Understanding the "Dungeons and Dragons" brand

[tomBitonti]

Hi,

This is semi-forked from this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?339235-How-Important-is-the-D-amp-D-Brand

What I'm finding is that, as a gamer, D&D no longer captures the "Center" of RPGs. What I'm finding is, for me, these influences pull the center away from D&D:

* PathFinder as the new D&D
* Other RPGs: WarHammer and WarHammer 40K, ShadowRun, StarWars, and many others.
* Lots of MMO's (WarCraft, Rift, EverQuest, Warhammer Online, DragonAge, and many others).

Altogether, these shift my role-playing experiences away from D&D, to the extent that I don't find that D&D is in the sweet spot anymore.

I'm presenting this as a different thread because I do think that D&D is still an important brand, and that for tabletop play, D&D (when you include Pathfinder and 3.5 play, then add in 4E and OSR play) is still the vastly dominant system, and because to the market at large, D&D is still the recognizable brand.

But, somehow, D&D seems to be stagnating. Or at least, Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks play experiences with the brand.

I think that's bad news for Hasbro. Not sure what it means for the hobby as a whole.

Thx!

TomB

 

[innerdude]

Truthfully, if you want to give people an idea of what pen-and-paper RPGs are like, I find it much, much easier to say the following:

"It's World of Warcraft / Skyrim, only you use dice and paper, and the 'computer' is run by a person."

In my experience that gets the point across much better than saying, "It's like Dungeons and Dragons."

Dungeons and Dragons has way too much negative baggage behind it now (stereotypes of creepy, smelly dudes with beards hanging out in basements, the whole "Satanism" scare, etc. etc.), whereas almost every parent has seen their kid, or their kid's friend / cousin, or a niece or nephew, etc. play World of Warcraft. In most cases, they can't even "visualize" a "D&D experience." But everyone can imagine "World of Warcraft: The Adventure Game," or "Skyrim: The Board Game."

I actually find "D&D" the brand to be detrimental to holding productive conversations about gaming.

 

[DnD_Dad]

I love and still play 2nd edition ad&d today, in fact I have a game scheduled Saturday. It is all about mechanics and setting. Choose a newer system with different mechanics and you still got people sitting around a table coming up with stories and solutions to problems. It's been a long time since TSR lost control of the many armed beast that was D&D and it will never return to its former glory, and many of the people that made it great are no longer in business or have moved on, but D&D is at the core of RPGs in my world.

 

[Umbran]

But, somehow, D&D seems to be stagnating.

Is it that D&D is stagnating, or that your needs are changing as you grow older? I mean, it is kind of hard to think of a thing "stagnating" when it is in the midst of open playtesting that introduces a whole mess of new mechanics and such. It may not be moving where you want it, but it sure as heck isn't sitting still!

Or at least, Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks play experiences with the brand.

Note that, as written, this is a sentence fragment.

It is either:

1) "Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks' play experiences *and* the brand,"
or
2) "Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks' play experiences with the brand *and something*."

I suspect you probably mean the former. But even then, your message here is muddled when you start mentioning other games. Short of another company selling them ad space, or orbital mind control lasers, WotC/Hasbro is fundamentally incapable of building a tie between your play experience in an MMO, or with another game, and the D&D brand. It isn't like WotC can somehow insert a thought of D&D's brand into your Savage Worlds game.

The only things they can try to tie together is your experience playing D&D, and the D&D brand. Are you saying they are no longer doing so? How, aside from plastering their brand identity all over your books, are they supposed to do so?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

But, somehow, D&D seems to be stagnating. Or at least, Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks play experiences with the brand.

I think that's bad news for Hasbro. Not sure what it means for the hobby as a whole

Mearls talked about this explicitly right before they started the 5E public tests. It's why 5E was meant to be as modular as possible, to accommodate all play styles and, in theory, appeal a "core" D&Dness allegedly at the heart of every edition.

 

[tomBitonti]

Is it that D&D is stagnating, or that your needs are changing as you grow older? I mean, it is kind of hard to think of a thing "stagnating" when it is in the midst of open playtesting that introduces a whole mess of new mechanics and such. It may not be moving where you want it, but it sure as heck isn't sitting still!

Note that, as written, this is a sentence fragment.

It is either:

1) "Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks' play experiences *and* the brand,"
or
2) "Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks' play experiences with the brand *and something*."

I suspect you probably mean the former. But even then, your message here is muddled when you start mentioning other games. Short of another company selling them ad space, or orbital mind control lasers, WotC/Hasbro is fundamentally incapable of building a tie between your play experience in an MMO, or with another game, and the D&D brand. It isn't like WotC can somehow insert a thought of D&D's brand into your Savage Worlds game.

The only things they can try to tie together is your experience playing D&D, and the D&D brand. Are you saying they are no longer doing so? How, aside from plastering their brand identity all over your books, are they supposed to do so?

Yup. That's a fragment. I meant to write: "Hasbro doesn't seem to be maintaining the tie between folks' play experiences and the brand."

Some folks may be excited about D&DNext, but I find it to be a bit meh. I signed up for downloads, and looked at the first two or three, but haven't been able to keep up my interest. I could be projecting my lack of excitement in regards to D&DNext to the brand as a whole, but you might be projecting your excitement in a similar fashion. Hard for me to tell. (I think I *still* want a condensed, simplified, corrected version of 3.5E, which I personally found 4E not to be. I don't see D&DNext quite moving in that direction.)

Not sure what I was thinking when I listed the other games. They do show that there is a lot of competition. Considering how many books Fantasy Flight has put out in the last few years in 40K RPGs (OK, OK, the count needs to be cut in half due to duplication), that's a pretty hefty output, with rather high quality. The bar for D&DNext has been set very high. But there is something else going on here. I really don't think of D&D when I play an MMO. The product relationships are there, they just don't seem to have a strong affinity. To me, the center for RPG's seems to have shifted.

There might not be anything that Hasbro can do. The day where D&D sat at the center of RPG activity may have passed. Now, the brand may still have a value for selling products in a D&D family: Some RPG, some movies / cartoons / comics, some books, some board games, some social games, but then we are back to a question of what does the brand mean? Is it an RPG brand, or a fantasy gaming and story line brand?

I do think that Hasbro needs to revitalize the RPG part of the brand with a program that has more people actively playing the game and connecting to their social activities. Say, events at stores with ties to social media and books. That might be possible, but maybe not, not even with a solid team.

Thx

TomB

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Sometimes, unexpected aspects of a brand begin to wax in importance while others wane.

The most valuable song in the world? Jimmy Buffet's "Margaritaville": ignore the royalty fees it generates from airplay and covers, it has morphed into a brand behind a clothing & shoe line, clubs and so forth. It's worth billions.

D&D may or may not be the most important RPG to actual players anymore, but as a brand that can be marketed to both gamers AND non-gamers alike, no other brand name in the tabletop RPG hobby has anything that can compare. Beyond its own derivative IP (movies, TVshows, games), it isn't an accident that D&D is the RPG chosen for direct referencing in TV shows: Communiy, Key & Peele, Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles, BBT, Sarah Silverman's show, and so forth. That name occupies a corner if the brain in people's knowledge of pop culture that has yet to be equalled by another RPG.

 

[Jhaelen]

Is it that D&D is stagnating, or that your needs are changing as you grow older? I mean, it is kind of hard to think of a thing "stagnating" when it is in the midst of open playtesting that introduces a whole mess of new mechanics and such. It may not be moving where you want it, but it sure as heck isn't sitting still!

Dunno. While it's true that they're changing the mechanics around a bit, my overall impression of 'Next' so far was that it's pretty focused on 'bringing back the good ol'e days' of classic D&D's simplistic dungeon-crawling past. Sacred cows that I thought had been slaughtered several editions ago are making a re-appearance and especially monster descriptions hearken back to their earliest Gygaxian roots. I mean, colour-coded dragons with fixed alignments after all this time? Really?!

I feel that they're basically overreacting because apparently the highly innovative 4e approach to D&D wasn't as successful as they hoped it would be. Now, in their attempt to win back the grognards that left for greener pastures, they're driving everyone else away from the game.

I guess, I just feel that trying to preserve the 'original D&D experience' for future generations is doomed to fail. Time doesn't stand still. Everyone's needs change over time and except for the nostalgia factor some older players might experience, D&D Next simply doesn't appear to have anything interesting to offer compared to other offerings already widely available. D&D might not per se 'stagnate' but it's still a pretty stale affair. At the very least they'd have to have a new, fresh setting for the game. If you have seen everything the game has to offer before, how do they think they can 'wow' anyone?

 

[Umbran]

Some folks may be excited about D&DNext, but I find it to be a bit meh. I signed up for downloads, and looked at the first two or three, but haven't been able to keep up my interest. I could be projecting my lack of excitement in regards to D&DNext to the brand as a whole, but you might be projecting your excitement in a similar fashion. Hard for me to tell.

Given that I haven't touched a playtest packet in months, I am pretty sure that any excitement I have is insufficient to overcome my rational nature. I just see change more as opportunity than threat, I think.

I really don't think of D&D when I play an MMO.

Why in blue blazes would you expect to? No, really. It's like saying that hamburgers should come to mind when you're eating pizza! Yes, there may be some superficial similarities - there may be some meat that's been through a grinder involved, and both are often classified as "fast food" - but they really are fundamentally different things.

To me, the center for RPG's seems to have shifted.

I'm not convinced the geometric analogy there is really all that applicable. While tabletop RPGs and MMOs are in competition for people's time, I am not convinced they're actually in competition for people's headspace - and brand identity is a headspace thing. The fact that you *don't* think of D&D when playing an MMO rather proves my point there. Set the jargon ("TRPG", "MMORPG", and so on) aside, and look at the actual things. One may draw some analogies between a computer game mechanic and a tabletop game mechanic (like, say, "aggro" vs "marking"). One may draw some analogies in imagery. But the play experience? Not in the slightest similar.

 

[tomBitonti]

Given that I haven't touched a playtest packet in months, I am pretty sure that any excitement I have is insufficient to overcome my rational nature. I just see change more as opportunity than threat, I think.

I really don't think of D&D when I play an MMO.

Why in blue blazes would you expect to? No, really. It's like saying that hamburgers should come to mind when you're eating pizza! Yes, there may be some superficial similarities - there may be some meat that's been through a grinder involved, and both are often classified as "fast food" - but they really are fundamentally different things.

To me, the center for RPG's seems to have shifted.

I'm not convinced the geometric analogy there is really all that applicable. While tabletop RPGs and MMOs are in competition for people's time, I am not convinced they're actually in competition for people's headspace - and brand identity is a headspace thing. The fact that you *don't* think of D&D when playing an MMO rather proves my point there. Set the jargon ("TRPG", "MMORPG", and so on) aside, and look at the actual things. One may draw some analogies between a computer game mechanic and a tabletop game mechanic (like, say, "aggro" vs "marking"). One may draw some analogies in imagery. But the play experience? Not in the slightest similar.

The reason for including MMO's is that they are cited as an area influenced by D&D. Eventually, Pathfinder will (I hope) have a MMO tied to Pathfinder. (To an extent: The rules don't quite carry over. We'll have to see how close Paizo manages to make their Online game to their Paper game.)

Looking in the current product space, and looking at my recent purchases (in the last two years) I have:

Rifts (MMO): Fantasy, Online; very limited roleplaying. (Previously, Warhammer Online, Guild Wars 2, and World of Warcraft)

Lots of Fantasy Flight (mostly 40K): Paper RPG; pretty far from D&D

Pathfinder Books, Supplements, and Modules: Pretty close to D&D, but not under the brand.

Some perusal of Warhammer Books: Fantasy and Sci-Fi books; pretty far from D&D. I mention the books because I did buy and read D&D books set in Greyhawk, Forgotton Realms, and Eberron, but I haven't in a while.

Pathfinder Prepainted Miniatures: Pretty close to D&D, but not under the brand. (Previously, I did buy the Hasbro prepainted miniatures)

Lots of Metal Miniatures: Useful for D&D, but not under the brand.

Dwarven Forge Tiles: Useful for D&D, but not under the brand.

Lots of Dungeon Tiles: Under the D&D brand. Quite generic, though. See: http://www.amazon.com/Dungeon-Tiles-Dungeons-Dragons-Accessory/product-reviews/0786943483

I did used to buy a lot of D&D rules, supplements, and modules from Hasbro, but that stream seems mostly dried up, and the most recent items (from the last two years) have been less and less of interest.

Under the brand, but not purchased:

Any of the recent board games, for example, Wrath of Ashardalon. (Although, if I had more gaming time, as I did in earlier years, I'd probably get one or more of these.) http://www.chessusa.com/product/CM-054.html?gclid=CJCfmZTLyLgCFRFp7AodE1UAFg

Other gaming items, for example, this, which I haven't quite figured out:
http://io9.com/hasbro-announces-the-official-dungeons-dragons-kre-o-803289402

I did see the original D&D movie, and (I think) the second one, but not anything recent. I never watched any D&D cartoons.

Net of all of this, based on my personal buying history, what I see is that I still am a buyer of role playing games and aids, but, in the core role playing space, the D&D brand has almost disappeared. I have to factor out changes in my own tastes, but even with that, the D&D brand seems to occupy much less of the role playing space, and increasingly more of the board game and toy space.

Thx!

TomB