Is this the Golden Age of Roleplaying?

[Minicol]

The number of quality options we have is staggering, to the point where there are more interesting things to try than time to do it. So I ask you: is this the golden age of (paper-and-pencil) roleplaying? If not, then I'd be hard-pressed to think of a better time to be a fan of this style of game.

I'd say : not yet.

Though this looks promising : if 4 e is selling well, and PRPG is selling well, and I know some other games are selling well too ... It is a promising revival.

Though I'd say it is a bit early to claim victory, as I still see some damn good RPG shops closing, the good trends I am seeing from everywhere are indicating a positive turnaround coming.

Now, it's up to us all to recrtui new players and have them share the fun.

 

[Glyfair]

Well, getting back on topic, it seems a lot of people here point to the 80's as a Golden Age. Is it because that's when a lot of you got into rpgs or D&D in general?

I was into D&D in the late 70s. I don't consider that the golden age.

Product quality of all games and books published across the board. That's what I judge it on.

Not I. Quality of the actual tabletop gaming I would consider. However, that is even more personal since no one can even begin to experience enough to judge.

 

[Crothian]

Not I. Quality of the actual tabletop gaming I would consider. However, that is even more personal since no one can even begin to experience enough to judge.

If we could measure that then it would be a good thing to go by but since it is impossible perhaps a different measuring stick is in order?

 

[Henry]

If I had to categorize, I'm still for calling the early to mid-80's the Golden Age, having lived through it, and having read some of Dancey's articles on just how much money TSR was earning through that period just prior to ousting Gary in '84-'85. In the mid-90s, The hobby as a whole was diminishing, because although people like White wolf were getting larger slices of the pie, it was a diminishing pie, thanks to CCGs and some problems with TSR business strategies.

My thought is that 2001 through now would be a "Silver Age" - despite some doom and gloom about the state of the hobby in the 2005 to 2007 period, from the outside, it really seems to be a gradually sloping trend with a few hiccups when you look at it closely. I really don't see much of a difference between now and 2003 when talking about the number of popular systems available, except that in 2003 it was predominantly OGL/d20, and now it's a wider variety.

This is, of course, when looked at from hindsight, and of course entirely pulled from my hindquarters when talking about the past six years or so.

 

[diaglo]

...and of course entirely pulled from my hindquarters when talking about the past six years or so.

and an ample hindquarter you are. i mean have.

but i agree with your assessment and said so in my earlier posts to this thread.

 

[Glyfair]

If we could measure that then it would be a good thing to go by but since it is impossible perhaps a different measuring stick is in order?

In at least one edit of my message I did

I think the ability to find a new game and game with new people is a good measure. The other factors are certainly there, but if they don't contribute to that, then it isn't a "golden age."

It doesn't matter if you personally want a new game or new people to game with. The fact that they are out there as an option is the key.

 

[Clavis]

For D&D, the "Golden Years" were the early 80s. D&D at the moment is culturally insignificant. The average person on the street is not even aware that people still play D&D. If you ask them what they know about D&D, to them it's something that people did in the 80s. If they have an opinion on D&D or people who play it now, its usually pretty negative.

The current edition seems to appeal to a much smaller group of people than the older ones did, but its a group that is more likely to buy items associated with the hobby. We D&D players are currently an extremely small, closed, and dying sub-culture.

 

[Nathal]

The average person on the street is not even aware that people still play D&D.

On the other hand, anybody who enjoys fantasy novels is probably aware of D&D, especially if they shop in Borders or Barnes and Noble...both had sections in their store with D&D books, last I checked.

The current edition seems to appeal to a much smaller group of people than the older ones did, but its a group that is more likely to buy items associated with the hobby. We D&D players are currently an extremely small, closed, and dying sub-culture.

And yet, still viable enough for Hasbro to keep it going. Yea for us!

 

[Glyfair]

For D&D, the "Golden Years" were the early 80s. D&D at the moment is culturally insignificant. The average person on the street is not even aware that people still play D&D. If you ask them what they know about D&D, to them it's something that people did in the 80s. If they have an opinion on D&D or people who play it now, its usually pretty negative.

If you asked someone on the street in the 80s, it would usually have been pretty negative. In fact, it's probably much more tolerated today, with such cultural touchstones as World of Warcraft, etc.

If WotC was smart, they would put their marketing people in touch with the people behind Big Bang Theory and make sure the books, etc. were on set. Give copies to anyone associated with the show who might be interested. We've seen Talisman being played, we have heard references to a World of Warcraft pastiche. IIRC, we even saw a brief glimpse of some D&D miniatures. D&D definitely should have a more obvious exposure given the nature of the show and the characters.

 

[Dausuul]

The current edition seems to appeal to a much smaller group of people than the older ones did, but its a group that is more likely to buy items associated with the hobby. We D&D players are currently an extremely small, closed, and dying sub-culture.

That's a little more pessimistic than I'd describe it; I don't think we're dying just yet.

Still, we do suffer tremendously from one thing: The casual gamers have moved on to hobbies which demand less personal investment. First CCGs and then MMOs provided new options for people who didn't have time for RPGs, or didn't have a gaming group, or simply didn't want to put in the up-front investment of time and energy to master the rules.

(Please note that I am not saying CCGs and MMOs are "dumbed down" compared to RPGs, or only suitable for casual gamers, or anything else along those lines; they simply have lower barriers to entry and require less of a commitment, making them more casual-friendly.)

And because the casual gamers have, by and large, moved on, we are left with the die-hard gamers who are willing to make big investments. What this means is that a modern RPG has two options. It can try to reach out to people outside the hobby and open up a new market. Or it can appeal to the hardcore gamers, trying to snare a small number of high-spending customers. The latter approach is easier and safer; but it also leads to a vicious cycle and an ever-narrowing player base.

D&D 4E is trying to have it both ways. The rules are simplified and streamlined in order to bring in new blood. At the same time, a dramatic increase in the percentage of "crunch," heavy reliance on miniatures, and a modular ruleset allowing for the release of endless "list o' powers" sourcebooks, target the hardcore gamer who will shell out the big bucks.

It remains to be seen whether this hybrid approach will work. I confess to being a bit skeptical, myself. 4E is certainly bringing in some new blood, but I don't see it making the kind of conceptual leap forward that opens up new markets.