Is Generational factors changing D&D?

[BlackMoria]

This thread is inspired somewhat by Upper Krust's Future Format of 4th Edition D&D thread as well as the host of many threads discussing whether D&D is too rules heavy and the quest by some for a good D&D-Lite ruleset.

The question: Is generational factors warring for the heart and soul of D&D?

The question came about when I was contemplating some of the recent threads. I am 50 years old and have played D&D since 1974, so that make me old generation.

I noted as I grown older that there is a difference between my generation of gamers and the younger generation.

The majority of the gamers (that I know, so that is a caveat) of my generation were wargamers (boardgames or miniatures). I grew up playing wargames from SPI, Avalon Hill, West End Games and Game Design Workshop.

Wargames tended to be very rules-centric, very structured, took time to setup and a even longer time to play (games took several days to several months to play to a conclusion).
Complex rules - hell, yes!! I've played SPI's Terrible Swift Sword, Wellington's Victory, War in Europe and War in the Pacific. It took nearly a week to set up a full campaign of War in Europe and it took months and months and months to play one game.

Wargame clubs and wargamers were everywhere. I could go to any very large town or city and find people playing wargame or miniatures.

Where am I going with this?

Wargames and miniatures were: rules complex, very detailed and took a long time to play out. For whatever reason, my generation embraced such complexity systems.

Over the years, wargames have fallen out of favor more and more, most likely due to the mainstream effect of home computers and the fact that wargames were rules heavy and time consuming.

An interesting note is that computer wargaming (which now handles the rules for you and greatly speeds up the amount of time playing) doesn't have a significant following of younger gamers - in fact, it is dominated by the older generation who move from the kitchen table or rec room to the computer for their gaming fix).

Now for Generation X.

Ask young gamers about wargames and most likely you get a blank stare and a 'what are those?' in response. Their games (caveat - as noted by me in the areas I have lived) tend to be CCG like Magic: the Gathering, Yui-Gui-Yo, Pokemon, to name a few. Boardgames are games like Descent, Talisman or Risk variants. Miniatures are DDM or Whiz Kids click games.

Now these games have several things in common. They are not rules heavy and can be played quickly - several games in a evening is common, particularly the CCG. Just the opposite of wargames.


Now, look at D&D. Its origins are the Chainmail miniature rules, evolving into a pencil and paper RPG. Over several editions, the rules have grown more complex, compared to OD&D.

Now we are at the crossroads. A certain vision of D&D's future (some of it coming from WOTC itself) is that the game should evolve to a simpler rule set, have a even greater emphasis on miniatures and be more board game like. The reason - to make the game more attractive. I am certain that the target demographics are not players my age (I have no illusions of that) and is probably the 12 -30 years of age crowd. The Gen-Xers.

D&D has remained somewhat an oddity in that the game has grown more complex over the years, while even CCG like Magic: The Gathering have simplied their rules. I think the reason is that the old guard of D&D which have remained steadfast loyal represented the majority interest in the game.

But is this the case now? Have we turned the corner and has WOTC accepted that the future of D&D is now in a simplier rule set and the game having more in common with DDM than its old pen and paper roots? Make the game easy and fast to learn and play - because the future is no longer with the old D&D gamers but must lie with the larger younger generation.

What do you think?

 

[Imaro]

I am 29 and started playing D&D when I was about ten. I have exspresed my views in numerous topics on the board as far as this is concerned but...here I go.

Yes D&D needs to START simpler. I especially realized both the viability and benefits of this during my interaction with 3.x. I think a basic game should be created with supplemental add-ons that add complexity to the rules. My ideal D&D basic game would be something similar to Castles and Crusades(with limited classes and races though). You can make a character up in about ten to fifteen minutes, most of your abilities are pre-determined and either a "general" skill system or very broad system with each class just having the skills that make sense for it. Magic should have a set of "basic" utilitarian spells.

Why? Playing is the heart of the game and the quicker you can get to that(with new players or casual players) the quicker you get them interested. IMHO character creation(with it's numerous options isn't all that fun for someone who doesn't understand the nuances of the game. In fact it can get downright frustrating as you try to explain concepts that would be better illustrated in gameplay, especially concerning feats, spells and skills. It's sort of like writing short stories, you want to catch the readers attention as quickly as possible. I know some will say use pre-gens but then I think you're doing the game a disservice since I do think one of its appeals is to have "your" character.

D&D could then have a supplemental rules-set that adds feats or class substitution abilities, new ways to do skills, new classes(or a system to design your own), expanded spells etc. This is like a novel by the aforementioned short story writer. You've gotten a taste of his writing, and you know whether you like it or not and thus are more willing to invest time and money into a novel by said author.

I know as a grown man I have plenty of responsibilities as far as work, getting bills paid, a son, familial obligations etc. If I have a group that's down for a long term campaign then cool we can use the add-on rules. If I have friends over who are curious about the game and want an impromptu session then I think the basic game would be better.
In the end IMHO it's the best of both worlds, you don't want D&D dumbed down use all the optional rules. Want a simpler system or just starting out in rpg's just use the basic set. This is WotC's model for sales anyway.

 

[arscott]

I'm vice president of a gaming club at my university. In addition to students, we get a lot of alumni and a few highschool students. Our youngest players are about 15, and our oldest is probably 60. Most are between 18 and 30.

I think that lumping the 12-30 year olds into one group is a huge mistake. There's a vast spectrum of different gaming habits that roughly corresponds to age. And in general, I'd say the younger a club member is, the more likely he is to prefer D&D to other games. Most of the 25-30 year olds almost never play D&D, while it's practically the only RPG that 15-20 year olds play.

That tends to contradict your thesis of an increasing call for simplicity among the younger crowd.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Interesting question. I'd have to lean towards the two things (generation and rules complexity) not being linked, but that's just based off of my personal experience. I grew up playing wargames (I cut my teeth on Tactics II and moved on from there), and D&D (I started with the Holmes set). I've always enjoyed a great deal of complexity in my wargames, and that remains true. With RPGs, I've gone through phases where I preferred one level of complexity or another, but I always seem to gravitate back to something between B/X and OAD&D. These days, I'm running C&C, which gives me a level of complexity that is just right for my game.

So I guess I separate the two things in my mind. Wargames I like very complex. RPGs I don't.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

I am certain that the target demographics are not players my age (I have no illusions of that) and is probably the 12 -30 years of age crowd. The Gen-Xers.

Generation X
n. The generation following the post-World War II baby boom, especially people born in the United States and Canada from the early 1960s to the late 1970s.

I believe you have in mind the age cohort commonly referred to as "Generation Y" ,the generation that's mostly made up of the children of Baby Boomers. Generation X are the people that were in their teens and twenties during the 90's.

 

[Pickaxe]

Black Moria, your perspective is very interesting, at the very least because it runs counter to the standard interpretation of the RPG "generation gap": Old School = story-driven, heavy roleplaying; New School = rules-driven, heavy combat, tactics and character power. Monte Cook had an interesting article dispelling the notion of the "munchkin" and this division in general. His interpretation matches my own experience: differences in how people play are more a function of how long they've been playing then what year they started. You begin just thinking that all the new stuff that you encounter in the game (e.g., monsters and magic for me) is extremely cool (the "sense of wonder" phase), then you get into notions of character power and how you can optimize the rules (the "munchkin" phase), and finally, your appreciation of the game focuses away from the rules and more on setting, story, and roleplaying (the "nostalgic for first level" phase). (All phase names my own invention, and not Monte's fault.)

The counter-argument to this usually comes from those who think edition X was far better than X+. When I switched fro Basic/Expert to AD&D, I did it reluctantly, thinking that more rules were not such a good thing (mainly because I was lazy and didn;t want to read them all). I then played a lot of 1e with a tight group of friends, and we all went through the "curmudgeon" phase when 2e came out, and we never switched over to it. Some of my group feel similarly about 3e. The main complaints? Too rules-oriented, not enough flexibility for the DM to emphasize a story line, too "video-gamey," etc. Personally, I think most of these problems were present in previous editions, but we already had to house-rule so much that we effectively house-ruled our way out of these problems.

The interesting thing about the OP's story is that it shows that the undoubted original audience of D&D was "rules-oriented." Roleplayers and story-tellers came later.

Knowing a number of wargamers myself, I would contend that it's not so much that wargaming has fallen out of favor as the fact that the wargaming community has a deliberately weak relationship with the RPG community. Wargamers are interested in historical battles and re-fighting them. Most wargamers are adults who think of their hobby as a scholarly endeavor; fantasy settings and roleplaying are of no interest to them.

If there is a real generation gap, then there is probably more than one gap. D&D has essentially had four incarnations, starting with Chainmail/Basic/Expert and going through the three editions. Each reincarnation has been a response to the previous incarnation, both in terms of what was good and bad. Sacred cows were retained, rules were expanded or stream-lined. And each incarnation has its devotees who have invested too much to change to the next edition.

So, to finally address the OP's question. I do not think that D&D will move towards simplifying rules, at least not in the sense of reducing the number of options or even the variables; I imagine that combat will still revolve around rolling an attack and rolling damage separately. The rules might become simpler in the sense of becoming more stream-lined or more internally consistent, which was a big part of 3e and the d20 system in general. But players want that complexity, because that is what makes it possible to create characters that you think are special. Even though it still takes a long time to play, D&D still gives you more options than a MMORPG.

I also think that the question of marketing is beyond any generation gap, simply because people will play D&D for their entire lives. The base of the market for 4e will be the same as that for 3e, which was essentially the people who played 1e and 2e. The difference between the 3e market and the previous editions is that it brought in some new demographics, CCG players and Vampire: The Masquerade players in particular. (The former CEO of WotC talkes about this market analysis on his BLOG.) The question is where WotC can find new buyers for 4e; the most obvious place to my thinking is MMORPGs, but I don't think that crowd will want less complex rules or a killing of sacred cows.

Just my 2cp.

--Axe

 

[diaglo]

Now for Generation X. <snip>

What do you think?

i think you are out of touch. Gen X isn't the current generation. at least according to the media and business models.

Heck Gen Y is almost being bumped.