? Supers seem to be a bit tapped out at present, and horror scratches a different itch than fantasy / sci-fi in terms of power fantasies or lack-there-of. So maybe Starfinder or Traveller?

The problem with sci-fi is that there's very little common ground. With fantasy, there's a sort of baseline based on Tolkien and D&D, plus of course the common understanding and misunderstanding of the medieval/early renaissance past, to the point where you can say "This is fantasy, but our orcs are smart." I mean sure, fantasy is in theory an extremely wide concept, but the pseudomedieval Tolkien/D&D makes for an extremely strong magnet for the word.

But science-fiction is a much broader idea. Are we talking Star Trek? Star Wars? The Expanse? Dune? The Foundation? 2001? The Fifth Element? Fallout? These are all very different properties with different levels of wundertech and magic. This all makes it hard to make a "generic" science fiction game that doesn't turn into a game creation kit like GURPS or Savage Worlds (with Savage Worlds being significantly closer to play out of the box but still requiring a whole lot of choices before you get started). So I think the Starfinder route is probably the best for a semi-generic sci-fi game: create an actual setting with a lot of variety, and make the baseline essentially a non-supers Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[cranberry]

If D&D somehow disappeared, Pathfinder would be the new number one.

 

[Umbran]

If D&D somehow disappeared, Pathfinder would be the new number one.

I think the point of the question is the assumption that the disappearance of D&D would lead to change, rather than just a continuation as-is. The question is what that change looks like, and does it gives us not just a new #1, but a new 800-lb gorilla in the market.

As-is, Pathfinder is currently #2, and would become #1, until change happens.

 

[bedir than]

I expect a lighter game, something with typical play around an hour would charge up the charts. Because it helps solve the biggest difficulty in gaming - scheduling.

 

[Umbran]

I expect a lighter game, something with typical play around an hour would charge up the charts. Because it helps solve the biggest difficulty in gaming - scheduling.

I think the boardgame space already covers play times that short.

The things TTRPGs offer that boardgames don't typically take more time than that.

 

[Tigris]

I, personally, am okay with one company making a modest fortune, if it supports the variety of other creative work we now see. The rest of the market does not looked, "ruled" by D&D. It seems more enabled by D&D.

I would say the opposite. If you compare the boardgame market to RPGs the boardgame market has a broader differentiation between products.

RPG market sure has some strange interesting works, but it clearly is dominated by D&D in the sense that many companies feel the need to make a D&D (5) clone.

The variety of mechanics in most game is so narrow. Even successfull games "far away" from D&D still most of the time use the same basic mechanics of roll dice + stat.

I think the boardgame space already covers play times that short.

The things TTRPGs offer that boardgames don't typically take more time than that.

The boardgame space also covers long playtime.

• There are campaign games with 99 missions like gloomhaven and frosthaven.
• It has short campaigns like the legacy games with in average 12 plays.
  • Some of which like Queens Dilemma include roleplay.
• Or even shorter minicampaigns like Arcs with 3 sessions
  • Arcs also has a strong focus on storytelling like RPGs.
• It has 10 hour (single session) experiences like Twilight Imperium.

There are even short experiences which feature some roleplay in the sense of social deductian games and similiar. Or even strange short intimidate 2 person games like fog of love where you kind of roleplay a relationship.


The RPG space is as mentioned above just not as varied as boardgames, and I see no reason why it could not also try to have more such experiences. Like a BIG game system focused on good and diverse 2 hour one shots. Maybe even tie them together in a legacy style play.

Or a game focused on minicampaigns.

 

[Marc17]

Globally, Call of Cthulhu. In the USA, probably Pathfinder, but I could possibly see other games such as Shadowrun, if not matching it, at least keeping it from being any gorilla. However, it's doubtful that D&D will disappear. It might fail in that Hasbro will decide not to handle it anymore, but I bet they'd license it out and let others do it for them. IIRC, that is what they were thinking of doing early after taking over WotC, but MtG was brining in enough money they were happy at the time to let WotC have their hobby project of D&D also.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

I expect a lighter game, something with typical play around an hour would charge up the charts. Because it helps solve the biggest difficulty in gaming - scheduling.

I think a shorter game that's attempting to give a similar experience would actually make scheduling harder. Sure you only schedule a short playtime, but people still have to block that time off to make it. Also this makes drive time a much larger factor - everywhere I play other than my own house involves driving 15-45 minutes each way. Even 15x2 minutes is a lot for a single hour game, I might do it once in a while or to try a new thing, but it's just not worth the effort on the regular, and with further distances driving longer than I play is really unappealing. Also short games are massively more sensitive to arrival times - if Joe is 15 minutes late to a game that's planned to run from 6:30-10pm, it's barely noticeable, but for the short game you've just lost 1/4 of your playing. And people are way less likely to dedicate time to something so short - I'm fine blocking off Monday evening for a 3-4 hour game, but I don't want to permanently reserve Monday for this game if it's just an hour at a time.

If you really want to solve scheduling, I think moving away from the static group idea does it much better and easier. And that has more to do with gaming culture than game rules - 'Organized Play' (like Adventurer's League) and West Marches style games work fine with most game systems (including D&D) and bypass the "Joe can't make it this week so we have to cancel" or "I don't feel good, maybe I should skip this week, but I don't want everyone else to cancel" issues that are the biggest hurdle in traditional setups.

 

[Tigris]

I think a shorter game that's attempting to give a similar experience would actually make scheduling harder. Sure you only schedule a short playtime, but people still have to block that time off to make it. Also this makes drive time a much larger factor - everywhere I play other than my own house involves driving 15-45 minutes each way. Even 15x2 minutes is a lot for a single hour game, I might do it once in a while or to try a new thing, but it's just not worth the effort on the regular, and with further distances driving longer than I play is really unappealing. Also short games are massively more sensitive to arrival times - if Joe is 15 minutes late to a game that's planned to run from 6:30-10pm, it's barely noticeable, but for the short game you've just lost 1/4 of your playing. And people are way less likely to dedicate time to something so short - I'm fine blocking off Monday evening for a 3-4 hour game, but I don't want to permanently reserve Monday for this game if it's just an hour at a time.

If you really want to solve scheduling, I think moving away from the static group idea does it much better and easier. And that has more to do with gaming culture than game rules - 'Organized Play' (like Adventurer's League) and West Marches style games work fine with most game systems (including D&D) and bypass the "Joe can't make it this week so we have to cancel" or "I don't feel good, maybe I should skip this week, but I don't want everyone else to cancel" issues that are the biggest hurdle in traditional setups.

This sounds like you never played boardgames.

You just schedule normally 1 evening/ afternoon.

And then you just play multiple games or the same game multiple times.

And if 1 person must leave early its no problem because the other X-1 can after the first (or second) just play another game with 1 person less.


A 30 min boardgame (or rpg if it gets made) is a great filler. Like you can play it if the bigger game finished its late but not too late so 30 minutes fit perfectly into the gap.


even with noemal RPGs/ D&D clones you might ha e after 3 hour the perfekt point for a break, but people might still have 1 hour time planned. That would be the perfect situation for doing the break early and then doing a short filler RPG to optimize playtime (vs drive time).

 

[MGibster]

Globally, Call of Cthulhu. In the USA, probably Pathfinder, but I could possibly see other games such as Shadowrun, if not matching it, at least keeping it from being any gorilla. However, it's doubtful that D&D will disappear. It might fail in that Hasbro will decide not to handle it anymore, but I bet they'd license it out and let others do it for them. IIRC, that is what they were thinking of doing early after taking over WotC, but MtG was brining in enough money they were happy at the time to let WotC have their hobby project of D&D also.

I've heard it argued one of the reasons CoC is so popular in Japan is because they tend to be focused on one shots rather than campaigns. This format better fits the Japanese schedule for those who couldn't commit to a campaign like with D&D. I'm sure that's not the only reason CoC is so popular there but it does give me something to think about. I tend to think of the next big thing in terms of settings or even rules. Maybe the next big thing will be driven by something like providing a framework for play that's more convenient for players?