QuoteAnd D&D has grown so much compared to any other RPG, I do not think that it is out of the realm of possibility to suggest that even if they go full woke; they could afford to lose half their audience, and still be the #1 selling RPG...

The difference with Doctor Who or comics you have only CANON.
In RPGs canon is loosely defined toolbox to make own fanfiction so to speak. You can use heavily woke RPGs without caring about this wokeness and ignoring it completely if rest works.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 08, 2021, 09:40:30 AM

QuoteAnd D&D has grown so much compared to any other RPG, I do not think that it is out of the realm of possibility to suggest that even if they go full woke; they could afford to lose half their audience, and still be the #1 selling RPG...

The difference with Doctor Who or comics you have only CANON.
In RPGs canon is loosely defined toolbox to make own fanfiction so to speak. You can use heavily woke RPGs without caring about this wokeness and ignoring it completely if rest works.

This is a good point worth looking at.

Yes, when you defile canon with the woke; this will upset fandom. Which is why when long standing characters of various IP are wokeified, gender/race flipped etc, the ire quickly gets the long-time fans hackles up.!

There is a reason though why the left always tries to subvert established IP:

If they created their own woke IP and had to promote it – it would go nowhere!

You see this in Marvel and DC comics. They wokeify the main characters because of the built-in audience they have. Every time they have tried to promote an original woke hero, it goes nowhere. Nobody wants it.

Because wokeness is off-putting for normal people! Without a known IP to draw them in, normies avoid the woke like the plague.

We can see similar examples with RPG's. The True20 system sold better as a tool-kit rpg independent of the game it was made for – Blue Rose. Evidently when it comes to RPG games with woke elements up front: "..ignoring it completely" is not that much of a thing.

And D&D does have its own Lore / Canon. Which was not woke. We see this in beloved older modules and settings like Ravenloft. And we see how WOTC has re-worked setting and lore elements for everyone's own good when it "updates" them for 5e...

D&D is the market leader, so for now the SJW's can get away with putting some woke in the product, and still count on BIG sales that they could not if it was any other RPG.

But there are degrees of woke...

Most fans of a given IP are willing to tolerate a degree of wokeness, if that show/game/etc., otherwise delivers elements they like.

If they find that they enjoy themselves more than the bits of wokeness irritate them; the wokeness tends to get a pass.

But there are always limits. Messing with "cannon" just gets the fanbase to those limits faster.

The idea that Doctor who has 'canon' is itself somewhat ridiculous.

But many fans do see it that way.

That's because they're complete fucknuckles though.

QuoteAnd D&D does have its own Lore / Canon.

D&D had a lot of ad hoc thrown fantasy bullshit. Calling it a lore is a travesty.
It was also mostly - do your own shit toolbook - setting books were not necessary to play a game.

QuoteAnd we see how WOTC has re-worked setting and lore elements for everyone's own good when it "updates" them for 5e...

Primo there was never something like D&D setting. There were D&D associated settings. Some of which - like Faerun were quite woke in hippy way from the get go.
Not to mention - secundo - those settings were usually retconned so much between each editions, that it's one big bullshit anyway.

QuoteMost fans of a given IP are willing to tolerate a degree of wokeness, if that show/game/etc., otherwise delivers elements they like.

If they find that they enjoy themselves more than the bits of wokeness irritate them; the wokeness tends to get a pass.

But there are always limits. Messing with "cannon" just get the fanbase to those limits faster.

With a game set in some one firm setting it could be a risk.
In D&D though there is no such thing, and many people play in homebrew settings because D&D is perfectly accustomed to it.

QuoteThe idea that Doctor who has 'canon' is itself somewhat ridiculous.

But many fans do see it that way.

That's because they're complete fucknuckles though.

Well it's truth technically - nevertheless it should have canon, and as a tv story it will generate illusion of fandom.
RPG - not so much.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
Primo there was never something like D&D setting. There were D&D associated settings. Some of which - like Faerun were quite woke in hippy way from the get go.
Not to mention - secundo - those settings were usually retconned so much between each editions, that it's one big bullshit anyway.

Not many people realise that Faerun existed before DnD claimed it as a game setting.

The reason it seems woke is that was created by a Canadian.

QuoteNot many people realise that Faerun existed before DnD claimed it as a game setting.

The reason it seems woke is that was created by a Canadian.

One could argue Ed's original vision is wokier than TSR first prints

Quote from: Shasarak on March 09, 2021, 09:01:54 PM

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
Primo there was never something like D&D setting. There were D&D associated settings. Some of which - like Faerun were quite woke in hippy way from the get go.
Not to mention - secundo - those settings were usually retconned so much between each editions, that it's one big bullshit anyway.

Not many people realise that Faerun existed before DnD claimed it as a game setting.

The reason it seems woke is that was created by a Canadian.

Excuse me, a Canadian pervert.  Or, technically, a free-love hippie but it's the same thing.

Isn't Canadian pervert a tautology?

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 10, 2021, 08:02:02 PM
Isn't Canadian pervert a tautology?

Ninja'd

Double Post.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
D&D had a lot of ad hoc thrown fantasy bullshit. Calling it a lore is a travesty.
It was also mostly - do your own shit toolbook - setting books were not necessary to play a game.
...

Yes D&D "Lore" for D&D settings like Forgotten Realms etc, is ass.

I mean you don't need to go full Tolkien and create your own languages when you world build. But some worldbuilding with internal consistency and verisimilitude should be attempted at some point.

But maybe that's for a different thread.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
Primo there was never something like D&D setting. There were D&D associated settings. Some of which - like Faerun were quite woke in hippy way from the get go. ...

D&D always had lore bits from many sources thrown in.

And a setting (Greyhawk) was amongst one of the first supplements released.

Greyhawk was the 3e default setting. Nentir Vale for 4e. 5e has Forgotten Realms as its default setting.

With default settings, some of those setting elements make it into the rule books as in-game lore.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
Not to mention - secundo - those settings were usually retconned so much between each editions, that it's one big bullshit anyway. ...

The D&D fandom that WOTC is selling to does not seem to care about the retconning BS. They still buy the Forgotten Realm based 5e hardcovers hand over fist.

Quote from: Wicked Woodpecker of West on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
With a game set in some one firm setting it could be a risk.
In D&D though there is no such thing, and many people play in homebrew settings because D&D is perfectly accustomed to it. ...

WOTC does not care about homebrew settings.

They are about creating a shared experience with their house settings so that they can sell supplementary material based on IP they own.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/3e-and-the-feel-of-d-d.667269/

Quote from:  Because Jonathan Tweet the designer of 3e says so: on March 09, 2021, 06:58:33 PM
"...Personally, one part of the process I enjoyed was describing the world of D&D in its own terms, rather than referring to real-world history and mythology. When writing roleplaying games, I enjoy helping the player get immersed in the setting, and I always found these references to the real world to be distractions. In the Player's Handbook, the text and art focused the readers' imaginations on the D&D experiences, starting with an in-world paragraph to introduce each chapter. "

"But by the time we were working on 3rd Ed, D&D had had such a big impact on fantasy that we basically used D&D as its own source. For example, 2E took monks out of the Player's Handbook, in part because martial artist monks have no real place in medieval fantasy. We put them back in because monks sure have a place in D&D fantasy. The same goes for gnomes. The 3E gnome is there because the gnome was well-established in D&D lore,..."

"The gods in 2E were generic, such as the god of strength. We pulled in the Greyhawk deities so we could use proper names and specific holy symbols that were part of the D&D heritage. We knew that plenty of Dungeon Masters would create their own worlds and deities, as I did for my home campaign, but the Greyhawk deities made the game feel more connected to its own roots. They also helped us give players a unified starting point, which was part of Ryan Dancey's plan to bring the D&D audience back to a shared experience."

"We were fortunate that by 2000 D&D had such a strong legacy that it could stand on its own without reference to Earth history or mythology. One reason that fans were willing to accept sweeping changes to the rules was that 3E felt more like D&D than 2nd Edition had."
...

So there is D&D lore.

It may be crap, but it is there.

The majority of D&D's audience does pay attention to the lore and WOTC publishes accordingly.

They have put out a lot of hardback books set in the FR.

I would guess that neither you nor I are part of their target audience.