Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is 5E Special
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8719299" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Are you thus saying that <em>nothing whatsoever</em> has changed about Pokemon and Ninja Turtles over the years?</p><p></p><p>Because I assure you, <em>plenty</em> has changed. And, surprise surprise, a lot of that has been improving the balance of the Pokemon games and dealing with legacy problematic elements, to the point that many fans of classic Pokemon are no longer happy with its current direction or content. ("Dexit" was a HUGE rigamarole that went completely unnoticed by most people whose first game was Sword/Shield.) Further, plenty of major cultural touchstones for people in their 40s are <em>completely irrelevant</em> today: Fat Albert, Shazam!, Grape Ape, some even I have never heard of like <em>Lidsville</em> or <em>Battle of the Planets</em>. On the literature front, many of the classics from the 70s and 80s are not as widely-read today (the Green-Sky Trilogy, <em>A Wizard of Earthsea</em>, etc.), even if ideas from them have trickled into the overall zeitgeist (e.g. <em>Dragonriders of Pern</em>).</p><p></p><p>D&D's demographics have shifted, a lot. I assume you grant this, given you have emphasized the growing number of participants. If 89% of the fanbase is people who literally <em>physically couldn't</em> have played anything earlier than late-2e, the creators are going to pivot to attending to that overwhelming majority. It's not hard to see this in action: stuff like drow, which remained pretty blatantly anti-feminist for decades, suddenly got some <em>major</em> attention. Adventures are tending toward somewhat brighter colors and more obviously heroic heroes, even as they consider things like politics and associated difficulties.</p><p></p><p>And that isn't the only aspect; much of the <em>design</em> and <em>structure</em>, and in particular the motives for these things, just isn't relevant to that 89% majority that is under the age of 40. For example, many folks now playing D&D literally haven't got the first concept of what an edition war is. They've no idea they're supposed to hate 4e or love 2e or whatever. They have no context for legacy design elements, particularly if those legacy design elements never found their way out into the wider zeitgeist of computer RPGs. So, while Wizards will probably never gain the ability to cast healing spells (because that design quirk <em>has</em> entered the collective unconscious of game design), people aren't likely to be so fixated on the power of something like <em>fire ball</em> when, from their perspective, that's just one staple spell among many, not a major game-changer. Questions as to why it's so hard for Wizards to use armor or why Fighters don't get their own neat powers are quite plausible, because they've been exposed to games like <em>World of Warcraft</em> and <em>Final Fantasy XIV</em> and <em>Guild Wars 2</em> (among many, <em>many</em> others) where that simply isn't true, where "fighter" characters (for some reason, always called "Warriors" rather than "Fighters," not sure why) have all sorts of impressive effects they can draw upon. Likewise, the fact that all spellcasters <em>have</em> to be complicated is probably going to get some pushback from all the folks who grew up reading <em>Harry Potter</em> and seeing how <em>he</em> practices such effortless, ultra-straightforward magic.</p><p></p><p>This is the heart of what Minigiant is saying.</p><p></p><p>The game is now mostly in the hands of people who literally cannot physically be old enough to have played much "old school" D&D. Their ideas and interests not only can, but <em>will</em> diverge from older ideas in various ways, and WotC isn't stupid, they're going to market to whatever they believe that 8.8x larger audience wants. It's absolutely the case that SOME of the classic stuff will remain--some of it because it was just good to begin with, some of it because it's become standardized fantasy gaming boilerplate, some of it because it's already familiar to them through other non-D&D games, and some because it's just the way things were and new players just happened not to question it. </p><p></p><p>But if you think even for a <em>second</em> that the game was already "98% perfect" for that larger audience, you're fooling yourself. The recent tempest in a teapot over the "cutesy" art and "Disneyfied" content for D&D are, quite literally, some of those old-school players getting antsy because <em>their</em> priorities are no longer the <em>top</em> priorities. Doesn't mean their priorities are irrelevant. But it does mean that WotC understands that there's a <em>gap</em> here.</p><p></p><p>5e was designed to appease the old-school crowd. It succeeded. It also, partially by coincidence, succeeded at growing an enormous <em>completely not at all old-school</em> audience, one that literally physically <em>cannot be</em> old-school because they aren't old enough. Some of those folks absolutely will jump at the chance to play old-school stuff because "is at least 40 years old" and "likes old-school things" are orthogonal things. But a lot of them <em>won't</em> jump at that, and thus, 5e is evolving in directions that appeal to folks whose interests aren't particularly rooted in old-school sentiments.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8719299, member: 6790260"] Are you thus saying that [I]nothing whatsoever[/I] has changed about Pokemon and Ninja Turtles over the years? Because I assure you, [I]plenty[/I] has changed. And, surprise surprise, a lot of that has been improving the balance of the Pokemon games and dealing with legacy problematic elements, to the point that many fans of classic Pokemon are no longer happy with its current direction or content. ("Dexit" was a HUGE rigamarole that went completely unnoticed by most people whose first game was Sword/Shield.) Further, plenty of major cultural touchstones for people in their 40s are [I]completely irrelevant[/I] today: Fat Albert, Shazam!, Grape Ape, some even I have never heard of like [I]Lidsville[/I] or [I]Battle of the Planets[/I]. On the literature front, many of the classics from the 70s and 80s are not as widely-read today (the Green-Sky Trilogy, [I]A Wizard of Earthsea[/I], etc.), even if ideas from them have trickled into the overall zeitgeist (e.g. [I]Dragonriders of Pern[/I]). D&D's demographics have shifted, a lot. I assume you grant this, given you have emphasized the growing number of participants. If 89% of the fanbase is people who literally [I]physically couldn't[/I] have played anything earlier than late-2e, the creators are going to pivot to attending to that overwhelming majority. It's not hard to see this in action: stuff like drow, which remained pretty blatantly anti-feminist for decades, suddenly got some [I]major[/I] attention. Adventures are tending toward somewhat brighter colors and more obviously heroic heroes, even as they consider things like politics and associated difficulties. And that isn't the only aspect; much of the [I]design[/I] and [I]structure[/I], and in particular the motives for these things, just isn't relevant to that 89% majority that is under the age of 40. For example, many folks now playing D&D literally haven't got the first concept of what an edition war is. They've no idea they're supposed to hate 4e or love 2e or whatever. They have no context for legacy design elements, particularly if those legacy design elements never found their way out into the wider zeitgeist of computer RPGs. So, while Wizards will probably never gain the ability to cast healing spells (because that design quirk [I]has[/I] entered the collective unconscious of game design), people aren't likely to be so fixated on the power of something like [I]fire ball[/I] when, from their perspective, that's just one staple spell among many, not a major game-changer. Questions as to why it's so hard for Wizards to use armor or why Fighters don't get their own neat powers are quite plausible, because they've been exposed to games like [I]World of Warcraft[/I] and [I]Final Fantasy XIV[/I] and [I]Guild Wars 2[/I] (among many, [I]many[/I] others) where that simply isn't true, where "fighter" characters (for some reason, always called "Warriors" rather than "Fighters," not sure why) have all sorts of impressive effects they can draw upon. Likewise, the fact that all spellcasters [I]have[/I] to be complicated is probably going to get some pushback from all the folks who grew up reading [I]Harry Potter[/I] and seeing how [I]he[/I] practices such effortless, ultra-straightforward magic. This is the heart of what Minigiant is saying. The game is now mostly in the hands of people who literally cannot physically be old enough to have played much "old school" D&D. Their ideas and interests not only can, but [I]will[/I] diverge from older ideas in various ways, and WotC isn't stupid, they're going to market to whatever they believe that 8.8x larger audience wants. It's absolutely the case that SOME of the classic stuff will remain--some of it because it was just good to begin with, some of it because it's become standardized fantasy gaming boilerplate, some of it because it's already familiar to them through other non-D&D games, and some because it's just the way things were and new players just happened not to question it. But if you think even for a [I]second[/I] that the game was already "98% perfect" for that larger audience, you're fooling yourself. The recent tempest in a teapot over the "cutesy" art and "Disneyfied" content for D&D are, quite literally, some of those old-school players getting antsy because [I]their[/I] priorities are no longer the [I]top[/I] priorities. Doesn't mean their priorities are irrelevant. But it does mean that WotC understands that there's a [I]gap[/I] here. 5e was designed to appease the old-school crowd. It succeeded. It also, partially by coincidence, succeeded at growing an enormous [I]completely not at all old-school[/I] audience, one that literally physically [I]cannot be[/I] old-school because they aren't old enough. Some of those folks absolutely will jump at the chance to play old-school stuff because "is at least 40 years old" and "likes old-school things" are orthogonal things. But a lot of them [I]won't[/I] jump at that, and thus, 5e is evolving in directions that appeal to folks whose interests aren't particularly rooted in old-school sentiments. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is 5E Special
Top