Why D&D is slowly cutting its own throat.
- Thread starter Celebrim
- Start date
Really, what this entire thread boils down to is perception, at least as far as commentary on homebrew.
I doubt many of us has reached double digits in the number of GMs played under stat- so our experiences never reach beyond the level of anecdotal evidence, not statistically meaningful evidence, one way or the other.
However, as many have pointed out, adventures are out there for the buying, or in some cases, for the free downloading. If you can't find adventures, perhaps you're not looking hard enough.
I live in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. I have been going to the same game store, Lone Star Comics in Irving, Texas (one store out of a local chain) since it opened 22 or so years ago. However, I know the chain doesn't carry everything, so I also make sure I hit Generation X Games in the mid-cities and Games Chest at the Valley View mall in Dallas. AND STILL I shop online at places like New Wave Entertainment and even at the sites for particular game publishers.
Quite simply, there's a lot out there, and nobody carries it all.
I doubt many of us has reached double digits in the number of GMs played under stat- so our experiences never reach beyond the level of anecdotal evidence, not statistically meaningful evidence, one way or the other.
However, as many have pointed out, adventures are out there for the buying, or in some cases, for the free downloading. If you can't find adventures, perhaps you're not looking hard enough.
I live in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. I have been going to the same game store, Lone Star Comics in Irving, Texas (one store out of a local chain) since it opened 22 or so years ago. However, I know the chain doesn't carry everything, so I also make sure I hit Generation X Games in the mid-cities and Games Chest at the Valley View mall in Dallas. AND STILL I shop online at places like New Wave Entertainment and even at the sites for particular game publishers.
Quite simply, there's a lot out there, and nobody carries it all.
So, you've had more than 30 GM's?
Slut!
Diaglo, I'm the Gene Simmons to your Wilt Chaimberlain. 
buzz said:HERO system has been around since 1981 without being tied to any massively-popular IP. Sure, the Champions Universe is beloved by many, but it's not a feature of the system. The system is the feature of the system.
Sure, it's not D&D popular, but nothing is.
The problem I have with what I believe you're saying is that it is a matter of record that the TSR business practices that you're citing as successful were, in fact, not. FR and DL have indeed proven very profitable IP. Planescape, Al-Qadim, Birthright, and Mystara have not. As others have pointed out, TSR was also pumping out ginormous amounts of player-centric crunch books. TSR's insistence on continually creating new settings and adventures was one of the reasons they went belly-up.
FR and DL have been successful becasue they are interesting worlds that were lucky enough to have both good design teams and talented authors pumping out novels. IMO, R.A. Salvatore and Weis/Hickman are the prime movers behind the popularity of their corresponding settings.
And if the recent downturn in the RPG industry has shown anything, it's that IP alone will not make a game successful. Plenty of RPGs have used licensed settings far more popular overall than even FR or DL, and it didn't automatically result in strong sales. Plenty of RPGs tied to popular IP have bombed. E.g., LOTR is probably the most popular fantasy setting on earth, but I don't remember seeing a single Decipher LOTR RPG event on the roster for this year's GenCon. Or, heck... the most recent Marvel or DC RPGs, anyone? I didn't think so.
The simple fact is, the current business practices of WotC that you are lamenting are far more sound strategically than anything TSR ever did. The vast diversity of settings is there for people who want it, thanks to the OGL: Midnight, Kalamar, Scarred Lands, Arcanis, Oathbound, etc.
And where are the great modules? All over the place: WotC, Necromancer, Atlas, Goodman, Green Ronin, Malhavoc... You just can't get all nostalgic about them yet.
Well, i think part of the disagreement is over whether we're talking about D&D-the-RPG, or D&D-the-brand. LotR and Marvel Comics continuing to be successful despite the failure of their respective RPGs is, i think, a point in favor of the original poster: it's the "fluff" that's of primary interest to the fans, and keeps them coming back. OTOH, it's, of course, not a particularly good comparison, because they started out as fluff, whereas non-licensed-IP RPGs either start with crunch, or start with a mix of crunch and fluff. Nonetheless, the current development of the D&D brand is similar:
- despite significant differences at the basic level, most agree that D&D3E is "D&D", just as much so as AD&D1/2. I think this is because of the continutiy of fluff: same roles (race/class), same feel of magic (both fire-and-forget, and what spells are available), same monsters, etc.
- despite significant similarities at the mechanical level, HackMaster is rarely considered "D&D". Again, i think this can be traced to the radical shift in the fluff, both in tone and content.
- As others have pointed out, the elements of the D&D brand have grown into a lot of areas besides RPGs. I suspect that D&D-related novels continue to outsell RPGs by orders of magnitude.
- "D&D" has always had a dual, maybe even triple, meaning: to RPers, it's a specific set of conventions, both mechanical and setting-wise (and it may be broad, encompassing all sorts of variants, published and unpublished, or specific, referring to a very particular ruleset and sort of setting); to the general public, it primarily encompasses a bunch of IP (though, depending on the lense through which they see it (i.e., the D&D movie), the IP they think of may have precious little in common with the IP in the actual game)--and, to further complicate matters, some think of it as a synonym for "RPG", unaware either that it is setting-specific, or that there are other RPGs out there.
IOW, it's the fluff that really defines "D&D", IMHO. Make relatively minor changes in the fluff with essentially no changes in the crunch, and people insist on referring to it as a new game; make radical changes to the crunch while retaining the basic fluff, and most call it "D&D with houserules".
In response to which, i posit a couple related questions:
- if there were no longer D&D-branded products being published, but tons of D&D-compatible D20 System books, would D&D be "dead"?
- If there were no longer D&D RPG products being published, but tons of D&D-branded novels, computer games, card games, movies, a TV show or two, coming out on a regular basis, would D&D be "dead"?
