D&D 5E Why D&D is not (just) Tolkien

[Parmandur]

See, but that's the problem. Empire of the Petal Throne is pretty concurrent with D&D. They came out about the same time, as well as a few other RPG's. Yet, D&D is the only one that people know. Outside of gaming geeks like us anyway.

So, how do we account for the MASSIVE different in reception? What's different from D&D than EPT? What is it about D&D that makes it the perennial top dog, to the point where every other RPG is a rounding error?

I'd say that the strong Tolkien influence on D&D which makes it immediately recognizable to anyone with even a passing interest in fantasy would be a strong contender here. I mean, why are the standard races those particular races? Elf, dwarf, halfling? It's not like those are particularly present in any other fantasy outside of those with direct lineage to Tolkien.

Like I've said, I'm no fan of Tolkien. But, realistically, AFAIC, you cannot overestimate the impact Tolkien has on both Fantasy as a genre and D&D in specific.

It's like overestimating the influence of the Beatles on pop music, or overestimating the influence of Wagner on Hollywood composers: say what you will about the originals, their shadow is long.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Parmandur]

But there's trouble with that theory as well, because it's the "just the way it is," theory.

For example, why is D&D so popular, that it is the granddaddy of RPGs? Is it because of Tolkien? (Thus discounting Empire of the Petal Throne)? Well, then you'd have to account for Tunnels & Trolls, which was published around the same time and had (wait for it) Elves, Hobbits, and Dwarves.

That's why it's complicated. The first RPGs that we know of weren't fantasy RPGs (Braunstein, first Arneson). But the one that really took off was a fantasy RPG. Why? Because it was cool. Because it was the early 70s. Is that because Tolkien created the market, of because the market was ready for something Tolkien-esque?

Once you move past the obvious influences (those things brought in from Chainmail, which was itself based on what Perren definitely read, and what Gygax probably read, about a wargame in New England), and those things that are player demands (such as the Ranger), how much is left?

But then, how many players came into D&D from Tolkien?

These are things that are not easily resolvable. Less so because so much attribution goes to EGG, who, despite being amazing in so many ways, also had a bad habit of attributing things to himself that we know aren't accurate. He borrowed from everywhere- myths, pulp fiction, wargaming roots, history, and, um, other gamers ... and it becomes problematic to attribute too much to Tolkien.

In the end, it's an unanswerable question.

Precisely, we can't say one way or the other. We can imagine a world without Tolkienian influence on fantasy, but we can't know what it would really be like.

 

[Lehrbuch]

I mean, why are the standard races those particular races? Elf, dwarf, halfling? It's not like those are particularly present in any other fantasy outside of those with direct lineage to Tolkien.

Dwarves and elves have a very strong lineage in fantasy that predates Tolkien. They feature strongly in Norse and Anglo-Saxon mythology. Which, as Tolkien's day job was a Professor of Anglo-Saxon literature, he would obviously know very well.

The conflation of elves and fae dates from Elizabethan fantasy literature. For example, Shakespeare, but he's not the only one.

 

[Lehrbuch]

For example, why is D&D so popular, that it is the granddaddy of RPGs? Is it because of Tolkien? (Thus discounting Empire of the Petal Throne)? Well, then you'd have to account for Tunnels & Trolls, which was published around the same time and had (wait for it) Elves, Hobbits, and Dwarves.

I think that D&D's original popularity is definitely because of its synergy with Tolkien. Tolkien was incredibly popular in the 60s and 70s. As you say, it is not for nothing that Led Zeppelin has songs that name-check Tolkien's work. We also get the spectacle of Leonard Nimoy singing a song about Bilbo...

Which doesn't mean that D&D is mostly or even significantly based on Tolkien. Clearly, Tolkien is an influence, but the important thing is that there are enough recognisable features that brings D&D into the same or at least adjacent genre as Tolkien. This allowed D&D it feed off the popularity of Tolkien.

As for why Tunnels and Trolls didn't beat D&D: I think that comes down to several factors.

• D&D was first. So T&T always had an aura of being a rip-off; despite arguably being a much better game.
• T&T didn't take itself as seriously as D&D, and the name is clearly a humorous derivative of D&D This kind of compounded the idea that it was a rip-off and perhaps parody.
• Marketing: Dungeons are simply sexier than Tunnels. Dragons are sexier than Trolls.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But then, how many players came into D&D from Tolkien?

IDK. Personally, I only read Tolkien because of D&D. :shrug:

 

[Parmandur]

IDK. Personally, I only read Tolkien because of D&D. :shrug:

Lord of the Rings is the third best selling novel of all time, after Don't Quixote and Tale of Two Cities (it may have passed Tale if Two Cities at this point though). Just by the odds, I think we can position that some of the 150+ million copies sold as if 2007 might have produced some number of D&D players.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Lord of the Rings is the third best selling novel of all time, after Don't Quixote and Tale of Two Cities (it may have passed Tale if Two Cities at this point though). Just by the odds, I think we can position that some of the 150+ million copies sold as if 2007 might have produced some number of D&D players.

That'd be a more compelling theory if D&D had sold anywhere near 150 million copies... even if everyone who bought the best-selling D&D Basic Set had come to it from Tolkien, that would only've been about 1% of Tolkien-purchasers. So checking out Tolkien would've translated to a 99% chance of ignoring D&D.

(No, that's not entirely serious.)

 

[Parmandur]

That'd be a more compelling theory if D&D had sold anywhere near 150 million copies... even if everyone who bought the best-selling D&D Basic Set had come to it from Tolkien, that would only've been about 1% of Tolkien-purchasers. So checking out Tolkien would've translated to a 99% chance of ignoring D&D.

(No, that's not entirely serious.)

Heh, well, precisely. D&D is very fringe next to Tolkien, and I think it is fair to speculate that the Venn diagram overlap for D&D players and Tolkien readers (at least attempted) is very, very high: if D&D players are not a perfect subset of Tolkien readers, it's probably damn close. And as a subset, it is teeny-tiny even by maximalist numbers of D&D players current and former. Hence, why D&D is so constantly compared to Tolkien: John Q. Public knows Tolkien much better than any other influence on the game.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*