D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[UngainlyTitan]

....

I wonder how many of those new players will show the same level of dedication when D&D's current cultural apogee inevitably wanes?

Any that become DMs

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Grognards, by their very nature, have stuck with the game for decades, and quite likely have bought a significant portion of the offerings being put out during that time and/or brought many other people into the hobby who themselves became consumers, at least for a time. Grognards are, in other words, the vital few.

I wonder how many of those new players will show the same level of dedication when D&D's current cultural apogee inevitably wanes?

Every grognard today was a young whippersnapper (a munchkin, in the parlance of the late 70s and early 80s) at one point.

We don't get more grognards without a high number of new players. So the fact that D&D continues to skew young is a feature, not a bug.

 

[Alzrius]

We don't get more grognards without a high number of new players. So the fact that D&D continues to skew young is a feature, not a bug.

It becomes a bug if they acquire those new players by making it a "tradeoff" for grognards, as the post I replied to characterized it. Far better to not make it a tradeoff (even if that means drawing in slightly fewer new players; a minor reduction in short-term growth to encourage long-term growth, if you will), at least as much is reasonably possible; the debate is whether or not that reasonable possibility is what we currently have, or if it should be something else.

 

[mamba]

Grognards, by their very nature, have stuck with the game for decades, and quite likely have bought a significant portion of the offerings being put out during that time and/or brought many other people into the hobby who themselves became consumers, at least for a time. Grognards are, in other words, the vital few.

Not sure about the vital bit. Grognards to me have played the game a long time and do bring people into the game, but that game is by now OSR, not 5e, and it has not happened with 5e first either, they already did move away with 4e or even 3e. Some hung in there, some maybe came back for 5e, but it is not the game for them, which is why all they do is complain about how the game goes in the wrong direction and relive the good old days. That does not sound like a person that brings people into 5e, or not many at least. They might bring people into TTRPGs, but that is not the same thing.

With the huge growth in number of players and visibility of D&D, they also become a lot less important as a funnel into the game. I am sure Matt Mercer or Stranger Things got more people into 5e than all the grognards combined.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Ok. So from what I see in Black flag is nit more compatibility than 1D&D, probably less.
So yes, that statement is really weird and proves what I am saying:

Some 3pp know well how to promote their otherwise not very special product by using the OGL controversary and transition of WotC to 1D&D.

That does not mean, what they say or imply might not turn true in a few years (barring insider knowledge), but right now it is at least seems to be made out of thin air.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It becomes a bug if they acquire those new players by making it a "tradeoff" for grognards, as the post I replied to characterized it. Far better to not make it a tradeoff (even if that means drawing in slightly fewer new players; a minor reduction in short-term growth to encourage long-term growth, if you will), at least as much is reasonably possible; the debate is whether or not that reasonable possibility is what we currently have, or if it should be something else.

Eh, I don't think any product does well by deliberately alienating its consumers, but I also think that the idea of fealty to grognards ... even though that would mean doing things I want ... is the death knell of a product and a company as a vibrant cultural force.

I will always have the thrill of opening the Greyhawk boxed set and unfurling Darlene's map for the first time. I will have the excitement of going to the store and seeing the Monster Manual 2 on the shelves, or the wonder of thumbing through a friend's copy of Deities & Demigods that was a first printing (you know what the means).

But that time has past. I still play, but it's time for another generation to have their own magical moments. I only hope that they remember them with that sense of happiness as I still remember mine.

 

[Alzrius]

Not sure about the vital bit. Grognards to me have played the game a long time and do bring people into the game, but that game is by now OSR, not 5e, and it has not happened with 5e first either

I suppose that depends on your definition of what constitutes a grognard, since I've seen the term thrown at people who were playing as recently as 4E, and certainly at people who are nostalgic for 3.5. In that light, I'm not sure I'd characterize them all as OSR adherents.

They might bring people into TTRPGs, but that is not the same thing.

This is where I disagree. It seems to be that there's a high degree of permeability between different tabletop RPGs of the same genre, particularly with regard to casual players, and that permeability most benefits the largest and most-popular game (i.e. the Skaff Effect), which is unquestionably D&D. While keeping the grognards in closer orbit to D&D certainly benefits WotC more, I don't think there's a zero (or negative) effect to their playing D&D-esque games. (Which I suppose serves as an excuse for why WotC feels like they can afford to near-totally ignore grognards, though I still think that's a fairly shortsighted view; this is an area where WotC absolutely could have their cake and eat almost all of it too).

With the huge growth in number of players and visibility of D&D, they also become a lot less important as a funnel into the game. I am sure Matt Mercer or Stranger Things got more people into 5e than all the grognards combined.

I have no doubt those things generated visibility and interest, but you generally need to have a group that you're playing with in order to create sustained engagement. Of course, you could abet that even without a group by also making the books interesting to read on their own (what Mike Mearls rather pejoratively called "lonely fun").

 

[Alzrius]

Eh, I don't think any product does well by deliberately alienating its consumers, but I also think that the idea of fealty to grognards ... even though that would mean doing things I want ... is the death knell of a product and a company as a vibrant cultural force.

I don't think it's the either/or that you're making it sound like here (or at least, that's how it sounds to me; if I've misread you, I apologize). These things exist on a continuum, and you can move a little in one direction without it being some sort of stark alteration between "old and busted" or "new hotness."

 

[Micah Sweet]

Every grognard today was a young whippersnapper (a munchkin, in the parlance of the late 70s and early 80s) at one point.

We don't get more grognards without a high number of new players. So the fact that D&D continues to skew young is a feature, not a bug.

Unless of course you're not young and they've moved on from you.

 

[mamba]

So yes, that statement is really weird and proves what I am saying:

Some 3pp know well how to promote their otherwise not very special product by using the OGL controversary and transition of WotC to 1D&D.

If that second sentence is what you are saying, then I am not sure how it follows from the Kobold Press post. OGL is not mentioned anywhere, and what is mentioned does not have anything to do with that controversy