D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I very much disagree with this. The whole point of them stressing out that OD&D is not a new edition and is backwards compatible is because they are very much interested in keeping this massive consumer group.
I don't know how effective they are going to be in it, but they are absolutely interested.
I believe they are doing that for all the people that have joined 5e since it became popular shortly after it was released (a large group to be sure). It is not, however, the same group of players the game was designed to attract when it was designed and originally published. That group no longer matters to them.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
So...have I missed something? Has something suddenly changed about WotC's plans?

Because "hey guys, these books we have no control over are going out of print sooner rather than later, and we are trying to be ready for that" seems like a perfectly valid thing to have a FAQ about...

Isn't this, pretty much exactly, how Paizo courted 3.5e players in the wake of the GSL? Words are different, but the concept--"we're preserving the REAL SPIRIT of the game," "we AREN'T moving to pure digital," etc. was exactly how everyone I knew spoke about PF when it first launched.
 

mamba

Hero
It all depends on how you look at it. To me, it really seems like WotC has decided to stop producing 5e, and no longer has any interest in the population it was created for.
Don't equate yourself with that population. If you think WotC is not interested in keeping their audience and having it move to 1DD, and are instead creating 1DD for some new audience, then I have no idea what you are smoking.

I believe they are doing that for all the people that have joined 5e since it became popular shortly after it was released (a large group to be sure). It is not, however, the same group of players the game was designed to attract when it was designed and originally published. That group no longer matters to them.
If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
It all depends on how you look at it. To me, it really seems like WotC has decided to stop producing 5e, and no longer has any interest in the population it was created for. It's a little sad, to be honest, even though I have other options. I used to get legitimately excited when WotC announced another book, and even that pales in comparison to what their predecessor released.

Heck, I still hold a torch for Dragon Magazine!
As a member of the population it was created for, I object to this statement. I quite like the direction the game is going in. The population it was "designed for" was a broad church and remains so. This is a game where new features and mechanics get to go through a popularity contest before adoption.
I get it that is not going the direction you favour but them the breaks I guess.
 

mamba

Hero
My impression of this whole thing is that KP had a really strong reason to do black flag, and the community was really behind them. Then the reason evaporated with the creative commons move. Now they are trying to find a new narrative to keep people engaged.
That is my take as well. One good thing in my book is that Black Flag will be on all kinds of VTTs, while for 1DD I am not so sure about the future support. Heck, it already supports fewer than BF will from the start (according to the announcement). Presumably it will also include more of the class related stuff in its licensed material, which is another plus in my book, if maybe not one that is all that marketable.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Don't equate yourself with that population. If you think WotC is not interested in keeping their audience and having it move to 1DD, and are instead creating 1DD for some new audience, then I have no idea what you are smoking.


If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them
First of all, I am absolutely part of that population. I had given up on 4e years before, and 5e brought me back. That's the definition of 5e's original audience.

They would like to keep their entire audience, sure, but they only really care about all the new adds when 5e became popular, and all the theoretical players that might start buying their products in the future. The people for which they actually wrote the game to entice back to D&D are the ones I'm saying they no longer are interested in particularly.

Is that the ratio? 10 : 1? That is supposition at best.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
As a member of the population it was created for, I object to this statement. I quite like the direction the game is going in. The population it was "designed for" was a broad church and remains so. This is a game where new features and mechanics get to go through a popularity contest before adoption.
I get it that is not going the direction you favour but them the breaks I guess.
There are always exceptions to any trend, and people always trot them out to refute a point.
 

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
If they lose one grognard for every 10 new players they gain, it is a worthwhile tradeoff to them
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?
 

mamba

Hero
First of all, I am absolutely part of that population
Yes you are, never said otherwise. But you are one in a diverse group, not a representative of the entire group. So if WotC does something 80% like, 15% don't care and you find yourself in the 5% then they still act in the interest of that population, even if it is not in yours.

Is that the ratio? 10 : 1? That is supposition at best.
No idea, I personally think that ratio is very generous to you
 


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
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

The EN World kitten
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

Hero
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.
 

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

Notorious Liquefactionist
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

The EN World kitten
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

The EN World kitten
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

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
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

Hero
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
 

Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition Starter Box

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top