Between Tim, VBWyrde, RSDancey, and many others upon this very thread, I've drawn more clarity using the simplest language with examples based on experience than most threads based on hypothetical worst case scenarios based off that same experience.  You adapt to a game based off an experience that is enjoyable to you, you can be dominereed and learn from those that are better than you, you can feel competitive to others of the similar talent, you can humiliate those of lesser talent, or you can tailor the game to make the experience enjoyable to all of the participants.  An RPG makes those intagibles irrelevant unless through the rules (fuck the snacks...Sorry Kyle;) ) you choose to adapt to make the game fun.  In order to play you must make the game enjoyable to all of those playstyles within the rules.  You can fine tune the rules to make the game enjoyable to the people you play with.  Roleplaying is not a community.  It is a shared fandome that play with a different level of experience and ability in regards to the people they know or would play with.  The only difference is that you have the ability to play as someone greater, equal to, or lesser than you, though not totally disassociated.  We are all playing the same game but deriving diifferent enjoyment from it based off that experience.  Our own experience changes that experience within the group we are playing with.  Playing any game with the people I enjoy playing with is far more important than watching and being a fan of the game.  IMHO...maybe?

Quote from: Elliot WilenI suggest you revisit the opening exchanges of this thread...

Suggestion noted and duly ignored. What you're doing is simple; you're hiving off an area that has been populated by roleplayers for decades. You're trying to define that area as smething other than RPGs. Why?

QuoteYou're playing a silly game now. You're smart enough I think to understand that communication is as much the responsibility of the speaker as of the listener, even more so when the listener expresses confusion and the speaker responds by just repeating himself.

No game at all, you're merely failing to understand what I believe to be a very, very simple assertion. There comes a point where further re-explaining a point becomes a waste of time.

QuoteMuch of the rest of your post is just special pleading; you've played games that way, ergo it's not new (directed at Dancey) and it's indistinguishible from what everyone else does (directed at several of the posters in this thread).

Ain't 'special' pleading. Look at other contributions here and elsewhere on the board; it is a shared experience of many gamers here that there is nothing new in this. If you don't like that, tough. There is nothing new in this, as demonstrated by the fact that I and many others have seen this kind of gaming before, many times, for years.

(further comments cut unread; I just can't be bothered dealing with this drivel).

Quote from: RSDanceyAt Wizards, I had enough data to decide that something was either X or Y.  I might not always have had enough data to determine which of the two things it was, but I had enough to exclude most other options.

Now, I have enough data to say certain things are either X, Y or Z, but not enough data to determine reliably which of the three the thing is.

Hopefully I'll get better insights as my projects progress.

Ryan

Fascinating...one of the things I've been troubled by is the lack of hard data.  If you are saying you have any hard data on these issues, I, for one, would be thrilled to see it. Perhaps it would provide some useful insight that would help many of us understand better your thought progression.

Any chance we could see the hard data?

Quote from: RSDanceyI'm the guy who held the line for "kick down the door, whack the orc, take his stuff, and power up", remember?  If anything, I think I've earned my "street cred" when it comes to getting the fact that the TRPG format delivers a lot of fun to the players.

What I am suggesting is that it has become technologically possible to make a similar game, on a different platform (MMORPG) that is more fun than the pre-existing TRPG for a big percentage of the player community, and that as a result, they've voted with their feet and left.

There isn't anything wrong with 'kill the monster, grab the treasure' games if thats what you want to play. And I'll wager that most of us here could think of worse ways to spend a rainy Sunday afternoon than rolling 3d6 in order six times and heading off to Quasqueton to to see what befell Zelligar, beating smeg out of every monster standing between us and our goals.

But I'll also wager that those of us who have played in games like that for more than a month soon developed characters who were more than a few numbers, who interracted with the world in ways in which the DM, the writers of the adventures you're in (if that wasn't the DM) and even the game designers didn't anticipate. In fact, by the time you get back to the Inn at the Keep on the Borderlands you'll be bristing with ideas that just aren't covered in the rules.

You see, this is where your idea that playing on a computer is in some way an approximation of tabletop roleplaying is flawed. It doesn't even come close. What it does have is a certain immediacy, and it does ger people interracting and keeping commitments to play with each other, and it can be done by someone who can't get into a gaming group (through geographical problems or whatever). But it very much provides a different thing to a tabletop roleplaying game.

So... Does such gaming take people away from RPGs? Yeah, probably. Should RPGs respond by playing to their own strengths? Hell yes.

In my opinion tabletop roleplaying games have lost people to computer gaming because they have rather played into the hands of those games. I'm pointing the finger at Dungeons and Dragons in particular, but the whole hobby in general. If you concentrate on crunch, gaming pieces, splatbooks and suchlike then all you're doing is adding details that really are better handled by computers. If you concentrate instead on story, plot, setting and adventure then you're doing something better achieved by a good GM. And by enabling a GM to build a coherent campaign you enable him to create a self sustaining gaming group who then move on to playing other games (and buying more products) too.

This is what good GMs do, its what they always have done. And this is where my position really parts company with yours; there is nothing new in empowering players, in shared story, in collective roleplaying experience. If you're setting out to educate people about how to play such games because you think that some people have forgotten (or never learned in recent years) then all power to your elbow! If what you're saying is that roleplaying games need to head in a NEW direction here, I think you're rather missing out on the fact that many gamers have been doing this for years already.

Quote from: RSDanceyNow THAT is an excellent question.

I am at 2 removes from the hard data; I neither make, nor sell TRPGs.  (That's one reason I'm going to write a few).  So I am making an analysis based on what I can observe in terms of sales trends, in terms of internet traffic, in terms of what people are doing at conventions, and what my gut instinct tells me based on the data I had from my time at Wizards of the Coast.

Ryan, take a glance at the top of this forum - on the stickied thread about the Comics and Games Retailer charts I've been putting together graphs of sales figures on a monthly basis.

The last charts up there are a bit out of date - Koltar's dug up a bunch of archival issues so the data from a year to two years back is a lot more complete now, but I've not put up any revised graph because I'm waiting for the next new chart to come out and for Koltar to transcribe it. But I'm looking at the spreadsheet right now, and I've got to tell you - D&D is rallying right now. It seemed to hit the bottom of a trough about a year or two ago, with your average game store only selling 24 D&D products a month (though bear in mind that includes comic shops which only have one tiny shelf of RPG products), while this year the average has been closer to, say, 27 copies a month (and RPG sales as a whole are up too).

Quote from: WarthurBut I'm looking at the spreadsheet right now, and I've got to tell you - D&D is rallying right now. It seemed to hit the bottom of a trough about a year or two ago, with your average game store only selling 24 D&D products a month (though bear in mind that includes comic shops which only have one tiny shelf of RPG products), while this year the average has been closer to, say, 27 copies a month (and RPG sales as a whole are up too).

I understand that you can watch the trends, but the real trick is in deciphering them, don't you think?  Any speculation as to why the Rally?  What happened in the market in the past year that would have made D&D sales rise?  Did Hasbro launch an Ad campaign of any sort?   Increase their distribution channels maybe?  Someone start a *really* big campaign?  Clues?

Also, I'm curious if anyone knows... How does Hasbro advertise D&D?  I've never seen a TV spot, radio commercial, or any kind of Ad.  Do they Market D&D in some other stealthy way?

- Mark

Quote from: jeff37923You forgot to mention the viral marketting approach to pushing Forge style play and Forge style games in forums, which has done much to turn people off of the Forge cult.

Which is the impression that I'm getting now, that this thread has morphed into a marketting tool.

"If you're going to sit in your basement pretending to be an elf, you should at least have some friends over to help. Dungeons and Dragons: Get together. Roll some Dice. Have Fun."

Quote from: VBWyrdeAny speculation as to why the Rally?  What happened in the market in the past year that would have made D&D sales rise?

I know you were looking for an answer from RSDancey, but for me things like GameSpy's coverage of the 30th anniversary of D&D got me really thinking about the game and it's table top rpgs again. I went looking for rpg podcasts at that point. Note that some forgey type things and play reports almost turned me right the fuck back off. Just a personal anecdote. It did take a bit to build up a head of steam on the idea and actually get around to purchasing something.

Makes me a little disappointed that GenCon didn't make a bigger deal about its own 40th anniversary.

Quote from: Stuart

"If you're going to sit in your basement pretending to be an elf, you should at least have some friends over to help. Dungeons and Dragons: Get together. Roll some Dice. Have Fun."

Thanks, Stuart.  Where'd the Ad come from, btw?

Quote from: darI know you were looking for an answer from RSDancey, but for me things like GameSpy's coverage of the 30th anniversary of D&D got me really thinking about the game and it's table top rpgs again. I went looking for rpg podcasts at that point. Note that some forgey type things and play reports almost turned me right the fuck back off. Just a personal anecdote. It did take a bit to build up a head of steam on the idea and actually get around to purchasing something.

Makes me a little disappointed that GenCon didn't make a bigger deal about its own 40th anniversary.

Actually I'm looking for answers from anyone who happens to have knowledge on the topic, not just Ryan - though I'd think he'd have a pretty good bead on it.  Thanks.  I'll check the link.

Quote from: VBWyrdeThanks, Stuart.  Where'd the Ad come from, btw?

The first place I saw it was on BoingBoing.net -- a (VERY) popular blog/news site:

Anti-MMORPG ads from D&D - Boing Boing

It was linked on tons of other sites, eg.

http://www.wilwheaton.net/2005/09/brilliant_dd_advert.php
http://www.acidlabs.org/2005/09/30/awesome-dd-ad/
etc.

The general consensus was:

1) It's a great Ad
2) It plays to RPGs strengths -- they offer something cool that you can't get from an MMORPG

Quote from: Elliot WilenWhere I think RSD goes off the rails is not to acknowledge that folks who are into world-exploration/simulation are (a) different from the "gamists" that D&D 3 tried to cater to, and (b) also different from the storytellers that he's trying to capture.

That's the big blind spot in the GNS theory; there are fuckloads of players who want to immerse themselves in another world but do not want to engage in amateur theatre or a shared-authoring storytelling session.

Ryan brings up 'nodes' of player groups. In my experience, those nodes are DMs. DMs tend to be the most creative and motivated people in a group. In fact, I'd say a typical group consists of one, or maybe two very motivated and creative enthusiasts, and a few more casual players.

Now, I can't see how this shared-authoring model of RPGs is going to take off it it's going to require several especially motivated and creative players to not only form as a group, but co-operate in a creative endeavour where none of them have more authority than the others. That's incredibly optimistic. I mean, there's a reason why a lot of these story games are only played at conventions - those are the only places where you find the critical mass of the kind of players you need to run such a game.

So I'm curious where Ryan thinks these local groups made up of several exceptionally creative, cooperative players who can handle unstructured play are going to come from, if the RPG market is indeed retracting to a wargame-sized rump.

Quote from: HaffrungThat's the big blind spot in the GNS theory; there are fuckloads of players who want to immerse themselves in another world but do not want to engage in amateur theatre or a shared-authoring storytelling session.

Ryan brings up 'nodes' of player groups. In my experience, those nodes are DMs. DMs tend to be the most creative and motivated people in a group. In fact, I'd say a typical group consists of one, or maybe two very motivated and creative enthusiasts, and a few more casual players.

Now, I can't see how this shared-authoring model of RPGs is going to take off it it's going to require several especially motivated and creative players to not only form as a group, but co-operate in a creative endeavour where none of them have more authority than the others. That's incredibly optimistic. I mean, there's a reason why a lot of these story games are only played at conventions - those are the only places where you find the critical mass of the kind of players you need to run such a game.

So I'm curious where Ryan thinks these local groups made up of several exceptionally creative, cooperative players who can handle unstructured play are going to come from, if the RPG market is indeed retracting to a wargame-sized rump.

I agree.  In my experience, the vast majority of role-players do not want to tell a shared story.  They just like to show up and play their character.

I guess by Ryan's estimate, these masses will all leave to play MMORPGs?  Because I'm not seeing that.

And what about people who like to GM, like me, but have absolutely, positively no interest in playing a shared storytelling game.  I am not interested in that whatsoever.  If I'm the GM, I'm the GM and want exclusive rights to control all non-PC parts of the game.  If I'm the player, then I do not want to have to bother with trying to play my PC and come up with story pieces, too.

I guess I'm supposed to just leave the hobby too then?  For what?  I'm not interested in MMORPGs.

If the RPG industry is reduced to just the people who want to play shared storytelling games, then there will be no industry left - because by my estimates, that would be 5% of the total current market at best.

Quote from: RSDanceyNow THAT is an excellent question.

I am at 2 removes from the hard data; I neither make, nor sell TRPGs.  (That's one reason I'm going to write a few).  So I am making an analysis based on what I can observe in terms of sales trends, in terms of internet traffic, in terms of what people are doing at conventions, and what my gut instinct tells me based on the data I had from my time at Wizards of the Coast.

Thanks for the answer, a very honest one it seems.

I'd also like to thank you for the statement on your blog that what you're attempting to do is basically a different type of game from what previously has been called rpgs- enough so that you wish to change the very classification. Radical changes like these should be called what they are- a serious and complete break with the past deserving of a new label. Again, very honest.


For what it's worth (yes, very little), I disagree with your view of how the rpg matrix will or will not change. It will be interesting to see what the next few years will reveal about who's right.

Good luck in your gamble.