Paul Farquhar
Legend
Maybe D&D is more dominant in the US? I'm in the UK too, and most of my players play other RPGs too (WH 40K, Paranoia, Pathfinder, Blades in the Dark get mentioned).
D&D 5E The Overwhelming Dominance of D&D is Bad for Everyone...
- Thread starter MGibster
- Start date
dave2008
Legend
Yep. I only play and DM D&D now (tried other games 20 years ago or so), but I never go to conventions.
EDIT: Just wanted to add that I am thinking of switching to PF, but that is still D&D IMO.
I mean a large of the reason why D&D is so dominant is because so many of our game designers knew it was dominant and they deliberately hitched their design wagon to it since that would be the most effective way to get eyeballs and wallets on their products. And they helped grow the D&D bubble just as much as anyone.
But is having D&D be such a huge slice of the pie a bad thing? Well, it certainly hasn't been for 3rd Party companies and designers, as they've made more money this way then they otherwise would have by just designing and publishing generic RPG products. And we know this is true based on everyone's reactions to 1.1-- if D&D wasn't so important to everyone's livelihood we wouldn't have nearly the same amount of reaction for WotC trying to change the landscape.
Everyone took a risk/reward assessment when they decided to follow along in D&D's wake... make a lot more money in D&D adjacent design than they otherwise would have made... but being beholden to the ways and means of Wizards of the Coast.
Is/was it worth it? I imagine every person and company will need to determine that for themselves.
But is having D&D be such a huge slice of the pie a bad thing? Well, it certainly hasn't been for 3rd Party companies and designers, as they've made more money this way then they otherwise would have by just designing and publishing generic RPG products. And we know this is true based on everyone's reactions to 1.1-- if D&D wasn't so important to everyone's livelihood we wouldn't have nearly the same amount of reaction for WotC trying to change the landscape.
Everyone took a risk/reward assessment when they decided to follow along in D&D's wake... make a lot more money in D&D adjacent design than they otherwise would have made... but being beholden to the ways and means of Wizards of the Coast.
Is/was it worth it? I imagine every person and company will need to determine that for themselves.
Oofta
Legend
While I play other styles of games when it comes to RPGs I only play D&D. Nobody in my current circle of gamers (roughly a dozen people) play anything but D&D when they play an RPG. I'd say that has been pretty typical for decades. A fair number of people I had gamed with in the past jumped to PF during 4E but that doesn't really count.
But it could well be how we meet other gamers. In some cases for me it's through AL or other D&D sponsored venues, in others it was because I specifically asked for people interested in playing D&D. But most people in my experience? People are busy and there's only so much time they can dedicate to playing games so they tend to focus on one.
Mod note:
You could have made your point without directly insulting a swath of people.
You chose not to.
That's a problem.
We recommend you not make that problem worse with repeat performances.
FitzTheRuke
Legend
Maybe, but I don't like to lie to my customers (even a little "white lie" - is that a racist term now? it sounds like it is...) I'd tell them that PF is a game "like" D&D (and I've certainly insisted to them that the miniature branding does not matter one iota) but I'm not about to insist that it IS D&D. Imagine them taking their PF books to a D&D friend's place and being told "wrong books"? They'd probably be upset with my store, and I'd much rather always grow in reputation than make a one-time sale.
I get your kindly meant point, though!
Xamnam
Loves Your Favorite Game
Just as anecdote, my consistent tables have totaled 19 different people. I tend to make/find tables out of friends, rather than strangers. Of them, 12, to my knowledge, have never played or expressed an interest in another system. Two of the remainder are excited about the Avatar game and helped kickstart it, but that's due to their love of the show, and I don't think they would have branched out otherwise.
Zardnaar
Legend
Nope the market decides. If something displaces D&D so be it.
Nothing really has in almost 50 years so not gonna hold my breath.
CapnZapp
Legend
Luckily for you, WotC recently took the one decision that is sure to break this dominance - burning down the OGL.
Shardstone
Hero
free market is an illusion lmfao you want me to compete with hasbros advertising pockets???? hey paizo, have you tried having literal hasbro levels of money hahahhaha
Stormonu
Legend
I don’t think D&D being so big as the problem. I think the problem is when its in the hand of one company. Even on its best days, a unified D&D can’t handle everyone’s desires in the game. It’s good when there’s so many choices for different flavors of D&D (various flavors of OSR, Pathfinder, 5E, LevelUp, etc.) and role playing overall.
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
That's an odd argument to make. It's certainly true that markets are not completely free (as in the classical economics sense, wherein the participants have perfect information and we don't worry about transaction costs), but .... the market for TTRPGs is surprisingly open and competitive; it's not like trying to set up a competitive long-haul airline.
There is a low barrier to entry for new market participants. There are already a large number of market participants. The "cost" to switching to a competing product is low. There aren't much in the terms of regulations or other barriers keeping people from competing in the market. In fact, there is a long history of competing games and systems. Finally, the primary product (in terms of books) is something that is differentiated by the content, not the form; there are numerous ways to deliver that content (both electronically and through various publishers).
Understanding the dominant position of D&D in the market (especially the American one) is an interesting exercise- and, at times, a frustrating one, especially for those who don't prefer D&D. But it's not because free markets are an illusion, or because D&D has traditionally ran giant Super Bowl advertisements with all of that sweet, sweet Hasbro money.
Zardnaar
Legend
This. I've had hipster dumping on D&D since 1996.
I'll see what the kobolds cone up with buy the PDF methinks.
Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
Same
Most people begin with D&D, and they return to D&D. But it hasn't been my experience of playing nothing but D&D exclusively for decades.
The argument against your point here is that D&D was dominant before the OGL, too. It was dominant before designers could hitch their wagons to it. I was dominant before what we think of as "game design" existed in TTRPG
It is very easy to oversimplify, or be reductionist with, the reasons for D&D's dominance. Some are historical, or based in long-term network externalities. Some come from the size of financial backing. Some even come from the fact that it is, in fact, a pretty darn good game that delivers experiences that are pleasing and satisfying to a wide swath of people.
I don't think so. I have mentioned before, most arenas wind up with dynamics that can be thought of as a sort of ecology, with different sized entities at various levels - there is an interplay among them that winds up keeping the whole ecology more vibrant and healthy.
Probably too strong a word. We will have to wait and see. There are A LOT of D&D players, and most of them probably do not care one way or the other about this issue, and even if they do they probably don't care enough to end their Beyond subs and switch games.
It is not universally bad. D&D dominating the market has some positives and let's draw a clear distinction between D&D dominating the market and WOTC dominating the market.
Reasons it is good for D&D to dominate the market:
1. It is easier to find players. While telling a coworker you are playing pathfinder might generate confusing, convincing a coworker to round out your pathfinder group is going to be downright impossible.
2. One ruleset to rule them all one ruleset to bind them. It is easier to learn 5E then it would be to learn 2 or 3 different rules sets.
3. More developed flavor and less confusion about fantasy elements. Things like Mind Flayers and Drow can't exist outside of D&D. While Goblins, Orcs and Elves can all exist they would not and probably could not be the same thing. A Goblin in the English language is probably closer to something from the movie Gremlins or alternatively a ghost than it is to a humanoid. Elves are santa's helpers and in some fiction stand less than a foot tall. D&D's dominance means that these terms mean close to the same thing to a group of players.
To be honest I think the IDEAL situation is for D&D to dominate the market without WOTC dominating the market.
schneeland
Hero
I would say, it's a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it's bad because the dominance of D&D means that D&D basically is the RPG market, so there is a strong incentive to run genres on D&D for which it is not made. And it also creates a situation that's a bit like a world in which Skyrim is the only video game with a meaningful audience, and when you bounce off Skyrim, you might think "yeah, maybe video games are not for me".
On the other hand, for quite a while, RPGs were below the mainstream threshold, and only through the rise of D&D we reached a point, where it is at least "nerd cool" and you don't necessarily get a dismissive look for spending your time with it.
I feel it would be healthier if there were at least a handful of equally large players in the RPG space (this was the situation in Germany for the better part of my time with RPGs and only started to shift now that D&D5 is taking over), but unless WotC's recent actions really cause a landslide decline in popularity, I don't see how that would change in the near future.
On the other hand, for quite a while, RPGs were below the mainstream threshold, and only through the rise of D&D we reached a point, where it is at least "nerd cool" and you don't necessarily get a dismissive look for spending your time with it.
I feel it would be healthier if there were at least a handful of equally large players in the RPG space (this was the situation in Germany for the better part of my time with RPGs and only started to shift now that D&D5 is taking over), but unless WotC's recent actions really cause a landslide decline in popularity, I don't see how that would change in the near future.
I have been thinking this for years. I've never understood why so many gamers will only play 5e OGL systems (or maybe Pathfinder). The reason I most commonly hear is that gaming groups either cannot learn too many systems (eg, not enough time money to learn) or simply refuse to because it's what their group enjoys. But maybe to a lesser degree, some gamers simply don't know there are other TTRPG's out there?
With regards to thinking that groups can only play one or 2 systems, I find that dubious, and I wonder if these groups have even tried? As a pre-teen and teen in the 80s, using just the allowances of our gaming group, we bought and played so many games it would probably make people's heads here spin. I could probably name close to 30 game systems we played in a 6 year time span (I actually just started listing them down...and so far have 32 games I could remember off the top of my head). Granted, a few of those games we may have only played 1-4 sessions, but at least we gave it a try. Could we afford every supplement and module? No, but that's what imagination is for anyhow.
If the problem isn't money or lack of time, I suppose it could just be an unwillingness to try out anything else. But that's also just anathema to me. It'd be like eating pizza everyday for the rest of your life. Sure, pizza is great and switching the toppings around might be a small change, but I'd get sick to death of pizza too if that's all I ever ate.
As for gamers who aren't aware there are other TTRPG's beyond 5e OGL (or even D&D), I wouldn't have thought it possible in this day and age with the internet. But I was just watching a Youtube video from The Gaming Group where they listed 29 fantasy games that didn't use the OGL. Many comments were along the lines of "thank you so much...I wasn't aware these other games existed!". Back in the pre-internet days, I was lucky. We played at a hobby store that sold lots of RC cars, train sets, plastic models, and a decent amount of wargames and TTRPGs. In those days, I only remember a handful of stores in my state that were dedicated to TTRPGs, Board Games, or Miniature games (CCG's weren't really a thing until the early 90s with MtG). For example The Compleat Strategist and Enterprise 1701 (now Sci Fi City). These days, if there isn't a dedicated game store, they seem to combine with comic and collectible card stores. But in the age of the internet, I honestly scratch my head how people aren't aware of the vast universe of TTRPGs out there.
It also makes me wonder where the majority of people play now? At a store? At a member's house? On VTTs? If it's not at a store, then I can somewhat see why people may not be aware of other games, but it's still surprising to me.
With regards to thinking that groups can only play one or 2 systems, I find that dubious, and I wonder if these groups have even tried? As a pre-teen and teen in the 80s, using just the allowances of our gaming group, we bought and played so many games it would probably make people's heads here spin. I could probably name close to 30 game systems we played in a 6 year time span (I actually just started listing them down...and so far have 32 games I could remember off the top of my head). Granted, a few of those games we may have only played 1-4 sessions, but at least we gave it a try. Could we afford every supplement and module? No, but that's what imagination is for anyhow.
If the problem isn't money or lack of time, I suppose it could just be an unwillingness to try out anything else. But that's also just anathema to me. It'd be like eating pizza everyday for the rest of your life. Sure, pizza is great and switching the toppings around might be a small change, but I'd get sick to death of pizza too if that's all I ever ate.
As for gamers who aren't aware there are other TTRPG's beyond 5e OGL (or even D&D), I wouldn't have thought it possible in this day and age with the internet. But I was just watching a Youtube video from The Gaming Group where they listed 29 fantasy games that didn't use the OGL. Many comments were along the lines of "thank you so much...I wasn't aware these other games existed!". Back in the pre-internet days, I was lucky. We played at a hobby store that sold lots of RC cars, train sets, plastic models, and a decent amount of wargames and TTRPGs. In those days, I only remember a handful of stores in my state that were dedicated to TTRPGs, Board Games, or Miniature games (CCG's weren't really a thing until the early 90s with MtG). For example The Compleat Strategist and Enterprise 1701 (now Sci Fi City). These days, if there isn't a dedicated game store, they seem to combine with comic and collectible card stores. But in the age of the internet, I honestly scratch my head how people aren't aware of the vast universe of TTRPGs out there.
It also makes me wonder where the majority of people play now? At a store? At a member's house? On VTTs? If it's not at a store, then I can somewhat see why people may not be aware of other games, but it's still surprising to me.
Similar Threads
