D&D 5E (More) ruminations on the future of D&D

[pemerton]

I think another way to describe the difference between MMOs and TTRPGs is that the former are more akin to mass media, while the latter is more of a refined taste. Think pop music vs. jazz (or perhaps compare commercial smooth jazz to more avant garde stuff). There's always going to be a kind of pyramid, with fewer people enjoying the more refined stuff.

We need something at least as different as Vampire: the Masquerade was. And something that will cause that type of upheaval in the community. Some of the story games people (Vincent Baker, Paul Czege, and Jason Morningstar in particular) are trying - but it's like trying to bottle lightning.

Crunch heavy games (and yes, every version of D&D fits) are scary.

<snip>

Video games have a low barrier to entry. We're having a boardgame renaissance right now - there's no reason TTRPGs shouldn't also be joining in.

<snip>

Again this is incredibly insular. A lot of modern RPGs (Fiasco and the entire Apocalypse World family spring to mind) give you tools to invent adventures on the fly. This is another problem with the big bulky book presentation model.

But the problem with such games is that you can sell the game, but then what do you sell next? You can't really sell a product line. You need to sell an entirely new game. Monetisation is a problem.

I agree with Neonchameleon (and therefore, by implication, at least sympathise with [MENTION=12037]ThirdWizard[/MENTION]'s points, though I have no real opinion on numbers of players).

I'm GMing G2 - a classic AD&D module from the heyday - at the moment (mechanically adapted to 4e, though not in the same way that Chris Perkins adapted it). It's fun, but frankly comparing it to jazz is pretty ludicrous. It's a dice-rolling fest, and all about hacking up giants! (Just as the original tournament intended.)

If I was going to look at games that do warrant comparison to jazz, in terms of elegance, support for improvisation, appealing to refined but slightly edgy taste, I would certainly be looking at Baker, Czege etc. 5e isn't jazz at all, any more than G2 was or is.

Can their games be made wildly popular? I don't know - as Neonchameleon allues to, part of the problem is that mass penetration depends upon publication, which depends upon commerciality, which is a problem for games that support their players' imaginations and improvisation without needing to buy more stuff.

 

[Mercurius]

I'm GMing G2 - a classic AD&D module from the heyday - at the moment (mechanically adapted to 4e, though not in the same way that Chris Perkins adapted it). It's fun, but frankly comparing it to jazz is pretty ludicrous. It's a dice-rolling fest, and all about hacking up giants! (Just as the original tournament intended.)

If I was going to look at games that do warrant comparison to jazz, in terms of elegance, support for improvisation, appealing to refined but slightly edgy taste, I would certainly be looking at Baker, Czege etc. 5e isn't jazz at all, any more than G2 was or is.

You're not understanding how I was "comparing" tabletop RPGs (and not any specific one, mind you) to jazz - and I wasn't really as much comparing them to jazz, as comparing the relationship of TTRPGs to computer games to the relationship of jazz to pop music in terms of cognitive functioning and imagination.

 

[pemerton]

You're not understanding how I was "comparing" tabletop RPGs (and not any specific one, mind you) to jazz - and I wasn't really as much comparing them to jazz, as comparing the relationship of TTRPGs to computer games to the relationship of jazz to pop music in terms of cognitive functioning and imagination.

The cognitive functioning and imagination needed to play G2 is not all that great. And not radically different from playing a computer game, I wouldn't think: it's about choosing how to deploy your resources to beat up on giants!

 

[Mercurius]

The cognitive functioning and imagination needed to play G2 is not all that great. And not radically different from playing a computer game, I wouldn't think: it's about choosing how to deploy your resources to beat up on giants!

Yes, the functioning need to play isn't much - but that's just the surface. There are depths of imagination possible with a tabletop RPG that simply aren't possible with a video game.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ah right. So they broke a perfectly working system. Silly WotC.

Heh.

And the count of DDI subscribers no longer works...

 

[Haffrung]

The cognitive functioning and imagination needed to play G2 is not all that great. And not radically different from playing a computer game, I wouldn't think: it's about choosing how to deploy your resources to beat up on giants!

D&D is about a lot more than deploying resources. There are a hundred thousands movies of the Glacial Rift of the Frost Giant Jarl generated in a hundred thousand imaginations aided by the descriptive powers and improvisation of tens of thousands of DMs. All unique. All spontaneous. All collaborative. Sounds like bebop to me.

 

[pedro2112]

The cognitive functioning and imagination needed to play G2 is not all that great. And not radically different from playing a computer game, I wouldn't think: it's about choosing how to deploy your resources to beat up on giants!

I read a "report" recently that someone on these boards posted from a gamer pamphlet that was published right after the Origins Convention (or was it GenCon?) when Gygax debuted G1. Basically, the game report read like a first hand account of the initial landings on Omaha Beach. I specifically recall the phrase "it was a bloodbath" when describing the battle that took place in the Feast Hall. Those of us that played or DMed those early modules are not full of rose colored lenses about what they were about. They were hackfests, plain and simple.

 

[billd91]

The cognitive functioning and imagination needed to play G2 is not all that great. And not radically different from playing a computer game, I wouldn't think: it's about choosing how to deploy your resources to beat up on giants!

That is, at best, a superficial assessment, and possibly even a cherry picked one as well. While it may be true that G2 is probably the most straightforward of the GDQ series considering it has pretty well-defined objectives and relatively constricted paths of ingress, the comparison of RPGs in general and jazz is entirely reasonable. Both G1 and G3, for example, offer considerable opportunities for improvisation, exploring one method of exploration until it plays out, jettisoning it, and exploring another. And then D3 sits on top of that with very little plotted structure and an open space to act.

 

[neonagash]

You're not understanding how I was "comparing" tabletop RPGs (and not any specific one, mind you) to jazz - and I wasn't really as much comparing them to jazz, as comparing the relationship of TTRPGs to computer games to the relationship of jazz to pop music in terms of cognitive functioning and imagination.

See thats a sign of one of the actual problems in growing the hobby. Too many old dudes looking down their noses at the culture and interests of the younger people who you need to make have a good time when they play in order to get the game to stick with them.

Your pop/jazz analogy is bogus. I'm not even that young (32) and when I hear pop music I envision some young 20 something wearing very little and gyrating on a stage..... believe me, my imagination is functioning at a very high level at that moment lol.

On the other hand, Jazz is slow, and boring and makes me think of a club full of old people with too much smoke and bad fashion sense.

Is one right? I dont know, i dont like jazz and only listen to pop if someone else is playing it at work. But I know that the attitude and the whole analogy is insulting to the younger generations.

Older players need to try to be less like grandpa wagging his cane at the young whippersnappers and a little more like a friend you actually want to hang out with on your day off if they want to inspire growth in the hobby.

WoTC cant do it. Only we, the existing player base and GM's can grow this hobby. And we will decide whether it slowly dies or not.

 

[billd91]

Your pop/jazz analogy is bogus. I'm not even that young (32) and when I hear pop music I envision some young 20 something wearing very little and gyrating on a stage..... believe me, my imagination is functioning at a very high level at that moment lol.

On the other hand, Jazz is slow, and boring and makes me think of a club full of old people with too much smoke and bad fashion sense.

Is one right? I dont know, i dont like jazz and only listen to pop if someone else is playing it at work. But I know that the attitude and the whole analogy is insulting to the younger generations.

I think you're not really grokking the whole analogy. The idea here is that pop, particularly top 40 pop, is fairly formulaic and limited in format. This isn't a generational thing at all. It has always pretty much been this way (and artists have been chafing at the limited format of the single since the 1960s). There is relatively little room for experimentation. Occasionally there will be significant changes that will suddenly happen but soon everyone else will be imitating and the new sound will be the dominant sound. They're all chasing the big money that fitting the narrow slice of likeability that generates big sales.

By comparison, jazz, particularly free form varieties and improv, can be a pretty open format with musicians riffing off each other, developing new melodies in response to inputs from their fellows, often around a core structure like a chord progression or repeated element. This is fairly esoteric and one reason why jazz is rarely the moneymaker pop is.

These elements are why pop music and its confining format are more like computer RPGs and tabletop RPGs with GMs and players improvising as the situations change are like jazz. There is nothing really generational about it, nor is the analogy intended to be insulting to kids.