• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Mike Mearls Talks (er, Tweets) About the Industry

I think history has proven Mike wrong. The problem is that D&D isn't a game. D&D is a framework that allows 5 players to make a game. So if you like boardgames, you got lots of different games to choose from. If you like RPGs, you got lots of games to choose from. But those games are the things GMs do with D&D. My campaign is my own game I've developed. Your campaign is yours. I think...

I think history has proven Mike wrong. The problem is that D&D isn't a game. D&D is a framework that allows 5 players to make a game.

So if you like boardgames, you got lots of different games to choose from. If you like RPGs, you got lots of games to choose from. But those games are the things GMs do with D&D. My campaign is my own game I've developed. Your campaign is yours.

I think there's a market for lots of different RPGs in that sense. Because each gaming group playing D&D is running its own unique game, in their own homebrew setting with their own house rules.

But I don't think there's a market for different *frameworks*. I think there's demand for *a* framework, that players use to develop lots of different games.
 

mrm1138

Explorer
Man, there are two conversations here. The one that interests me more is "why isn't there a good space sci-gi game as good as D&D?"

I'm really hoping White Star catches on outside of OSR circles. I think it's a pretty great tool kit for running space opera games, and the rules are exceptionally easy to learn.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm really hoping White Star catches on outside of OSR circles. I think it's a pretty great tool kit for running space opera games, and the rules are exceptionally easy to learn.
The problem with space games - in my experience - is less the rules of the game and more the rules of the universe. I ran a game of Eclipse Phase using Fate and it was awkward at times as the party expected artificial gravity, FTL, standard sensor arrays, and the like.
Fanatsy is easier as it's placed over a veneer of history. Everyone knows how a sword works. And the variance of magic is learned with those rules.

The best sci-fi games are licenced. Since anyone playing Star Wars or Star Trek knows the assumptions of the universe. But those are divisive franchises and bow to the restrictions of the licencee. (And the rules can be clunky...) The gaming company can't run with the IP and make it their own. Plus, the universes are not designed for the needs of gaming groups.
Plus Star Trek has the whole chain of command issue where someone has to be captain and in charge of the gaming group.
 


How does the board game expansion market look like?

It varies according to the board game, there's not really one standard model.

Sometimes you find games where there's a set of rules and then you apply the same rules over a series of otherwise separate games that are independent of each other. So people who can play one don't need to learn how to play others, but will need to buy the new boards and counters and other material. Most common in wargames and train company games.

Then there's the 'expansions' which add new content to the base game. That might mean new maps, new counters, new <whatever the game uses>. While not strictly a boardgame (it uses cards) Sentinels of the Multiverse follows this pattern, with a base game and a variety of different extra sets ranging from ones that are almost the size of the base game to ones which provide a single new character or location.

Some expansions add new equipment so you can play the base game with more players. So if the base game is for a maximum of two players, an expansion gives you the 'gear' you need to add another one or two.

And that's just some ways things work in the board game market. And there's games which mix all of those things - Advanced Squad Leader for example - and do other things too. See above, there is no standard board game expansion model.

Man, there are two conversations here. The one that interests me more is "why isn't there a good space sci-gi game as good as D&D?" That really needs to be spun off into its own thread. (Has someone started that?)

There are plenty of SF RPGs that are, in the opinion of their fans, better than D&D. I'd argue however that D&D is a genre, one created and occupied by itself. There's no SF RPG which attempts the whole SF genre, and I don't think it's possible to make one. Too much variety on SF for one game to cover everything, and the only SF game sufficiently large and well established to be a genre in its own right happens not to be an RPG, though an RPG (several RPGs) have covered the setting. WH40K, specifically.
 

Yaarel

🇮🇱He-Mage
My take : VR games are probably going to steal tabletop D&D's lunch money, stick it in a locker, then forget it there all summer until the janitor smells the flies coming out from all the sticky mountain dew residue.

2016 is the year VR is going to take off. And playing D&D just won't really be able to compete. If wizards were smart they would see the writing on the wall. D&D was always meant to be unlimited except by your imagination. But virtual reality worlds are a whole other level. Photorealistic games, where you can swing swords and cast fireballs and fight gargantuan monsters atop flying dragons are going to make table top seem positively stone age in comparison.

Good luck getting a new generation of zero-attention span gamers to hop on board to their grandpa's RPG. Roleplaying can't really compete with full immersion presence. It doesn't need to, it filled its niche during its time and all good things come to an end. Sure, some people will still play it, but developers and companies won't release new rules which produce pennies in revenue compared to making something like a Ravenloft VR Experience. I can't wait. 5th edition is the last D&D I'm interested in playing. It did a good job letting me use my imagination until computer graphics could catch up. D&D is supposed to be immersive, but is stifled by its own tabletop limitations and the problems of a human being trying to run a believable world simulation. They didn't even try to make a sensible item economy in 5th edition, for example. In a VR game, you could easily have a steel longsword break 46% less often, and have a price that varies by design with subtle variations in delay factor and point of balance, all of which affecting combat stats in a physically realistic and also fun way.

I also can't see myself bothering to argue about another edition's rules, I'm finished with that after 5th edition. It's like arguing about a tricycle's pedals not being greased enough, while I can easily step into a shiny Ferrarri over here. It's like a future space man going to the past and getting into a debate with bronze-age shepherds about the nature of the universe.

The big problem with D&D rules is that they're turn-based, which is a pointless limitation for a computer game that is wholly unnecessary. The only thing that will matter in the future regarding D&D are the IPs that its associated with, and how well those are rendered into games, and how successful those games are.

Rodney Thompson is probably realizing this now, how much more intricate videogames are to TTRPG rules, making them quaint by comparison, an anachronism if we're truly being honest. He jumped ship at a good time, before becoming fossilized in a more or less irrelevant and dwindling, market. A market that's probably doomed, and was from the start. It's had a good run though. I hope to play maybe one or two more full campaigns before hanging up my dice bag and moving on to greener pastures.

At a certain point, it's inevitable that most will be forced to admit it's time to put those horse carriages away and pick up a Ford. You can always go up to a farm once in a blue moon, but to get to work, you're going to have to commute like everybody else. And you might not even have a choice. The more people migrate to VR for their fantasy, the less of a market there will be, the less products will be produced, the less players there will be to find, and the futility of it all will finally put it out to pasture.

Eventually correct. But WotC can license the rights to such virtual-reality games, and still benefit.

LOL! I think theres a curse on digital D&D. Let there be peace!
 


delericho

Legend
Man, there are two conversations here. The one that interests me more is "why isn't there a good space sci-gi game as good as D&D?"

You can mix together Conan and Elric and Lankhmar and a bunch of other fantasy sources, shake them together, and it all kinda-sorta works if you squint a bit. You can't really mix Vernor Vinge and Star Wars in the same way.

That means you either need two games to cover both options, or you need a toolbox game that allows groups to do their thing. The former fractures the market, while the latter requires considerable work from the group - work that many GMs simply won't have the time or the expertise to do.

And that's before you get into licensing issues. At the time D&D was released, fantasy was small enough, and D&D niche enough, that it got away with playing fast and loose with its sources... and still got in trouble from some quarters. A sci-fi equivalent now that "adapted" material from Star Wars and Star Trek for their game? The moment such a game was big enough to be noticed it would be squashed by lawyers.
 

delericho

Legend
The best sci-fi games are licenced. Since anyone playing Star Wars or Star Trek knows the assumptions of the universe. But those are divisive franchises and bow to the restrictions of the licencee. (And the rules can be clunky...) The gaming company can't run with the IP and make it their own.

Indeed. The best licensed games are the ones where the setting was abandoned after just enough material was created - this allows the group to get on the same page as regards setting assumptions, while allowing the group (and licensee) to put their own spin on it. So shows like "Firefly", "Crusade", or "Terra Nova" make for decent candidates.

Of course, such settings are generally abandoned for a reason, and most likely due to poor viewing figures. Which sorely limits the appeal of an RPG. Though "Firefly" seems to be doing well enough.
 

wedgeski

Adventurer
2016 is the year VR is going to take off. And playing D&D just won't really be able to compete. If wizards were smart they would see the writing on the wall. D&D was always meant to be unlimited except by your imagination. But virtual reality worlds are a whole other level. Photorealistic games, where you can swing swords and cast fireballs and fight gargantuan monsters atop flying dragons are going to make table top seem positively stone age in comparison.
D&D still has its market in the face of competition from incredibly rich game experiences. The gulf between video games and TTRPG's, and video-games with VR and TTRPG's, is not so huge. VR dramatically increases immersion, but until software can generate realistic human interaction on the fly, the table-top will continue to have its place.

When a game really does generate a realistic NPC, with all of the humour and weirdness and complexity of people I've known all my life, the world will have changed so radically that even the phrase "table-top" will seem quaintly prehistoric.
 

Yaarel

🇮🇱He-Mage
Some have mentioned being unable to use the same system for:

• Naturalistic Western setting
• Magical Fantasy setting
• Superhero setting

But why cant these be tiers?

• Apprentice
• Journeyer
• Master
• Legend
• Epic
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top