Scenario - 2009: WOTC drops D&D product line - Death or Resurrection for RPG hobby?

[JDJblatherings]

Starts? The hobby's been slowly declining for years and years and years. I know this forum isn't all that representative but look how big of a chunk of us have played 1st ed. Not too much new blood...

What dopes that really mean? I was playing 1st edition until 92-93. Mt last D&D campaign before 3e was a Rules Cyclopedia campaign in 98 (2 noobs still playign own games since then). My long running 3e campaign had a large number of totally new (or non-AD&D playing gamers) at one point our group was 50/50 newbies/crusty veterans out of a dozen players . Of that dozen 4 noobs, all had to move away as careers and military service required and all of them still play RPGs.

My BFRPG campaign had 5 (was 6) people in it (other then me), none of them post to enworld that I am aware of it, only 3 of them played 1st edtion. None of the 5 other people I play Earthdawn with post at enworld. No one in the WoD campaign I entered post at enworld either. a group of players i drop in and out of that has rabid "d20 only" players only has one person out of 8 or 9 that visits enworld occasionaly.

In closing, out of about 20 gamers, 2 of us read and post at enworld, forum population shows the hardcore RPG fan-base but not all of the RPG fan-base or market. Enworld polls tell you about folks that use enworld not the rest of gaming.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

After much reflection, I had to vote 'decline', but I think it's more likely it would fracture completely, spinning off dozens of small insular groups whose incestuous cannibalizations and defections -eventually- destroy the hobby.

I'm really curious about the 3 people who voted "Immediate flowering of creativity". Don't you know huffing spraypaint can kill you?

 

[ejja_1]

Just my 2 coppers

Judging by my LGS the majority of players are in thier mid 30's, and while this may not represent the entire gaming populace I would think it does represent the majority.
At some comic shops I have witnessed some pre teen and teen Magic the Gathering games, but when I witness People playing D&D they are usually the older crowd.

 

[JDJblatherings]

Folks I see playing RPGs at my FLGS are all under 21. So there is still hope.

 

[Switchblade]

Mid 30's? Well that probably depends on your own age range. When I started in school everyone I played with was of school age, at uni mostly in the 18 - 24 range, now in one group I play in it's early to mid twenties, the other early twenties up to 40's. Just because I no longer roleplay with 14 year olds doesn't mean there are no longer any out there.

The more I think about it the more I realise how few enter roleplay through DnD, it doesn't seem to be the entry system these days. People rarely pick up a rpg book and start rping, they usualy start rp then pick up a book so enter the game that their friends all play which isn't always DnD. The rare exception is the goths who are drawn to White Wolf like candles to the flame. As much as I dislike WW I think it does more to recruit new blood (d'oh, pun so not intentional) than DnD, it appeals more to the "younger generation" (Oh 'eck, I'm to young to make comments like that, next I'll be saying "In my day...") than sword and sorcery does.

This does not mean RPG are dead if DnD goes the way of the dinosaur, just evolving into a new form that will survive.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm really curious about the 3 people who voted "Immediate flowering of creativity". Don't you know huffing spraypaint can kill you?

Don't make fun of other peoples opinions please. Your first sentence is fine, your second sentence isn't (ascribing motives to others, suggesting they may be hallucinating etc)

Thanks

 

[prosfilaes]

Since D&D makes up, what, 60 percent or more of all RPG sales, it's the end of the FLGS in pretty short order, other than Games Workshop-only stores.

Why? The last games store I was in had merely a shelf of RPGs. Board/classic card games, CCGs, and Warhammer seem to make up the bulk of their sales. It's entirely possible that none of the FLGS I've ever been in have made RPGs the majority of their sales; even those that may have had strong side components.

I find the answers conflate tomorrow with forever. Yes, it would send shockwaves through the community and have immediate negative effects. But a lot of players would switch to different games. Eventually the RPG ecosystem would recover; I don't think that it would have any effect on the number of people playing RPGs fifty to a hundred years down the line.

I answered "Nothing changes. Gamers move on to other systems - the hobby retains present level of popularity." because, while I don't think it would retain in the short term its present level of popularity, I don't believe in an inevitable decline.

 

[prosfilaes]

The OGL wouldn't change, so the restrictions would still be there.

The restriction may be there, but the will to enforce it wouldn't be, so interpretations that permit more reuse would abound. (Like elsewhere in real life: programmers only worry about software patents if there's a company attacking violators, and I'd be much quicker to write a story inspired by one of Anne McCaffery's works than one of Harlan Ellison's--inspired here not meaning anything I would consider copyright infringing.)

Frankly, I can see use of the OGL dropping a lot. Game rules (as opposed to their written expression) aren't covered by copyright, and there's a case that much of the stuff under the OGL doesn't have to be. If Hasbro no longer cares enough to produce the product, they aren't likely to bother anyone outside clear copyright or trademark infringement, so why mess with the OGL?

 

[Storm Raven]

I'm really curious about the 3 people who voted "Immediate flowering of creativity".

There is a small, but vocal subset in the RPG community that think that D&D is crushing the flowering of wondrous and exciting new game systems. They are generally devotees of one or more "indie" games, and talk a lot about things like the "GNS" axis and so on. If only WotC and D&D were out of the way, those of us who play D&D would see the light and start playing a lot more Burning Wheel or whatever. There are a lot of people with this sort of viewpoint at RPG.net.

I think that people with this viewpoint vastly underestimate the importance of a flagship game for the hobby. I can only point to the wargames hobby by comparison. Avalon Hill was never as much of a dominant player in that market as WotC is in the RPG market, but since Avalon Hill went out of business, the wargames industry has basically withered to a shell of its former self. Would it have done so anyway? I'd say that is likely yes, but it certainly didn't help to lose the main player in the market.

I'd say losing D&D as a published game would be disastrous for the tabletop RPG hobby. Sure, established gamers would probably keep playing, for a while at least. But old gamers would increasingly leave the hobby (for various reasons) and new gamers would be few and far between without the "gateway drug" of D&D.

 

[Clavis]

What I expect to happen is that WOTC will cancel D&D as a tabletop game in 2 or 3 years, in order to focus on trading card and miniatures games. Hasbro will then use Dungeons & Dragons as a brand name for a line of toys, and license the name out to other game companies as a revenue stream. My dream scenario is that Troll Lord Games gets the license for the tabletop game, and C&C becomes tabletop D&D. That might bring back a lot of the original creative talent, especially Gygax himself. I also expect the name "Dungeons & Dragons" to be licensed for computer games, but without any attempt made to replicate the tabletop rules. Much like was done in the 80s when Intellivison had "AD&D" games on its console, but they were completely unlike the tabletop game as far as rules went.