Is a popular non-D&D traditional fantasy RPG possible?

[ProfessorCirno]

It's a bit of a cursed spiral. DMs want a game, but want to ensure they get a group, so they go with the most popular game they can - D&D - and advertise that. Groups want a DM and thus advertise the same game for the same reasons. Meanwhile everyone WANTS to play Dogs in the Vineyard, but they want to play a game more then that, so D&D is advertised more and becomes more popular. Ensuring even more that they won't be playing Dogs in the Vineyard.

 

[Mercurius]

I'd agree that the attack in the first post wasn't veiled... I wouldn't agree that it wasn't clearly there, though.

When, if you'll allow me to paraphrase, you say, "given that 4e sucks so much, do you think that now's a good time to create a new traditional fantasy game that could take the wind out of its sails?" I'd hardly call that a simple inquiry.

Thanks for letting me know how I feel about 4E

 

[The Little Raven]

This sounds like a Fantasy Heartbreaker, slouching towards Bethlehem, waiting to be still-born.

You, good sirrah, have been sigged.

 

[Desdichado]

Thanks for letting me know how I feel about 4E

You already let us know. And now you're saying something other than what you said at first.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think a popular non-D&D fantasy RPG, which might be called by some "traditional" is certainly possible.

I don't think the "first to market" BS really flies, frankly. I mean, people say that and keep saying precisely until it's NOT true any more. It happened with MMORPGs, big-time, for example, and it's happened in other fields and genres of RPG.

What does fly is marketing oomph. You're not going to get a sizeable market share without serious marketing, these days. So that really only leaves two possible companies to put out such a product - WotC and WW. Both of them have a degree of inherent "branding" from their name, and if one of them put out an entirely new, non-D&D FRPG, it would attract a LOT of interest from gamers.

With marketing, you might be able to make it appeal to current non-P&P RPGs, too, whether people who read fantasy, or people who game, but don't play P&P RPGs. I don't think, however, that trying to take a slice out of WotC's pie is the way to go about it. You need to do what WoW did, and to try to "grow the market", and appeal beyond the current gamers (something 4E, currently, fails to do due to the lack of an introductory product). Differentiation from D&D would be key, too.

I'm a little dubious about this term "traditional", though. I mean, wth is "traditional fantasy"? Is it Tolkien? Leiber? Howard? Moorcock? Le Guin? C.S. Lewis? Rowling, even? They're all venerable enough, and despite Rowling's protestations, she's pretty much trad in all her fantasy ideas (conservative even, hilariously). If we're talking about a game that could perhaps encompass all of those mentioned, and did not have D&D's focus on "ultra-magic" and it's many non-human PC races, then I think it could do well on the differentiation front.

If it was just another D&D-style Tolkien-rip-off with Elves, Dwarves, dungeons and dragons as typical places to go and things to kill and so on, then no, I don't think there's much room for that.

As for being a fantasy heartbreaker, well so's 4E, essentially. It's just a fantasy heartbreaker (and it's breaking a MEGATON of hearts RIGHT HERE guys, so no denying it) published by a very successful company, and that's what separates a typical "fantasy heartbreaker" from a successful fantasy RPG, imho.

 

[Mercurius]

You already let us know. And now you're saying something other than what you said at first.

That's simply not true and I don't know you have a chip on your shoulder about this. I did NOT say what you paraphrased me of saying; specifically, I did not say that 4E sucks. If you really insist that I did, please quote me, but it is NOT what I intended to say nor, scanning over my original post--or any post in this thread or any other--is it something I said.

Again, please don't put words in my mouth or hidden meanings that I did not intend.

snip

Good post, Ruin Explorer. As for "traditional" I suppose we can only speak of traditional D&D, or traditional specific sub-genres within fantasy rather than "traditional fantasy" as a whole. So traditional D&D has certain core elements that have existed since the beginning: A secondary world of dragons, dungeons, elves, dwarves, magic-users, etc. And much of this, of course, was inspired by Tolkien--but also Vance, Leiber, Howard, etc.

So I like to use these terms lightly because they are more descriptive than definitive, but don't shy away from using them because they are useful.

 

[Particle_Man]

As for being a fantasy heartbreaker, well so's 4E, essentially. It's just a fantasy heartbreaker (and it's breaking a MEGATON of hearts RIGHT HERE guys, so no denying it) published by a very successful company, and that's what separates a typical "fantasy heartbreaker" from a successful fantasy RPG, imho.

The heartbreak part is that of the game designers, not the game players. So unless the "MEGATON of hearts RIGHT HERE" include game designers of 4e, it is not a fantasy heartbreaker. That would require the game designers of 4e to be broken-hearted that their game is not popular, when it is extremely popular, given the sales.

As an aside, how many hearts (given the average size of a gamer's heart) would it take to make a megaton?

 

[RFisher]

It's a bit of a cursed spiral. DMs want a game, but want to ensure they get a group, so they go with the most popular game they can - D&D - and advertise that. Groups want a DM and thus advertise the same game for the same reasons. Meanwhile everyone WANTS to play Dogs in the Vineyard, but they want to play a game more then that, so D&D is advertised more and becomes more popular. Ensuring even more that they won't be playing Dogs in the Vineyard.

The thing is—no matter how much I read about this kind of thing online—I’ve never seen this in real life. Every group I’ve played with has played all sorts of systems. I’ve very seldom seen a gamer refuse to play whatever system a friend wanted to run. In fact, the few times I have seen it, it’s most often D&D that they refuse to play.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The thing is—no matter how much I read about this kind of thing online—I’ve never seen this in real life. Every group I’ve played with has played all sorts of systems. I’ve very seldom seen a gamer refuse to play whatever system a friend wanted to run. In fact, the few times I have seen it, it’s most often D&D that they refuse to play.

Once the group is together, yes. I mean in terms of that "Players/DM wanted" notice in the game store or college campus or whatever. It's almost always going to be for D&D because they want to attract the most they can.

 

[Shroomy]

FWIW, I still see a lot of notices for D20 Modern, Exalted, WoD, and Call of Cthulhu at the various LGSs that I frequent. Still, D&D does rule the roost.