D&D General io9: 2023 Should Have Been D&D's Best Year, Until It Wasn't

[DEFCON 1]

Yes, but the OGL kerfuffle seems to provoked some other game companies to step and create more open games (that seem to have a fair of public interest as per the MCDM game). This could have longer term consequences for D&D - good for gamers but may effect D&D in terms of supporting the new version of 5e and may have consequences on a financial level.

In my estimation, most likely not. Game companies make non-D&D games all the time, and if companies making non-D&D games had any real impact on D&D we wouldn't have seen D&D grow so much over the last 9 years.

To think that MCDM or Kobold Press or Darrington Press or Arcane Library or anyone are going to release anything in the future that will actually impact D&D in a meaningful way (that Hasbro/WotC has to adjust to) is rather wishful thinking. So far that kind of things has happened one time... Paizo making Pathfinder and massively impacting 4E... but I do not foresee any other RPG being released that will put that sort of dent in 5E (the 2014 or 2024 versions.)

I mean it hasn't been lost on me that even companies that did release non-D&D games over the last decade-- like Monte Cook Games and their Numenera line-- ended up adapting parts of their line TO 5E as well in order to cash in on D&D (like so many games did back in the 3E era with d20 versions of Call of Cthulu, 7th Sea etc.) That tells me that companies are still always keeping an eye on D&D and adjusting to them, rather than the other way around.

 

[Clint_L]

In the year before a major release you just hope to have it not so bad.

So bad like an excellent movie that appears to be gaining a solid following, and a spectacularly successful, instant classic game? BG3 absolutely dwarfs everything else that has happened with the D&D brand this year, and it isn't close.

Like, I know on this forum we discuss all the things, but for Jane Q. Public this has been a pretty good year for D&D.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I’m going to say that it was an amazing year for the D&D brand. The OGL fiasco was inside baseball and I doubt there was much lasting impact in terms of stank on the brand. The AI art thing and delay on the cards for Deck…please. No one cares except people who need to write clickbait.

The brand impact of the movie and especially BG3 outweigh these by orders of magnitude.

Lousy year for Hasbro, though.

The number of people that get riled up over these things on the internet is a fraction of number of people that play D&D. I suspect most of the negative events that got discussed online were mere blips on the radar for the vast majority of gamers.

In the year before a major release you just hope to have it not so bad.

When you look at the last years of past editions, they could only dream of having a movie (an actually good one at that) and a wildly successful videogame come out. And that's not even mentioning closing the year out on Planescape's return.

 

[Umbran]

Many things would be better if folks stopped taking offense on behalf of others, but recent history tells us that not the way we're going.

Well, that depends - there is a fine line between taking offense on behalf of others, and standing up for others.

 

[Alzrius]

Yeah that feels like the culture. Negativity just sells. Let’s let Jeff Easley take offense if he wants to, which I doubt he has, no need to do it in others behalf.

Given the history of how some of D&D's most classic artists have at times been treated, I think it's important to note when large companies seem to go out of their way to disrespect them (i.e. deliberately removing his signature from his own work; it wasn't cropped out, and so wasn't something that could be called an accident).

Also, if you read the article, Easley did take offense at it; you don't post "THEY TOOK MY SIGNATURE OFF THE PAINTING!" publicly unless it's something upsetting. And while I suppose there's (pointless) arguing to be done over how upsetting it was, to say that there's no value in being aware of what happened comes dangerously close to a "who cares about the little guy?" sentiment.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, that depends - there is a fine line between taking offense on behalf of others, and standing up for others.

True, but in either case, best to know how those others actually feel about the situation before taking action on their behalf.

 

[jerryrice4949]

Given the history of how some of D&D's most classic artists have at times been treated, I think it's important to note when large companies seem to go out of their way to disrespect them (i.e. deliberately removing his signature from his own work; it wasn't cropped out, and so wasn't something that could be called an accident).

Also, if you read the article, Easley did take offense at it; you don't post "THEY TOOK MY SIGNATURE OFF THE PAINTING!" publicly unless it's something upsetting. And while I suppose there's (pointless) arguing to be done over how upsetting it was, to say that there's no value in being aware of what happened comes dangerously close to a "who cares about the little guy?" sentiment.

I certainly stand corrected. My apologies.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Oh, that's funny.

io9: Our parent, G/O media, has fired most of our editorial staff, and all our genre media investigative reporters, and told folks we are leaning into generative AI for our stories. So let's write a story about how someone else screwed up this year!

So, they shouldn't report on news in their coverage area, because their company isn't run well?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I’m going to say that it was an amazing year for the D&D brand. The OGL fiasco was inside baseball and I doubt there was much lasting impact in terms of stank on the brand.

I think the impact is less "stank" than creating a new set of Pathfinders in the coming years. We'll see how many of them succeed long term, but if the goal was to consolidate the game industry around WotC's offerings, it seems to have done the exact opposite. I am confident folks inside of Hasbro don't think of it as "no big deal."

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

True but most will be a flash in the pan.

It just takes one additional Paizo to be a "problem" for the folks inside Hasbro who were behind the OGL fiasco to begin with. (I don't know if we'll ever really know how it happened, but I have a hard time imagining it came from people who actually create D&D in a meaningful sense.)

Kobold Press and MCDM are both producing games that look likely to carve away a portion of D&D's customer base, possibly permanently. Cubicle 7 is still playing their cards close to their chest, but they may be as well. And Arcane Library has already come out with an OSR game that specifically appeals to 5E players.

I don't know what threshold folks inside Hasbro would view to be concerning -- it's lower than what partisans here care about, since I don't think many people here spend a lot of time worrying about Paizo's "threat" to WotC -- but I'd bet that, collectively, those companies have probably reached it.