D&D 5E We're Getting Old - and is WotC Accounting For That?

[Mercurius]

[MENTION=1165](Psi)SeveredHead[/MENTION], I have to chuckle because your post actually further confirms my view that good virtual tools would be greatly beneficial. That's a lot of paperwork, a lot of stuff to keep track of - and a suite of online (or downloadable, preferably) tools could be of great assistance.

Out of curiosity, have you check out MasterPlan? Might be very useful for you. I really like it.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Do we need another thread for this?

I've heard of Master Plan and might check it out one of these days. If so, I hope it can handle Rich Text Format monsters. Yes what I'm doing probably sounds like a lot of (literal) paperwork but it doesn't bother me. 4e is easy on DM prep that way.

 

[delericho]

Didn't one of the WotC top dogs comment recently that they weren't terribly concerned with recapturing market share from Paizo, because they'd rather increase the size of the player base as a whole?

That suggests to me that while WotC would be very glad if we all bought 5e, we're probably not their focus. Rather than worrying about dealing with a greying market, they're interested instead in instilling some new colour. (Or whatever the metaphor is. )

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

It was Greg Leeds:

We’re not in a share game; we never have been. I’ve been with Wizards of the Coast for five years and we’ve always talked about how our role is to build the hobby gaming industry.

Basically, it's not about taking the share from Paizo, but getting non-hobby money that have potential to become hobby money. I like that approach.

Cheers,

 

[DEFCON 1]

Didn't one of the WotC top dogs comment recently that they weren't terribly concerned with recapturing market share from Paizo, because they'd rather increase the size of the player base as a whole?

Which is actually a smart idea, as the tabletop market has been getting bigger as well over these last number of years (Wheaton's TableTop series having a bit to do with that.) As the concept of "tabletop gaming" includes both board games and RPGs... if you can ride the wave of expansion, you can increase the market of new players. And in that regard... that's the advantage 5E will have over all the other games, because they'll have the Dungeons & Dragons brand behind it (which is still the only name known by the huge swathe of people outside the current circle of tabletop gaming.)

 

[Stormonu]

I think D&D made a mistake in that's there a huge gap in the 80's and 00's crowd; for a while, D&D was not bringing in new players and the existing crowd has just been getting older. When they tried "remaking" D&D, they made a grab to make it popular again to catch a new crowd, and a significant-enough established group turned their nose up at it (me being one). Now, I think they've got the problem it wasn't popular enough and they're trying to grab back the older, established crowd - but it may be too late; they've now probably alienated their new fanbase and the old crew is done with them.

<EDIT> I think this situation really hurts the newcomers. They come dashing in, grinning for ear to ear, eager to play this new game they found out about, and holding the newest edition up shout "Who wants to play some D&D?" Then they wonder why everyone's standing in the shadowy corners glaring at them, holding a bunch of tattered and dogeared books like any moment someone is going to come and rip them out of their hands.

 

[Zardnaar]

Wasn't 3.0 the last time they got new blood in large numbers? Even then you are looking at people probably around 30 years old now. Video games also have an aging audience with the 25-35 year olds being the target market so to speak. Those who grew up on Playstation more or less or even the NES.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I think the best way to approach a variety of audiences is with a carefully chosen set of settings and supporting adventures. It wouldn't hurt to have a product line of products aimed at middle-aged gamers.

 

[Mercurius]

I think D&D made a mistake in that's there a huge gap in the 80's and 00's crowd; for a while, D&D was not bringing in new players and the existing crowd has just been getting older. When they tried "remaking" D&D, they made a grab to make it popular again to catch a new crowd, and a significant-enough established group turned their nose up at it (me being one). Now, I think they've got the problem it wasn't popular enough and they're trying to grab back the older, established crowd - but it may be too late; they've now probably alienated their new fanbase and the old crew is done with them.

<EDIT> I think this situation really hurts the newcomers. They come dashing in, grinning for ear to ear, eager to play this new game they found out about, and holding the newest edition up shout "Who wants to play some D&D?" Then they wonder why everyone's standing in the shadowy corners glaring at them, holding a bunch of tattered and dogeared books like any moment someone is going to come and rip them out of their hands.

If this is the case, then my recommendation for the "shadow dwellers" is: Get over it! Time to let go, move on, don't take things so seriously or personally! Join the fray and see what 5E has to offer.

But I don't agree that the "old crew" is done with them. Certainly there's a sizable group of Pathfinder players that are happy with Paizo, and some older players who are into this or that retro-clone (or simply older edition of D&D). But I think a lot of 4E players, and plenty of others, are willing to give 5E a shot.

Another thing to keep in mind is that a lot of folks - even the Paizo Faithful" - are going to pick up the core rulebooks. Maybe WotC is banking on the possibility that some of them might give the game a shot, and some might even like it.

I think the best way to approach a variety of audiences is with a carefully chosen set of settings and supporting adventures. It wouldn't hurt to have a product line of products aimed at middle-aged gamers.

Agreed. It has worked well for Paizo. I think WotC could do something similar, but perhaps diversify a bit with a few different settings. But the adventures and settings combined make the game come alive in a way that 4E couldn't accomplish with the "points of light" approach.

 

[Starfox]

I don't like action or combat scenes in books or movies, but that I don't want it to be the focus. Now in D&D that may be different in that the combat is a tactical experience that isn't something passively watched but is actively engaged. But I still want a balance. When we were playing 4E, in a typical four hour session we might have one minor and one major combat encounter. The minor one would take about an hour, and the major one about two hours - so that left only an hour or so for other stuff. I'd at least like to get that down to 50-50, if not 40-60 or even 30-70 (combat to non-combat time ratio).

This is my experience too, and a big part of the reason I like Paizo - my feeling is that they manage to encourage alternate solutions and make many combat scenes optional. Also, a faster combat system (like 5E) also feeds this trend - with quicker combat, you can either have more combat, or you can make room for other kinds of story.

Didn't one of the WotC top dogs comment recently that they weren't terribly concerned with recapturing market share from Paizo, because they'd rather increase the size of the player base as a whole?

This is very good news indeed! If 5E can be the newbie game that us graybeards can play too, without trying to be the one true way, it would be absolutely great.