Wow...Talk about a failed reading comprehension roll.

I was disputing RPGPundit's assertion that people only hate D&D 3e because it's successful, I pointed out that I hate RaWaHo and FATAL as much as D&D 3e and they aren't successful (in the terms D&D is anyhow blah blah milage may vary blah blah blah).

What is good for D&D is good for D&D and d20 is an effort to corner the market and squeeze everyone else out.  It's not inclusive or helpful.  It dooms us to be a failing dying market piloted by the bottom line of a company that doesn't really even like gaming (Hasbro...).

If you call that healthy, I've got some nice carcinogenic compounds to sell you for your own health.

Quote from: RPGPunditIts obvious that classes and levels are good design; the video game industry uses them for a reason.

They don't know any better and to many computer game players RPG means the system of character advancement and levels. Not the act of playing a role. That said, a few do break with the mould.

Quote from: RPGPunditThey allow you to make clear characters that fit archetypes, if they're WELL done on top of that they allow you to individualize tons as well.

The base problem is the classes though. Skills, feats and multiclassing are like sticking plasters to address the problem. Its like adding a spoiler and blower to  a sinclair C5. Classes are boxes, roles, like in MMORPGS tank/nuker/buffer etc. Team slots, not characters.

Quote from: RPGPunditPeople who dislike these things, well, they're either people who just hate D&D because they hate its success; or they hate levels and classes because they'd rather min-max and be munchkins. Yes, those are pretty much the only possible reasons when you come down to it.

Or because they like individual characters and don't like the vastly dispirate spread of character power that tends to associate with levels. As to the min-maxing issue you haven't seen min-maxing untl you've seen the various broken d20 character builds.

Quote from: RPGPunditAs for D20's success, I'm glad that in this thread at least, the other side is mostly admitting that it IS successful. BTW; those who claim "no D20 game other than D&D have made the top 5" are probably wrong, both Star Wars D20 and D20 modern have in different times been in the top 5. I wouldn't be surprised if M&M were as well.

Commercially successful certainly. Whether it succeeds in other goals is extremely questionable.

Quote from: RPGPunditD20 is successful because its a great system, its adaptable, it has great network externalities, and its well promoted. IN THAT ORDER.

By definition it is the default system, that doesn't mean it is great. I'm sure even you can think of various systems that cover various aspects of rules etc in various subjectively better ways than D&D does. The adaptability is largely a myth, if by 'network externalities' you mean - lots of people play it - that's a self perpetuating thing but doesn't mean it is necessarily best.

Quote from: GRIMPop, not rock (but rock used to be pop, you get what I mean).
Yes, it is the People's choice, they grey mediocrity you get from populism.
It doesn't encompass everything, that would be roleplaying as a whole.

Here is an page (I've posted links to it before) that talks about the end of the most popular pop music station in the United States (Musicradio WABC in NYC) and in the beginning of the page, I think it does a pretty good job of covering the pros and cons of music stations designed to appeal to everyone vs. niche stations in a way that's applicable to D&D and niche games.

Quote from: GRIMCommercially successful certainly. Whether it succeeds in other goals is extremely questionable.

What other goals do you think WotC has for it other than commerical success?

Seanchai

Quote from: John MorrowHere is an page (I've posted links to it before) that talks about the end of the most popular pop music station in the United States (Musicradio WABC in NYC) and in the beginning of the page, I think it does a pretty good job of covering the pros and cons of music stations designed to appeal to everyone vs. niche stations in a way that's applicable to D&D and niche games.

Again, metaphores always break down if you take them too far. The singles market pretty much collapsed and everything is still shaking down to take into account music downloads etc now.

Quote from: SeanchaiWhat other goals do you think WotC has for it other than commerical success?

Who cares? Gaming groups aren't WOTC. Their measure of success isn't the same as a game's measure of success.

Quote from: RPGPundit(note: those aren't the only reasons to LIKE point-buy systems, but they are the only reasons to HATE class/level systems; sorry)

Please tell me that you're just saying that shit to provoke and not because you are actually dumb enough to believe it.

Quote from: GRIMAgain, metaphores always break down if you take them too far. The singles market pretty much collapsed and everything is still shaking down to take into account music downloads etc now.

Actually, you are making it sound like it's still a pretty good metaphor, given downloads and PDF for RPGs, too.

The insight that I think that essay offers is that when people do the same thing (whether it's listening to the same music, watching the same TV shows, or playing the same game), there is a cultural connection that's lost when everyone does their own thing.

Quote from: GRIMWho cares? Gaming groups aren't WOTC. Their measure of success isn't the same as a game's measure of success.

So you're saying the measure of whether or not a RPG is successful overall is based on whether or not it meets individual gaming groups' goals? That's dumb.

Seanchai

Quote from: John MorrowActually, you are making it sound like it's still a pretty good metaphor, given downloads and PDF for RPGs, too.

The insight that I think that essay offers is that when people do the same thing (whether it's listening to the same music, watching the same TV shows, or playing the same game), there is a cultural connection that's lost when everyone does their own thing.

Its unclear whether PDFs are really going to take off in the same way that downloadable music has. The pricing issue still doesn't seem to have been learned by the larger companies and while its a growth area, it doesn't feel like a major chunk of the business yet.

Quote from: GRIMWho cares? Gaming groups aren't WOTC. Their measure of success isn't the same as a game's measure of success.

QFT

Quote from: GRIMWho cares? Gaming groups aren't WOTC. Their measure of success isn't the same as a game's measure of success.

People wouldn't buy and run a game that didn't meet their needs. While surely some buy without completely using, I'm one of them. I'm pretty sure most people don't, they just don't like the expense. They check out the book in a store, check a review, or ask friends, and if they like it, they buy it with the intent to use it. D20 stuff, D&D in particular is the most purchased and played game in the market. It has to be scratching that game itch or Joe and Jane Rolepayer would not waste their time and money playing it.

Your idea is right, and it does well to explain the success of the system on the consumer level.

BTW, this whole series of threads debating the success of D20 is the best  example of how elitist some gamers have become after exposure to the internet's ugly side of gaming theory.

For God's sake GRIM, are you even listening to yourself? You are claiming that the average D&D player is some mirage-addled idiot in the desert, throwing their dice and pretending they're having fun, while the Obviously Superior Game is just one dune over (Brain-Damaged even?). For all of your arguments about how much D20 sucks has it ever occurred to you that for these many groups all over the place, the rules work just fine for them, because it let's them have the fun they want? Furthermore could you possibly lower yourself enough to admit the possibility that if the rules were so bad that people couldn't have any fun playing that they would be smart enough to stop wasting their money and time and do something else? Every time I think that maybe the Pundit's concept of gaming Swine is exaggerated someone comes along and blows my mind with the bulk of their own arrogance. I'm just glad the instances are few and far apart.

If I have to choose between the following images of the average D&D/D20 player:
A) Brain-dead idiot who's wasting their money on a brand they've fooled themselves into believing is fun, and doesn't recongize the genius of That Other Game.

and

B)People who are having a good time with the game that meets their needs.

The choice is fucking simple for me.

QuoteIf I have to choose between the following images of the average D&D/D20 player:
A) Brain-dead idiot who's wasting their money on a brand they've fooled themselves into believing is fun, and doesn't recongize the genius of That Other Game.

and

B)People who are having a good time with the game that meets their needs.

The choice is fucking simple for me.

Seriously.  

You'd think someone who does so much chest thumping abotu how "logical" and "rational" he is over certain subjects would be able to understand a simple concept like Occam's Razor.  

People play D&D, because they like playing D&D.  That really is it.  And it's really such a simple conclusion to come to, that I'm a bit baffled as to how it's so hard for some people.

Quote from: JamesVIf I have to choose between the following images of the average D&D/D20 player:
A) Brain-dead idiot who's wasting their money on a brand they've fooled themselves into believing is fun, and doesn't recongize the genius of That Other Game.

and

B)People who are having a good time with the game that meets their needs.

The choice is fucking simple for me.

Excellent strawman argument.

Here's my most recent experience playing D&D...

The group consisted of about 10-12 people on and off.  Rarely more than 8 at any given time, nor less than 5.  If I had to categorise their views on D&D, it would go something like this:

• 1 x player decided he hated the system and quit the game.
  
• 1 x player decided he hated the system, but stuck around in order to continue to socialise.
  
• 1 x player decided he hated the game and quit.  I don't think he ever really thought whether the system was at fault or not.
  
• 1 x player decided he disliked the system, but kept playing (again, in order to continue to socialise with friends)
  
• 5 x players where rather "meh" over the system.  No strong opinions either way.
• 1 x player liked the system.  His exposure to other systems was incredibly limited, though (mainly WEG Star Wars).
  
• 1 x player loved the system.

So in a group of some 10-12 people, we had only two people that really liked the system.  And yet, most of them continued to play, week in, week out.  It's interesting to note that the one person that loved the system was the DM.  Most of the others happily played whatever he put in front of them (generally as long as it was fantasy).  They enjoyed the social gathering - a chance to munch on some snacks and chew the fat with friends.  It could have just as easily been GURPS, Hero, Star Wars or Dogs in the Vineyard they were playing.  

They weren't mindless drones, fooling themselves that they were having fun.  They definitely were having fun.  But mostly the fun wasn't because of D&D.  And that's not a criticism of D&D because it could have just as easily been another system.  So I bristle when I hear people try and equate the popularity of D&D with it's superiority as a system.  My experience just doesn't support the theory.