D&D General Mike Mearls' blog post about RPG generations

TheAlkaizer

Game Designer
If there was a thread about his topic, I missed it.

Mearls posted this blog article a little less than two weeks ago. It made its way in several communities I frequent so I got to reading it.

TTRPGs: The Next Generation

I'm really puzzled by it. It makes little sense to me. The lines he draws in the sand and his interpretation of these "generations" does not correlate at all with my perspective. Of course, I know my perspective is limited and anecdotal, so I was curious as to how other people would judge the blog post. I know ENWorld has a lot of older folks that have been in D&D for longer that I have been and have a more complete perspective of the industry.

I'll reserve my comments about specifics for now and just absorb a bit.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



The lines he draws in the sand and his interpretation of these "generations" does not correlate at all with my perspective.
I can see where he's coming from for some of it, but it's still a fairly D&D-heavy perspective in some cases. For example, Mike's second generation is largely D&D's Hickman Revolution. But some other games had already been wrestling with similar ideas while also being third generation genre-emulation games - my strongest example being superhero games. They went through issues of playability and simulation - but mainly of a genre of entertainment - thus blurring first and third generation definitions, and their adventures and sourcebooks generally focused on some of the same stuff that made up part of the second generation Hickman Revolution - there's a story to the PCs' heroic shenanigans.
That's why I think Mike's analysis is pretty heavy from the D&D perspective and less so games outside of D&D, despite many of them coming around only about half a decade after D&D first appeared.
 
Last edited:


Eh. Analysis like this is almost a Rorshach test, people see patterns whether they're there or not. But the patterns almost always reflect predefined beliefs.

Maybe there's a seismic shift going on, maybe not. In general I don't really buy into these generation defining moments, either people enjoy playing a game or they don't. There are certainly more options available than ever before but I'm not convinced that's what's best for the hobby overall. I think competition is good, but there are also issues with the paradox of choice. Outside of a relatively small percentage of players that are hard-core gamers I think most people just want to play what other people around them are playing as long as the barrier to entry isn't too high.

The risk I see is people turning their backs on TTRPGs because everyone is playing something different. Compared to many other group activities people participate in, TTRPGs are still incredibly small slice of the pie. That slice has grown bigger over the past decade or so for multiple reasons, but divvy it up too much and that may reverse.

Or not. I have no real clue what will happen, we've just seen so many predictions sort of along these lines that I'm skeptical. That and I get a "Let's stick it to the man" vibe here (which may or may not be fair) when the alternative is in uncharted waters. I'll take any predictions on what's going to happen next with a huge block of salt. The grouping? Nothing inherently wrong with it but I also don't think it matters much.
 


I mean... on the one hand it's a lot more accurate than all the horrible Forge classifications. On the other hand, it's a lot less useful for modern discourse than horrible Forge classifications, which is... not a high bar at all

Is the Forge stuff all the faux-intellectual stuff? Hard pass there.

This at least seems to make a reasonable amount of sense at a high level.

Gen1 - Born of the Hex/Miniature systems of the day.
Gen2 - Leaning into that Heroic setting and a desire to recreate the books/movies/settings we knew.
Gen3 - The beginning (imo) of self referencing loops of design. Its not enough now to be playing the heroic setting, now the setting itself becomes a focus.
Gen4 - CRPG, OC focus with 10 pages of font size 10 backstory at level 1, 4e as its 'final form'.
Gen5 - OSR, and the freedom due to self publishing to realize it.

I dont know, makes sense to me.
 

Is the Forge stuff all the faux-intellectual stuff? Hard pass there.
Precisely.
This at least seems to make a reasonable amount of sense at a high level.

Gen1 - Born of the Hex/Miniature systems of the day.
Gen2 - Leaning into that Heroic setting and a desire to recreate the books/movies/settings we knew.
Gen3 - The beginning (imo) of self referencing loops of design. Its not enough now to be playing the heroic setting, now the setting itself becomes a focus.
Gen4 - CRPG, OC focus with 10 pages of font size 10 backstory at level 1, 4e as its 'final form'.
Gen5 - OSR, and the freedom due to self publishing to realize it.

I dont know, makes sense to me.
The biggest problem with chronological analyses is that the further you get from the origin generation the muddier everything gets as experimentation gets broader and it becomes harder and harder to confine all or even most of the prevailing zeitgeist to a single definable entity.
 

I myself wouldn't necessarily agree with the specifics of what Mike wrote, but can understand where he's coming from. To me I always saw it like this:

First gen is the original Dungeons & Dragons and D&D adaptations that are like as he said-- the slow move from wargaming into playing a character in a fantasy genre. Building dungeons and running through dungeons is the order of the day. This is probably '75 through the early '80s through the publishing of both Basic and Advanced D&D.

Second gen starts in the early-mid '80s where other RPGs are being invented and designed that don't mechanically follow D&D's formatting, plus begin to involve all kinds of other genres besides fantasy. So our GURPS, Toon, James Bond, Paranoia, Champions and so on. They are all RPGs, but no one would ever say they were trying to mimic D&D in any sense.

Third gen starts where he mentions, around 1991... but for a reason different than what he said. To me it was the advent of Vampire: The Masquerade and the increased narrative and story-heavy types of game. Games that never expect you to use grids or miniatures, games that do not have a combat-focus, games for whom game mechanics are not the primary method of interacting with the game. Instead, its the in-depth stories being told together by the players.

Fourth gen is where I agree with him on the 2000 3E advent, which is all about going back to creating rules to mechanically create whatever type of character you want. It also is the advent of the OGL and d20 system, allowing for an inordinate number of companies and people to design more and more and more products to extend the design of a character. Splatbooks all the way down.

Fifth gen? I do agree with him that we are in it, but I think the reflection point of it should be described differently that what he suggested. Mike said it's about new games making things easier for GMs to run... whereas I think the turn is reallly about the rise of Indy RPGs leading into the advent of Actual Play. With games that are more about character personality and character emotions and character relationships taking center stage, with combat and mechanical "character builds" no longer the focus. Players of this generation now are concerned with the interactions of their characters to each other and to the characters and essence of the worlds they are in, just like the actors and improvisors they watch playing RPGs online. And part of that is because the watching of the "board game" part of RPGs online through Actual Play is not the fun or compelling part and not the reason people tune in. Instead, it's roleplayers interacting vocally and emotionally with each other. Indy RPGs led the way on that, and 5E was light enough that it could be run in that manner successfully (even though it's not designed around the Indy RPG narrative aesthetic.)

And to me this has nothing to do with the attempted revocation of the OGL... as Indy RPGs had already begun to gain steam in the late 2000s and which lead to Actual Play in the mid 2010s-- all before the OGL fiasco.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top