The reason they're taking away heroism from D&D, and the reason why WoTC is calling short adventure books 'settings', and the reason why even well-meaning 5e players seem totally lost about the real RPG experience, can all be explained by one simple statistic.
#dnd #ttrpg #osr #dnd5e
I watched your video; and I kept waiting to hear you say the one word in particular, which accurately names exactly what you are describing: "Casuals".
The hobby is now full of "Casuals". Not a criticism of the hobby; just an observation, and assessment. Many, many people latching on to the hobby now; are Casual fans of D&D. They're not "all in". They may also move on to something else, once they tire of D&D.
Great video.
Sadly, it's pretty common for this to happen when things get popular and go corporate. Hasbro wants to sell as much D&D branded junk as possible. They will spend their energy appealing to the typical D&D "fan." Not player. Not GM. Fan. The fan buys a few books, signs up for some online subscription, buys some pretty dice, buys a shirt and some branded candy, and plays a few games. And since they're a true fan, they accept no substitutes and only buy the official D&D gear. A fan getting into D&D spends more than the average grognard has spent in the past X years (X=5, I don't know, but Hasbro has done this math, make no mistake). Fans vastly outnumber players who stick around for a proper campaign. And the best part is fans are easy to attract with shiny bobbles.
You're both right about those points.
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
Social retardation inhibits good gaming, certainly.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Quote from: Jam The MF on December 16, 2021, 06:22:54 PM
The hobby is now full of "Casuals". Not a criticism of the hobby; just an observation, and assessment. Many, many people latching on to the hobby now; are Casual fans of D&D. They're not "all in". They may also move on to something else, once they tire of D&D.
I like the term casual. I've been using tourist. My kid told me her high school was full of trans-tourists. Those that want all the attention without the full commitment of actually being trans. A step further removed than 'casual' but pretending to be a super-involved member of the community none-the-less.
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 08:37:55 AM
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Arm people with Google searches for psychological and medical conditions and incentivize them with a victimhood culture where they can gain power over people through their self-diagnosed "illnesses" and bingo bango you have a society full of weaponized narcissists.
The "real RPG experience".
One True Wayism runs deep with you, doesn't it?
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 11:57:26 AM
The "real RPG experience".
One True Wayism runs deep with you, doesn't it?
Anyone who's been around here awhile knows I'm as Anti-OneTrueWayism as it gets, but even I have to admit that Pundit has a point here about the difference in perspective between those who view sessions that wouldn't even add up to the time it takes to binge watch a season of a Netflix series to be a complete campaign and those who engage with the same system and characters for months to years.
I don't know that it necessarily takes 300+ hours over two years... my life doesn't allow me sessions much more than 3-4 hours at a rate of 2-3 times a month... but definitely not just six sessions. Something that short and I'd actually throw the PC concept back into my "potential" pile to reuse because I wouldn't have even considered that to have been a campaign.
I think noting the difference between, let's call them D&D tourists and D&D campaigners, isn't so much OneTrueWayism as it just acknowledging that the two have about as much in common as the guy who buys model trains to put on his shelf and the guy who buys model trains and all manner of terrain to create a fifty foot long model rail line that runs through several model towns, forests and mountains in his basement and runs them religiously every weekend.
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 11:57:26 AM
The "real RPG experience".
One True Wayism runs deep with you, doesn't it?
Welcome to the board Lou.
Keep in mind that "one true wayism" is a rhetorical technique. Most reasonable people already understand that there are exceptions to everything.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
They're not really mentally ill. It's just performative mental illness to score oppression olympics points. As someone who grew up around actual mental illness, it's fucking repugnant to see.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 17, 2021, 12:21:50 PM
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 11:57:26 AM
The "real RPG experience".
One True Wayism runs deep with you, doesn't it?
Anyone who's been around here awhile knows I'm as Anti-OneTrueWayism as it gets, but even I have to admit that Pundit has a point here about the difference in perspective between those who view sessions that wouldn't even add up to the time it takes to binge watch a season of a Netflix series to be a complete campaign and those who engage with the same system and characters for months to years.
I don't know that it necessarily takes 300+ hours over two years... my life doesn't allow me sessions much more than 3-4 hours at a rate of 2-3 times a month... but definitely not just six sessions. Something that short and I'd actually throw the PC concept back into my "potential" pile to reuse because I wouldn't have even considered that to have been a campaign.
I think noting the difference between, let's call them D&D tourists and D&D campaigners, isn't so much OneTrueWayism as it just acknowledging that the two have about as much in common as the guy who buys model trains to put on his shelf and the guy who buys model trains and all manner of terrain to create a fifty foot long model rail line that runs through several model towns, forests and mountains in his basement and runs them religiously every weekend.
I agree there is a difference in experience between a short campaign (5-6 sessions) and a long extensive campaign in which the PCs contribute to the development of the world, but they're both "real" RPG experiences.
It could very well be that the latter is an objectively better experience, but that doesn't make it any more "real".
One of the biggest challenges I have with Pundit is his belief that if you play RPGs differently than he does you're doing it "wrong". IMO, of the best things about RPGs is that outside of using/adjudicating the rules incorrectly, there is no "wrong" way to play RPGs.
Lou Prosperi
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PM
I agree there is a difference in experience between a short campaign (5-6 sessions) and a long extensive campaign in which the PCs contribute to the development of the world, but they're both "real" RPG experiences.
Wait a second. Let's not conflate that just because two different groups engage in the same thing they're the qualitatively the same. This is a post-modern malfunction of conflating lesser upwards, and greater downwards to make zero distinctions between them, for the rhetorical claim to be contrary to someone with a clearly more nuanced opinion.
I use this analogy all the time - I run in-depth games. I'm trying to run MLB Baseball. I don't want players that just want to play little-league T-ball with zero ambition to want more. Yes they're both "baseball" - but they are very different games.
That someone "likes" T-ball is not the issue. The issue is that "T-ball" is not representative of "quality" play. If you want to debate "quality" that's fair - lets absolutely do so, but let's not pretend that there is no distinction between what is being discussed.
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PMIt could very well be that the latter is an objectively better experience, but that doesn't make it any more "real".
Who is making this claim aside from you? This is like watching porn and saying "this is sex." It's just as real as engaging in the real thing. Well *someone* is having sex. But it's not the same qualitative thing.
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PMOne of the biggest challenges I have with Pundit is his belief that if you play RPGs differently than he does you're doing it "wrong". IMO, of the best things about RPGs is that outside of using/adjudicating the rules incorrectly, there is no "wrong" way to play RPGs.
Maybe it's because you may not have ever experienced gaming at that level? I'm not pretending to know. But I find in all the discussions I'm invariably part of when it comes to GMing is that the people that take the most offense are *only* those that engage in these low-quality games being told that by the standards of experienced GM's that have been doing this for years, exactly that: low-grade gaming. It's purely ego driven and shows an incredible level of lack of awareness.
We're called "gatekeepers", "One True Way Sinners" or some other silly shit. The reality is it's a spectrum of engagement and many of us have a deeper stake in our games. The things that casual players apparently struggle to do are trivial to us because we are more experienced, use better techniques (which are learnable AND teachable) we are *engaged* in the hobby.
It's not "one true way" - anymore than someone that actually engages with their craft in a deeper way, makes those experiences more meaningful.
If you apply this "distaste" to Pundit - and others here - then I question how you apply it to literally everything else in your life where people spend their lives engaged in things deeply and you enter into conversations with them about the craft.
It would be like (yes this is hyperbolic to explain the silliness of your claim) - telling Leonardo Da Vinci that fingerpainting is just as valid as his oil-painting.
I would not call them Casuals so much as Spectators.
Casuals will play and often develop into more in depth players over time.
Spectators will dabble... maybe. But will drift away the second the next bright shiny trendy comes along.
Problem is that casuals and spectators have been co-opted by the nuts and are increasingly not a demographic any sane company wants. WOTC is not sane and they want these nuts.
The other problem is that since 3e WOTC has been pushing that most players are casual players that do not play campaigns much past level 10. If even that.
Remember kids. WOTC is their own worst enemy.
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 08:37:55 AM
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Besides what others have said, also better diagnosis and treatment, better understanding of what counts for a mental health issue, and more understanding that seeking help for mental health isn't something to be ashamed of or stigmatized over.
Similar to "where were all these people before gluten/food allergies became a thing?" Those people had poor quality of life and nobody could tell them why. "How did we get a generation of mental defectives?" We started paying attention to mental health instead of largely ignoring it.
Yeah, you are going to get people who think they have depression instead of just being sad or have anxiety instead of just not wanting to deal with hard things. Still, more people are actually getting needed help than before.
Quote from: Omega on December 17, 2021, 04:06:26 PM
I would not call them Casuals so much as Spectators.
Casuals will play and often develop into more in depth players over time.
Spectators will dabble... maybe. But will drift away the second the next bright shiny trendy comes along.
Yes, I have a lot of "casual" players in my games, and always have. None of them have ever even edged towards the level of "shallow" that describes the typical woke player.
I've been calling them shallow players for a long time. They've always been with us. Now they get more attention.
Or to be more precise, they are shallow people that happen to be dabbling in gaming at the moment.
Quote from: Jam The MF on December 16, 2021, 06:22:54 PM
...
The hobby is now full of "Casuals". Not a criticism of the hobby; just an observation, and assessment. Many, many people latching on to the hobby now; are Casual fans of D&D. They're not "all in". They may also move on to something else, once they tire of D&D.
And while any RPG needs the influx of casual fans, it seems that current year D&D is starting to cater to the twitter fanbase, to the exclusion of the old fans that got them where they are.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 16, 2021, 06:39:42 PM
...
Sadly, it's pretty common for this to happen when things get popular and go corporate. Hasbro wants to sell as much D&D branded junk as possible. They will spend their energy appealing to the typical D&D "fan." Not player. Not GM. Fan. ...
And this seems to be the direction they want to take D&D as a game a swell – they have become so enrapture with all their new fans that they now believe that they no longer need the old ones.
4e did some dumb marketing and insulted 3e fans by talking up how much "better" 4e was going to be. But they still fundamentally wanted everyone to buy into 4e.
Right now, the 5e devs seem more than happy to completely jettison all the 'old guard' fans they brought back with the release of 5e. In Fact they seem to actively want them to leave so that they do not offend any of the new cool kids that are just now starting to play D&D because they are only now making it more "inclusive"...
Every RPG needs new players to grow the game and to generate the new blood that will be the players and GM's of the future.
We have seen RPG's dwindle into shells to their former selves by only listening to their hardcore fanbases, like GURPS and HERO.
We will see going forward how a game does by listening only to their new casual players, with game devs that believe twitter is representative of their entire customer base.
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PM
...
One of the biggest challenges I have with Pundit is his belief that if you play RPGs differently than he does you're doing it "wrong". IMO, of the best things about RPGs is that outside of using/adjudicating the rules incorrectly, there is no "wrong" way to play RPGs.
While there are several ways to RPG right.
You can
absolutely RPG wrong.
The rise and fall of the storygame movement is proof of what happens when you try to make roleplaying all about the 'story'.
In the context of Pundits comments; It is like playing a game of chess according to the traditional rules, verses people playing a game of "chess" where around moves 5-10 everyone just gets up and leaves. They then run around talking about the great game of "chess" that they just played.
Technically still "chess", but they are
literally playing it wrong.
They are robbing themselves of the experience you get playing chess the way that it was intended to be.
Whatever the case is with 5e players, the pundit is absolutely set in his ways and sees any other play except the one he likes that moment to be wrong.
Im not a storygamer, but to say it has 'fallen' is a phyric celebration over a community that called you names a decade ago.
There is no 'Wrong' way to play pretend with your friends. It can lead to after-effects but to say there is 'wrong' or 'right' is just arrogance.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 04:59:58 PM
...
Im not a storygamer, but to say it has 'fallen' is a phyric celebration over a community that called you names a decade ago.
The entire premise of storygames was that they were going to "fix" RPGs.
Arrogance like that deserves all the dead horse beating that they get.
I've played some storygames back in the day. They were interesting for what they were. But they were a solution in search of a problem.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 04:59:58 PM
There is no 'Wrong' way to play pretend with your friends. It can lead to after-effects but to say there is 'wrong' or 'right' is just arrogance.
RPG's are not just playing 'Pretend'.
There is no wrong way to have
fun with your friends.
But games with rules have expected modes of play, and can be
played wrong.
You can have fun playing them wrong.
I will neve dispute someone's claims of having a good time.
Doesn't change the fact that they are being played wrong.
Basing future design decisions on the trend of people that can't keep a game of D&D going for more than 6 sessions will not end well.
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PM
One of the biggest challenges I have with Pundit is his belief that if you play RPGs differently than he does you're doing it "wrong". IMO, of the best things about RPGs is that outside of using/adjudicating the rules incorrectly, there is no "wrong" way to play RPGs.
Lou Prosperi
Welcome to the Thunderdome, Lou! Always loved your work on Earthdawn!
It's only this way because currently 5e is the edition du jour.
Each succeeding edition garnered more players - which inevitably invites casuals (this is true of anything that gains in popularity). The problem is when oversaturation of a given view that is lower in quality due to the democratization of the thing in question, in this case GMs new to the hobby that haven't developed those skills for advanced and deeper gameplay, become the defacto market that gets catered to.
I can steel-man this in a cynical way by simply pointing out: Why produce goods for a captive audience like old-school gamers when they're likely going to buy my stuff anyhow? See the 5e players here that complain about how WotC is destroying the brand (and hobby) yet still purchase WotC product.
Meanwhile, relative noobs to the hobby come to forums like this, thinking they know it all, and take umbrage at hearing Old Timers like us poo-pooing what passes for "content" these days - while we chuckle at decades worth of our own stuff, some of which might even be published, which noobs could give a flying shit about because they think they know it all (and who cares about your published shit - it's not 5e D&D therefore it's probably garbage, right?).
Note: I'm not telling anyone how to play their RPG's. I'm pointing out the dynamics in play. Pundit is right on the money on this. I honestly don't care if Casual People accuse me of <X> because I don't do anything casually. As far as I'm concerned, "You do you, filthy casual." I don't owe anyone respect for pretending some deluded notion that tries to claim a deep multi-year-long campaign is the same as an Adventure Path or 5-session series of combat scenarios is the same thing.
I also don't demand respect for my time in the GM saddle. I'll let my games speak for themselves. Just like I'm a noob at figure painting, I'm not going to pretend my journeyman-quality figures are equal to Squidmar's just because I'm doing my thing. But I certainly am not going to dismiss his opinions on HOW TO DO IT BETTER because he's been at it a lot longer than me. <--- that's generally how I approach things.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 17, 2021, 05:15:59 PMArrogance like that deserves all the dead horse beating that they get.
It really doesn't. I don't care if that bully from 6th grade home economics really did intend to disfigure your face, bringing him up again a decade later just makes you obsessed.
QuoteRPG's are not just playing 'Pretend'.
And their posable action collectors kits, not paintable modeling action figures!
Those filthy comic book readers are demanding the same level of clout as us: chad graphic novel thinkers!
Quote from: tenbones on December 17, 2021, 03:15:15 PM
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PM
I agree there is a difference in experience between a short campaign (5-6 sessions) and a long extensive campaign in which the PCs contribute to the development of the world, but they're both "real" RPG experiences.
Wait a second. Let's not conflate that just because two different groups engage in the same thing they're the qualitatively the same. This is a post-modern malfunction of conflating lesser upwards, and greater downwards to make zero distinctions between them, for the rhetorical claim to be contrary to someone with a clearly more nuanced opinion.
I use this analogy all the time - I run in-depth games. I'm trying to run MLB Baseball. I don't want players that just want to play little-league T-ball with zero ambition to want more. Yes they're both "baseball" - but they are very different games.
That someone "likes" T-ball is not the issue. The issue is that "T-ball" is not representative of "quality" play. If you want to debate "quality" that's fair - lets absolutely do so, but let's not pretend that there is no distinction between what is being discussed.
I wouldn't say that heavier commitment of long-term play is the same thing as overall quality. There are quality short campaigns and one-shots, and there are quality long campaigns. Short campaigns and one-shots have always been a part of the D&D tradition. Many of the early AD&D modules were adapted from tournament play at conventions. Around 1980 when D&D had its first boom in popularity, there was the same phenomenon of casual players.
I'd draw a parallel to board games. Some board games take hours or even days to complete. They can get very involved. There are also many shorter board games that can be played casually with family and friends. I don't think that more involved board games are inherently higher quality. They're just different.
Personally, my role-playing gaming has gone back and forth over my life - especially because of my life circumstances. When I was a new parent or when I was going through divorce, I moved into a more casual gaming mode. I've had some terrific games like that, and made some great friends who wouldn't be able to commit to an in-depth multi-year campaign. I also have had some great short games and one-shots, like my tradition of convention games. I've played and run a lot of great games at local conventions, but those are generally one-shots. Even with committed gamers, I've also had periods of more "beer and pretzel" gaming where we may play for a long time - but we don't have notebooks full of detailed background and documented episodes.
Quote from: Manic Modron on December 17, 2021, 04:27:08 PM
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 08:37:55 AM
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Besides what others have said, also better diagnosis and treatment, better understanding of what counts for a mental health issue, and more understanding that seeking help for mental health isn't something to be ashamed of or stigmatized over.
Similar to "where were all these people before gluten/food allergies became a thing?" Those people had poor quality of life and nobody could tell them why. "How did we get a generation of mental defectives?" We started paying attention to mental health instead of largely ignoring it.
Yeah, you are going to get people who think they have depression instead of just being sad or have anxiety instead of just not wanting to deal with hard things. Still, more people are actually getting needed help than before.
Totally missing the point. It's self-induced mental illness. Older generations of D&D players and DMs were considered misfits and wierdos but managed to grow into adulthood being functional members of society (mostly). Now, the current crop of players seems to have a series of unseen ailments that allows them to only complain about the lack of wokeness in RPGs, complain about how unfair law-abiding citizens are to BLM grifters and antifa thugs, and complain about how it's the patriarchy (not their $100k degrees in worthless subjects ) that is what is keeping them from obtaining gainful employment. Certainly no time to go get a job or get some exercise or otherwise improves their lot in life.
In other words - lack of personal responsibility on their part to do *anything* to improve their lives - as if they actually derive joy from being professional victims.
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 07:07:11 PM
Quote from: Manic Modron on December 17, 2021, 04:27:08 PM
Besides what others have said, also better diagnosis and treatment, better understanding of what counts for a mental health issue, and more understanding that seeking help for mental health isn't something to be ashamed of or stigmatized over.
Similar to "where were all these people before gluten/food allergies became a thing?" Those people had poor quality of life and nobody could tell them why. "How did we get a generation of mental defectives?" We started paying attention to mental health instead of largely ignoring it.
Yeah, you are going to get people who think they have depression instead of just being sad or have anxiety instead of just not wanting to deal with hard things. Still, more people are actually getting needed help than before.
Totally missing the point. It's self-induced mental illness. Older generations of D&D players and DMs were considered misfits and wierdos but managed to grow into adulthood being functional members of society (mostly). Now, the current crop of players seems to have a series of unseen ailments that allows them to only complain about the lack of wokeness in RPGs, complain about how unfair law-abiding citizens are to BLM grifters and antifa thugs, and complain about how it's the patriarchy (not their $100k degrees in worthless subjects ) that is what is keeping them from obtaining gainful employment. Certainly no time to go get a job or get some exercise or otherwise improves their lot in life.
In other words - lack of personal responsibility on their part to do *anything* to improve their lives - as if they actually derive joy from being professional victims.
People have been saying similar about D&D players for decades. The Knights of the Dinner Table comic started in 1990, and it had stereotypes of adult D&D players that they were mostly unable to hold down a decent job and mentally unbalanced. I've also been attending role-playing conventions since the late 1980s, and I find that while some stereotypes might be superficially true - they're generally way off base. I'd agree that gamers tend not to focus on their careers -- career-focused people have networking hobbies more like Toastmaster or golf. And there has always been a subset of role-players who are unsuccessful career-wise, but I don't think they differ from the overall population that way.
That goes just as much for the current crop of players. I've been going to conventions in the SF Bay area for twenty-odd years - which is woke central, and while they might have different tastes and foibles, in socio-economic terms they seem to be in the same ballpark as Gen Con attendees. Some have successful tech jobs, some are struggling, some have a variety of other work.
---
On mental illness in general - I do think that mental illness is objectively getting worse along some lines. In the U.S., we have been seeing higher rates of alcoholism, overdose deaths, and suicides over the last two decades. However, these don't seem correlated to either political leaning. New York and New Jersey have the lowest suicide rates, while California and Texas are similar. The highest are in Nevada, New Mexico, and Montana.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 17, 2021, 04:56:44 PM
Quote from: LouProsperi on December 17, 2021, 02:24:51 PM
...
One of the biggest challenges I have with Pundit is his belief that if you play RPGs differently than he does you're doing it "wrong". IMO, of the best things about RPGs is that outside of using/adjudicating the rules incorrectly, there is no "wrong" way to play RPGs.
While there are several ways to RPG right.
You can absolutely RPG wrong.
The rise and fall of the storygame movement is proof of what happens when you try to make roleplaying all about the 'story'.
In the context of Pundits comments; It is like playing a game of chess according to the traditional rules, verses people playing a game of "chess" where around moves 5-10 everyone just gets up and leaves. They then run around talking about the great game of "chess" that they just played.
Technically still "chess", but they are literally playing it wrong.
They are robbing themselves of the experience you get playing chess the way that it was intended to be.
That's not a strong enough analogy.
It's more like someone claiming to be a "world traveler" because they spent a weekend in an all-inclusive resort in Cabo once, versus someone who spent two years living in India.
Oh look, Pundit resorts to the Bad Wrong Fun argument. Doesn't matter if you're enjoying playing D&D your way, if you're not playing his way you're not playing "real" D&D and therefore are not having the fun you think you're having.
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 17, 2021, 10:26:48 PMIt's more like someone claiming to be a "world traveler" because they spent a weekend in an all-inclusive resort in Cabo once, versus someone who spent two years living in India.
Except its two homeless people arguing about which poster they slept under last night makes the more of a 'world traveller'.
Games of pretend with no win condition and flexible rules is the dumbest things to be arguing about in terms of authenticity.
I may not like 5e, but I don't play along with this stupid 'authenticity' idea.
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 17, 2021, 10:26:48 PM
Quote from: Jaeger on December 17, 2021, 04:56:44 PM
In the context of Pundits comments; It is like playing a game of chess according to the traditional rules, verses people playing a game of "chess" where around moves 5-10 everyone just gets up and leaves. They then run around talking about the great game of "chess" that they just played.
Technically still "chess", but they are literally playing it wrong.
That's not a strong enough analogy.
It's more like someone claiming to be a "world traveler" because they spent a weekend in an all-inclusive resort in Cabo once, versus someone who spent two years living in India.
If someone's goal is to be properly called of "world traveller", then spending two years in India does that better.
If someone just wants to have fun, though, weekending at the resort in Cabo sounds awesome to me.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
I doubt many of the woke people who advertise their mental health issues actually suffer from them, or to the extent they claim.
More likely, they're just assholes who claim to be suffering from X for sympathy and excuses/deflections from their shit behavior.
Quote from: tenbones on December 17, 2021, 05:28:53 PM
I can steel-man this in a cynical way by simply pointing out: Why produce goods for a captive audience like old-school gamers when they're likely going to buy my stuff anyhow? See the 5e players here that complain about how WotC is destroying the brand (and hobby) yet still purchase WotC product.
I get the impression most of us stopped buying at latest mid 2018 after Mordenkainen's - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_rulebooks - basically as soon as Crawford was fully in control from mid/late 2018, most old school gamers stopped buying new WoTC material. Only new thing I bought since then was the Essentials Kit.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 18, 2021, 01:34:20 AM
I doubt many of the woke people who advertise their mental health issues actually suffer from them, or to the extent they claim.
More likely, they're just assholes who claim to be suffering from X for sympathy and excuses/deflections from their shit behavior.
I think Wokeism does tend to aggravate mental illness in those already vulnerable to it. So does social media more generally. It's a drug that makes them feel good for a moment, but makes them worse and worse in the long term.
Years of play in an immersive sandbox campaign definitely does provide something, an experience, that one shots and mini campaigns can't do. Is anyone disputing that?
Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 06:39:47 PM
Even with committed gamers, I've also had periods of more "beer and pretzel" gaming where we may play for a long time - but we don't have notebooks full of detailed background and documented episodes.
I don't think you need "notebooks full of detailed background and documented episodes" to get the experience Pundit is talking about. In fact I think those kind of 'event' games rather stand in contrast to the kind of Gygaxian-1e DMG style Sandbox Experience of regular routine playing in what becomes a 'living world'.
It's also possible to play for a long time without getting the kind of experience Pundit discusses. Eg if the GM just runs an episodic series of modules without a real 'world' or 'milieu' behind it. I've been guilty of this in the past, thinking it was 'easier' than a proper sandbox. I was wrong; the sandbox needs more prep, but it becomes self-sustaining and eventually effortless to maintain.
Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 11:26:07 PM
If someone's goal is to be properly called of "world traveller", then spending two years in India does that better.
If someone just wants to have fun, though, weekending at the resort in Cabo sounds awesome to me.
This obsession with "fun" is short sighted. People who put fun above all want instant gratification. A longer campaign is not full to the brim with fun. Sometimes there are setbacks, maybe a whole session builds tension that won't be resolved until later. That's not fun, but it can be immensely satisfying and rewarding. Eventually.
It's like any other long term endeavor. Read Moby Dick or watch the movie.
It is wrong the play only one-shots or short campaigns? Yes. Just like it's wrong to enjoy a long novel by only watching the movie. Do both? Great! Do only the instant gratification mode of play. Yeah, it's not the full experience and you are missing out.
Using your comment to make a point; not necessarily directed at you.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 12:17:51 PM
This obsession with "fun" is short sighted.
This a review of The Last of Us 2 now?
This is some if the most elitist petty shit ever.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 12:23:25 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 12:17:51 PM
This obsession with "fun" is short sighted.
This a review of The Last of Us 2 now?
This is some if the most elitist petty shit ever.
Yeah, no kidding. This is nothing but badwrongfun bullshit at its finest. Not everyone will even find long campaigns interesting, and if pushed to play in such, that's not the better experience, it's a huge waste of their time. Playing for quick rewards is perfectly acceptable since it's just a fucking game.
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
There are some RPG books that really are only good for placing under the short leg of an unbalanced table. Which books are in that category is likely to vary a great deal from one player to another.
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 08:37:55 AM
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Created by the school system and also now being either an immature fuck or a mental defective is "cool". Just look at the results you get when you tell these children in adult bodies to grow the fuck up.
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 01:52:56 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
There are some RPG books that really are only good for placing under the short leg of an unbalanced table. Which books are in that category is likely to vary a great deal from one player to another.
How about the D&D 4th Edition Player's Handbook?
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
Pretty sure there is a RPG that uses Jenga blocks as a determination system in place of dice.
Im not into storygames (though the Pundits idea on it is somewhat nebulous), and I prefer campaigns over short games. And 5e is my least favorite of all the D&D editions.
I like books over films and I think movies are my least favorite artistic medium (as in self-contained movies and not series). But I can account for my own taste and the worst I can blame others is for having a shitty or shallow taste. But everybody is shallow or has shit taste in a few respects because we don't care about everything equally.
But even with my own pretty judgemental outlook, I wouldn't call the people that enjoy crap to be having fun in the 'wrong' way.
Quote from: Jam The MF on December 18, 2021, 02:15:33 PMHow about the D&D 4th Edition Player's Handbook?
4e did more mechanical experimentation and had more ambition then 5e did by fusing a bunch of systems together to fuel nostalgia pandering. Nostalgia pandering that worked well enough to get any amount of praise from the pundit even though it in vanilla format took so many design elements from 4e.
Quote from: Jam The MF on December 18, 2021, 02:15:33 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 01:52:56 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
There are some RPG books that really are only good for placing under the short leg of an unbalanced table. Which books are in that category is likely to vary a great deal from one player to another.
How about the D&D 4th Edition Player's Handbook?
I have more respect for 4E than 5E now. 4E may have made some questionable decisions, but at least they were decisions based on game design rather than identity politics.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 02:19:39 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
Pretty sure there is a RPG that uses Jenga blocks as a determination system in place of dice.
Dread, a rules-light horror game.
Quote from: Aglondir on December 18, 2021, 03:57:59 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on December 18, 2021, 02:15:33 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 01:52:56 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
There are some RPG books that really are only good for placing under the short leg of an unbalanced table. Which books are in that category is likely to vary a great deal from one player to another.
How about the D&D 4th Edition Player's Handbook?
I have more respect for 4E than 5E now. 4E may have made some questionable decisions, but at least they were decisions based on game design rather than identity politics.
At least your disrespect of 4e was based on game design rather than identity politics.
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
First post here, been lurking for a while. Since you have experience with SotDL do you feel like the progression could be slowed down to use the system to be used in longer campaigns? Or is the leveling pace too tied into the overall construction of the mechanics. I'm on the fence about buying a copy to try out.
Quote from: Hzilong on December 18, 2021, 07:47:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
First post here, been lurking for a while. Since you have experience with SotDL do you feel like the progression could be slowed down to use the system to be used in longer campaigns? Or is the leveling pace too tied into the overall construction of the mechanics. I'm on the fence about buying a copy to try out.
You could easily slow it down if you wanted by just increasing thr amount of adventures completed to advance. Normally, it's 1 per level, but you could increase it
A flat increase (say 2 adventures per level) doubles your campaign length, but I'd suggest a stepped progression (1 adventure per level from 0-2, 2 adventures per level from 3-6, and 3 adventures per level from 7-10).
Of course, you could NOT do that and just run multiple shorter campaigns with different characters and stories too.
One thing to remember is that the game can be fairly lethal, and a longer campaign gives a lot more chances for the character--or even the whole party--to die (and eliminate the continuity advantage of a longer game).
Cool, thanks. Since it is on sale right now, I was thinking of picking it up. Keeping this on the topic of the thread, I have to agree that something seems to be missing/ have gone awry with the direction of 5e. Maybe I'm just a grognard (even though I only started playing in the 3.5/pathfinder era), but 5e publications feel so much less characterful in any meaningful way. It might just be general system fatigue and the fact that we've hit the point in the dev cycle where mechanics and splat bloat are starting to accelerate.
It's the reason why I've been looking to branch out from 5e. Luckily, it looks like my preferred system, Savage Worlds, hasn't gone balls deep on politics yet. Too bad the people I play with prefer the unified d20 systems.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 02:19:39 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 01:50:16 PM
Go back to playing Jenga with your RPG books because "there's no wrong way!!1!!!"
Pretty sure there is a RPG that uses Jenga blocks as a determination system in place of dice.
Im not into storygames (though the Pundits idea on it is somewhat nebulous), and I prefer campaigns over short games. And 5e is my least favorite of all the D&D editions.
I like books over films and I think movies are my least favorite artistic medium (as in self-contained movies and not series). But I can account for my own taste and the worst I can blame others is for having a shitty or shallow taste. But everybody is shallow or has shit taste in a few respects because we don't care about everything equally.
But even with my own pretty judgemental outlook, I wouldn't call the people that enjoy crap to be having fun in the 'wrong' way.
I hear you. I enjoy one shots and other light stuff, too. I even played Microscope once and enjoyed it. Perhaps I'm admitting to some hyperbole in my comments. It may even be pedantic to rally against "fun" as the be all and end all. Still, Pundit does still make a good observation about extended and involved campaigns. It opens something up that you don't get with light play.
Jenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 08:47:54 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on December 18, 2021, 07:47:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
First post here, been lurking for a while. Since you have experience with SotDL do you feel like the progression could be slowed down to use the system to be used in longer campaigns? Or is the leveling pace too tied into the overall construction of the mechanics. I'm on the fence about buying a copy to try out.
You could easily slow it down if you wanted by just increasing thr amount of adventures completed to advance. Normally, it's 1 per level, but you could increase it
A flat increase (say 2 adventures per level) doubles your campaign length, but I'd suggest a stepped progression (1 adventure per level from 0-2, 2 adventures per level from 3-6, and 3 adventures per level from 7-10).
Of course, you could NOT do that and just run multiple shorter campaigns with different characters and stories too.
One thing to remember is that the game can be fairly lethal, and a longer campaign gives a lot more chances for the character--or even the whole party--to die (and eliminate the continuity advantage of a longer game).
Forbidden Rules contains information on Paragons and advancing beyond level 10. Worth checking out if you haven't already.
Last campaign, the Goblin Spellbinder with a tooth sticking out of his forehead ("IT'S A HORN, DAMMIT!") had fun picking up a few of the Legendary Talents from that book and finally becoming a hero to his people by killing the trolls terrorizing their burgeoning Goblin community. It was cool.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.
It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.
QuoteIt may even be pedantic to rally against "fun" as the be all and end all.
I mean 'fun' may not be requisite for a good game, but 'enjoyment' I would say is. If your not enjoying yourself multiple sessions at a time, I think thats more sunk cost fallacy.
Id say saying its about 'fun' is more succinct to say then its about 'enjoyment'.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 10:15:21 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.
It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.
Are you guys seriously not familiar with Dread? I'm not sure how that's possible for folks who frequent RPG boards.
Quote from: S'mon on December 18, 2021, 05:26:59 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 18, 2021, 01:34:20 AM
I doubt many of the woke people who advertise their mental health issues actually suffer from them, or to the extent they claim.
More likely, they're just assholes who claim to be suffering from X for sympathy and excuses/deflections from their shit behavior.
I think Wokeism does tend to aggravate mental illness in those already vulnerable to it. So does social media more generally. It's a drug that makes them feel good for a moment, but makes them worse and worse in the long term.
SJWs and the woke actually encourage mental illness so they can use them like the parasites they are. Same with the handicapped. Every iteration has pushed this.
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
I passed on the SotDL. The setting seemed too dark, and the rules looked too heavy. While I'm not in the rules-lite camp, I don't want to go any heaver than Savage Worlds. But I did like the way SotDL handled modifiers (pool of D6s, select best.)
Any other selling points? Can you get around the darkness of the setting, or is that built-in?
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 17, 2021, 10:26:48 PMIt's more like someone claiming to be a "world traveler" because they spent a weekend in an all-inclusive resort in Cabo once, versus someone who spent two years living in India.
Except its two homeless people arguing about which poster they slept under last night makes the more of a 'world traveller'.
Games of pretend with no win condition and flexible rules is the dumbest things to be arguing about in terms of authenticity.
I may not like 5e, but I don't play along with this stupid 'authenticity' idea.
Wrong. Something absolutely 100% objective and concrete is being discussed: playing a campaign of two years or longer versus never playing more than a half-dozen sessions of the same game.
If someone has played tennis six times in their entire life, any sensible person would realize that this person does not have as developed an understanding of the experience and knowledge of tennis playing as someone who has played it every week for ten years.
Quote from: S'mon on December 18, 2021, 05:31:36 AM
Years of play in an immersive sandbox campaign definitely does provide something, an experience, that one shots and mini campaigns can't do. Is anyone disputing that?
A whole bunch of butthurt leftists willing to look like idiots, apparently.
Quote from: S'mon on December 18, 2021, 05:37:35 AM
Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 06:39:47 PM
Even with committed gamers, I've also had periods of more "beer and pretzel" gaming where we may play for a long time - but we don't have notebooks full of detailed background and documented episodes.
I don't think you need "notebooks full of detailed background and documented episodes" to get the experience Pundit is talking about. In fact I think those kind of 'event' games rather stand in contrast to the kind of Gygaxian-1e DMG style Sandbox Experience of regular routine playing in what becomes a 'living world'.
To whit, I've never had a notebook full of anything related to a campaign.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 12:17:51 PM
Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 11:26:07 PM
If someone's goal is to be properly called of "world traveller", then spending two years in India does that better.
If someone just wants to have fun, though, weekending at the resort in Cabo sounds awesome to me.
This obsession with "fun" is short sighted. People who put fun above all want instant gratification. A longer campaign is not full to the brim with fun.
I disagree. If you'd said something like a "fast pace" or "action packed", required by one-shots and shorter games because they just don't have time to do otherwise, you could be right. But by definition, the actual FUN of long-term campaigns is hugely more satisfying because you're creating something vastly more intensive as an experience.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 18, 2021, 10:48:24 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 10:15:21 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.
It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.
Are you guys seriously not familiar with Dread? I'm not sure how that's possible for folks who frequent RPG boards.
Given that Dread is a storygame and not an RPG, it's not surprising in the least.
Quote from: Aglondir on December 19, 2021, 01:03:07 AM
I passed on the SotDL. The setting seemed too dark, and the rules looked too heavy. While I'm not in the rules-lite camp, I don't want to go any heaver than Savage Worlds. But I did like the way SotDL handled modifiers (pool of D6s, select best.)
Any other selling points? Can you get around the darkness of the setting, or is that built-in?
I'm curious about the modularity as well.... maybe this needs its own thread.
I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:25:57 AM
Quote from: Mishihari on December 18, 2021, 10:48:24 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 18, 2021, 10:15:21 PM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 09:50:54 PMJenga though. Seriously that would be tedious.
It would be a tension system. Where a big event happens after a collapse. Not used exactly like a dice roll. It was a horror game so the tower collapsing is when the killer chops your head off.
Are you guys seriously not familiar with Dread? I'm not sure how that's possible for folks who frequent RPG boards.
Given that Dread is a storygame and not an RPG, it's not surprising in the least.
It's been talked about on a lot of RPG boards, especially ENWorld,where I used to hang out before it went to hell.
And why do you call it a story game - serious question? I've always considered the main difference between a story game and an RPG is that an RPG plays through a task resolution mechanic, whereas a story game lumps a whole bunch of tasks into a single resolution, sometimes even an entire encounter. The jenga draw resolves only a single task, albeit in an unorthodox way.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 19, 2021, 04:06:52 AM
I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.
I'm going to disagree with that. Even in the old days most of the games I was in could have been described as half game, half improv. The "theater" part is home to most of the roleplaying and a lot of the fun in the game. Without it, I might as well be playing a wargame.
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 19, 2021, 04:06:52 AM
I want my games to be just games and not feel like I'm attending an improv theater class in drama school. Maybe an increasing number of players are failed actors? In the past, you never heard of such people again, but today they are all over youtube.
I'd like to point out, however, that we did a lot of one-shots and short campaigns even back in the "good ol' days" of the 1980s.
Can confirm. Am failed actor. One addendum: I'm the GM... so I guess I'm a failed director too 🥲😅
"Can confirm. Am failed actor. One addendum: I'm the GM... so I guess I'm a failed director too."
Hahaha, I like your reply.
;D
Quote from: Aglondir on December 19, 2021, 01:03:07 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze on December 18, 2021, 05:14:02 PM
I prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord over pretty much any version of D&D. It should be noted that the game is set up for eleven-adventure campaigns (one adventure for each of levels 0-10), and that each adventure should last 1-3 sessions. Typically, the campaign should be complete in < 1 year...so if you're doing Pundit's "right way" with SotDL, you're doing it wrong! ;D
I passed on the SotDL. The setting seemed too dark, and the rules looked too heavy. While I'm not in the rules-lite camp, I don't want to go any heaver than Savage Worlds. But I did like the way SotDL handled modifiers (pool of D6s, select best.)
Any other selling points? Can you get around the darkness of the setting, or is that built-in?
It's a dark fantasy setting with a baseline of twisted faeries and horrific monsters, but you can adjust that dial quite a bit. The "Demon Lord's Shadow" (i.e., what doom the world is moving toward) is noted as being entirely optional.
Quote from: Hzilong on December 18, 2021, 08:52:47 PM
Cool, thanks. Since it is on sale right now, I was thinking of picking it up. Keeping this on the topic of the thread, I have to agree that something seems to be missing/ have gone awry with the direction of 5e. Maybe I'm just a grognard (even though I only started playing in the 3.5/pathfinder era), but 5e publications feel so much less characterful in any meaningful way. It might just be general system fatigue and the fact that we've hit the point in the dev cycle where mechanics and splat bloat are starting to accelerate.
It's the reason why I've been looking to branch out from 5e. Luckily, it looks like my preferred system, Savage Worlds, hasn't gone balls deep on politics yet. Too bad the people I play with prefer the unified d20 systems.
FWIW, SoTDL is pretty chock full of mechanics & splat bloat, so be warned. The original core book is okay; I found it a bit more fiddly than I prefer for rules light games and it does get more complex as characters level up and pursue different career paths. The author churns stuff out so you can't say it's not well-supported, but you can get into an endless cycle if you're a completist. Not super fond of some of the creator's virtue signalling, but I didn't really see that much in the game itself. And hey, if you want to play a clockwork, there's that. I would put it as superior to Zweihander in the grimdark setting and the suggested campaign framework of 10-11 adventures was a selling point for me. We never actually played it yet; but I've cribbed material from it for my Old School D&D games.
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:18:55 AMIf someone has played tennis six times in their entire life, any sensible person would realize that this person does not have as developed an understanding of the experience and knowledge of tennis playing as someone who has played it every week for ten years.
But its imaginary tennis. A person who plays imaginary tennis with some people for 10 years might find those 10 years of experience worthless when entertaining a different group of people who play imaginary tennis a different way, even if they have only played six times. And instead of saying there are different strokes for different folks to insist that their flavor imaginary tennis is just the best, and if you dislike it, it must be because there is something wrong with you.
Its one thing if its a boardgame with hardcoded rules, but its another if its mostly freeform and the OSR crowd suggests using rules as a suggestion if at all.
But long running campaigns have different advantages/disadvantages over short ones.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 05:37:05 PM
It really doesn't. I don't care if that bully from 6th grade home economics really did intend to disfigure your face, bringing him up again a decade later just makes you obsessed. .
A better analogy would have been saying when debating the merits of Marxism, anyone that keeps bringing up the failures of communist countries that they are 'obsessing'.
But that still doesn't work.. The reference is still relevant. Noting the failures of people who think that they know better is always relevant.
WotC is doing what it thinks is best for RPGs. They literally think that they know better, and are altering the game accordingly 'to make it more Diverse, Inclusive, and Equal'.
As we have seen in the past with the storygames movement - who thought that they 'can do it better' because they convinced themselves that GNS theory was the answer, and it failed. Because the larger hobby rejected their 'new man' storygame that was meant to give them the play experience that they really wanted out of their incoherent RPG's, but they just didn't know any better...
And now we have a new movement using CRT theory that has decided to 'save' RPG's in a different way, but one that interestingly still revolves around what kind of 'stories' are told at the gaming table... The goal is the same; to deliver to the hobby their 'new man' way of gaming.
In the long run I believe that the larger hobby will reject the WotC 'new man' RPG, just like the last time a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals thought that they knew 'a better way'.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 17, 2021, 05:37:05 PM
And their posable action collectors kits, not paintable modeling action figures!
Those filthy comic book readers are demanding the same level of clout as us: chad graphic novel thinkers! .
And you miss my point entirely in trying to score a rhetorical point of your own.
RPG's are not
just playing 'Pretend': In that they have codified rules and expected modes of play.
People can have fun, and enjoy playing the game wrong. But it is like ignoring the die rolls in a game of monopoly and just putting yourself on the property you want because it is more fun. The players may be having an absolute blast 'playing' Monopoly this way. Still doesn't change the fact that they are playing the game wrong.
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:18:55 AM
Wrong. Something absolutely 100% objective and concrete is being discussed: playing a campaign of two years or longer versus never playing more than a half-dozen sessions of the same game.
This is the sticking point.
The fact that WotC is catering to the SJW six-session 'gamer'.
They are mistaking a subset of vocal D&D twitter "players" as being representative of the larger D&D RPG fanbase. Which they are not.
I think that WotC has been drawing the wrong conclusions from their survey's and twitter reactions for quite a while now. And it will come back to bite them in the long run.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PMA better analogy would have been saying when debating the merits of Marxism, anyone that keeps bringing up the failures of communist countries that they are 'obsessing'.
This keeps on getting more up its own ass. The next time a storygame deposes a country, bring it up. Otherwise this reminds me of Moviebob saying that the console wars was his version of vietnam.
Storygamers have a good time being stuck up storygamers and saying anybody that didn't play their way has brain damage. And OSR'ers have a good time being stuck up OSR'ers and saying anybody that didn't play their way is like following a genocidal philosophy.
The truth is most peoples taste is shit. WOTCs marketting strategy is on focusing on most people. Ergo shit product. And its the most popular one ever. And now they are throwing in some SJW shit once market reach has been established.
But your not focusing on WOTC, and instead your focusing on the bully from 6th ed and saying he is a totes genocidal marxist.
Edit: In my terms: I love animation and I think the Lion King remake is an aberration. Awful, AWFUL garbage on every level. But If you don't have a soul, It makes sense to release it as a product if you just want to make money. Don't put your faith in the mass market consumer, they will only dissapoint.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PMIn that they have codified rules and expected modes of play.
But this isn't monopoly. Its an inherently flexible game system, and the OSR crowd in general has been supporting the 'minimalistic rules as suggestion' model. They tend to just get upset if those rules favor the player and not the GM. I favor a GM model as well, but Im not so stuck up as to say its the 'right' way to play.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 05:54:37 PM
But your not focusing on WOTC, and instead your focusing on the bully from 6th ed and saying he is a totes genocidal marxist.
The only one that keeps mentioning bullies is you. Also, analogies are not meant to be taken literally...
I simply referenced the last time in the RPG hobby someone thought they new best, and how it turned out.
The Storygamers bullied no one. They just promoted an incorrect model of play that has ultimately proved a commercial failure.
Which has a direct correlation to what WotC is doing now.
WotC's underlying reasoning is different, but their goal is the same: To make a 'better' gaming experience.
And I believe that it will also fail for very similar reasons.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 05:54:37 PM
But this isn't monopoly. Its an inherently flexible game system,...
Nobody here is questioning anyone's fun.
But the amount of fun someone is having has
absolutely nothing to do with the fact that even silly elf-games can be played wrong.
Even heavily house ruled RPG's still share codified rules and expected modes of play.
This is not that hard of a concept to grasp.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 07:45:18 PMThe Storygamers bullied no one. They just promoted an incorrect model of play that has ultimately proved a commercial failure.
To streamline my opinions: I think your belief that 5e was successful because it came with design elements that appealed to the old-guard is misplaced and self-serving. Its design focus was on nostalgia and 'Feeling' like D&D over any coherent mechanical focus. Because if you examined its mechanics it has more 4e DNA in it then there is 1-2e.
The general rule is that things only appeal to masses by being dumbed down and crap. I find 5e sloppy, dumbed down and crap, and I see its success as evidence of that strategy paying off.
The Star Trek reboots made more money then the originals. Trekkies thought 'Oh I guess this means there is a rising interest in Star Trek, maybe this will cause more classic star trek', when the reality was that there was interest in the nostalgic idea of star trek as a candy wrapper over the same old shit. And it caused more streamlined rebooted same old shit.
I don't think this will cause a loss in sales because the demographic that wants to pretend to roll some dice while having the barebones of a system while they pall around and have the gm flub the results for the best story is significantly larger then people that want a properly curated experience.
The mass of grey goo that wants a "whatever" experience is much larger then the OSR, storygame, or any other community. And WOTC is marketting to them, which as a general rule makes more money. The grey mass also doesn't want to be lectured, but are also less likely to make a fuss, so expect some mild resistance to SJW trash but not a ton.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
The mass of grey goo that wants a "whatever" experience is much larger then the OSR, storygame, or any other community. And WOTC is marketting to them, which as a general rule makes more money. The grey mass also doesn't want to be lectured, but are also less likely to make a fuss, so expect some mild resistance to SJW trash but not a ton.
The grey goo has not shown a particular interest in choking down the SJW trash so lets see how it goes.
Personally I am of the opinion that WotC needs to do more.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 19, 2021, 10:36:30 PMThe grey goo has not shown a particular interest in choking down the SJW trash so lets see how it goes.
It will not choke, but it will swallow the pill with some sugar. That has been the secret to their media success the past 60 years. The sugar has just gone thin and the pills have gotten bigger.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 11:30:07 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on December 19, 2021, 10:36:30 PMThe grey goo has not shown a particular interest in choking down the SJW trash so lets see how it goes.
It will not choke, but it will swallow the pill with some sugar. That has been the secret to their media success the past 60 years. The sugar has just gone thin and the pills have gotten bigger.
Guess that means they have to switch to suppositories and oil.
Quote from: Hzilong on December 19, 2021, 11:43:44 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 11:30:07 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on December 19, 2021, 10:36:30 PMThe grey goo has not shown a particular interest in choking down the SJW trash so lets see how it goes.
It will not choke, but it will swallow the pill with some sugar. That has been the secret to their media success the past 60 years. The sugar has just gone thin and the pills have gotten bigger.
Guess that means they have to switch to suppositories and oil.
Except without the oil...
Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PM
I think that WotC has been drawing the wrong conclusions from their survey's and twitter reactions for quite a while now. And it will come back to bite them in the long run.
1) Not if old-school players keep buying "D&D" because of the name.
2) You may still be correct, but I think it's a much longer dwindling line than you might think. Because of #1 above.
(and this is *not* directed at you Jaeger I'm just saying in general).
As I've been saying for a long time... "D&D" isn't a system, it's a genre unto itself. The best years of ALL of its settings are long gone, but they sit there like feasts in the dark waiting to be consumed. The problem is FOMO and Brand Dickriding. We, the GM's and players are "D&D". We decide what lands on our tables. The issue is not what is wrong with 5e Players, it's what's wrong with "us" that we patronize a Brand that nurses from that asshole that shits upon us *at* every turn.
There is no saving "the D&D brand" Nor should we. There is no rehabilitating the damage that's done. If you're a GM, run the "D&D" that you gives you the most pleasure *without* supporting those who shat upon thee. Use systems that actually makes the genre of "D&D Fantasy" better at your table. If you have the balls to get into development, support the thing you like that isn't WotC.
If you have to use 5e... do what they've been doing - subvert it. It shouldn't be too hard. After all, if you did a basic European Historical fantasy, in 5e, they would likely lose their fucking minds.
I do not understand the idea of bitching and complaining about WotC while many give it all the monetary support to continue the cycle. It's like spousal abuse.
Quote from: tenbones on December 20, 2021, 10:03:29 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on December 19, 2021, 05:15:54 PM
I think that WotC has been drawing the wrong conclusions from their survey's and twitter reactions for quite a while now. And it will come back to bite them in the long run.
1) Not if old-school players keep buying "D&D" because of the name.
2) You may still be correct, but I think it's a much longer dwindling line than you might think. Because of #1 above.
(and this is *not* directed at you Jaeger I'm just saying in general).
As I've been saying for a long time... "D&D" isn't a system, it's a genre unto itself. The best years of ALL of its settings are long gone, but they sit there like feasts in the dark waiting to be consumed. The problem is FOMO and Brand Dickriding. We, the GM's and players are "D&D". We decide what lands on our tables. The issue is not what is wrong with 5e Players, it's what's wrong with "us" that we patronize a Brand that nurses from that asshole that shits upon us *at* every turn.
There is no saving "the D&D brand" Nor should we. There is no rehabilitating the damage that's done. If you're a GM, run the "D&D" that you gives you the most pleasure *without* supporting those who shat upon thee. Use systems that actually makes the genre of "D&D Fantasy" better at your table. If you have the balls to get into development, support the thing you like that isn't WotC.
If you have to use 5e... do what they've been doing - subvert it. It shouldn't be too hard. After all, if you did a basic European Historical fantasy, in 5e, they would likely lose their fucking minds.
I do not understand the idea of bitching and complaining about WotC while many give it all the monetary support to continue the cycle. It's like spousal abuse.
This. I'm wondering if Ryan Dancey had that much forethought in ginning up the OGL or if it was a happy coincidence. Either way - we don't need WotC at all to continue having wrongbadunwokefun.
I think it's a coincidence.
I wouldn't give anyone associated with WotC any credit for having to use the OGL in any meaningful manner (including myself) in the way it's being used today if it weren't for the simple undeniable fact of what WotC is doing to the brand and *why* they are doing it. No one at that time saw this coming...
Yet here we are, and as always Necessity cradles us like the patient mother she is, reminding us of the tools we already possess.
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 20, 2021, 11:08:57 AM
This. I'm wondering if Ryan Dancey had that much forethought in ginning up the OGL or if it was a happy coincidence. Either way - we don't need WotC at all to continue having wrongbadunwokefun.
As I recall (it's been over 20 years), Dancey has given two reasons for the OGL--"make sure D&D never dies" and "make a bunch of other people in the hobby provide the more marginal support while WotC keeps on with the core and big projects." They aren't contradictory, but he does seem to have leaned more on one or the other depending on to whom he's speaking.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 18, 2021, 12:17:51 PM
Quote from: jhkim on December 17, 2021, 11:26:07 PM
If someone's goal is to be properly called of "world traveller", then spending two years in India does that better.
If someone just wants to have fun, though, weekending at the resort in Cabo sounds awesome to me.
This obsession with "fun" is short sighted. People who put fun above all want instant gratification. A longer campaign is not full to the brim with fun. Sometimes there are setbacks, maybe a whole session builds tension that won't be resolved until later. That's not fun, but it can be immensely satisfying and rewarding. Eventually.
It's like any other long term endeavor. Read Moby Dick or watch the movie.
It is wrong the play only one-shots or short campaigns? Yes. Just like it's wrong to enjoy a long novel by only watching the movie. Do both? Great! Do only the instant gratification mode of play. Yeah, it's not the full experience and you are missing out.
Using your comment to make a point; not necessarily directed at you.
While it's true that someone is missing out by not playing long campaigns - there are nearly infinite things that people miss out on. Some of them we just don't get a chance to try, but also, people try a lot of things and don't like them. Personally, there's lots of movies that I've seen that I've never read the book of. There's also a lot of books that I've never seen the movie version of. One doesn't have to try everything.
More specifically --
I'm not convinced that most casual RPG players who only play one-shots and short campaigns would really find long campaigns more rewarding if only they tried them. While there may be some who are missing out, I think most people have at least a reasonable idea of what they like or don't like in games, and gravitate towards those games. I'd mildly encourage people to try different stuff, but in general, if someone is railing at the masses for not liking the superior game -- it indicates a problem with the complainer, not with the masses.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 01:10:08 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on December 19, 2021, 03:18:55 AMIf someone has played tennis six times in their entire life, any sensible person would realize that this person does not have as developed an understanding of the experience and knowledge of tennis playing as someone who has played it every week for ten years.
But its imaginary tennis. A person who plays imaginary tennis with some people for 10 years might find those 10 years of experience worthless when entertaining a different group of people who play imaginary tennis a different way, even if they have only played six times. And instead of saying there are different strokes for different folks to insist that their flavor imaginary tennis is just the best, and if you dislike it, it must be because there is something wrong with you.
Its one thing if its a boardgame with hardcoded rules, but its another if its mostly freeform and the OSR crowd suggests using rules as a suggestion if at all.
But long running campaigns have different advantages/disadvantages over short ones.
I think what some are referring to is not that playing short adventures is playing wrong. But that there are a certain type who try to claim that barely even doing that is somehow superior to actually... you know... playing a full short adventure even. That and a portion of them are pushing the storygamer agenda likely does not help.
On the same note. Long campaigns are not a guarantee of a good time either.
Like everything else. In the wrong hands its going to fail.
Quote from: Omega on December 20, 2021, 04:02:34 PMI think what some are referring to is not that playing short adventures is playing wrong. But that there are a certain type who try to claim that barely even doing that is somehow superior to actually... you know... playing a full short adventure even. That and a portion of them are pushing the storygamer agenda likely does not help.
If they push for that, then yes I also say they are wrong.
Quote from: tenbones on December 20, 2021, 10:03:29 AM
I do not understand the idea of bitching and complaining about WotC while many give it all the monetary support to continue the cycle. It's like spousal abuse.
Who says we give it monetary support? I still don't own even the 5e PHB and haven't purchased a product from them since the 4E days. I built my own game system as a specific modern game design (vs. OSR) alternative to 5e.
Not everyone feeds the beast.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
To streamline my opinions: I think your belief that 5e was successful because it came with design elements that appealed to the old-guard is misplaced and self-serving.
I specifically said:
"5e devs seem more than happy to completely jettison all the 'old guard' fans they brought back with the release of 5e... ."I made no specific mentions of any design elements, or how they brought the old fans back, and that post is unedited from when you responded to it.
In fact, I'm largely in agreement with what you said here:
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
...Its design focus was on nostalgia and 'Feeling' like D&D over any coherent mechanical focus. Because if you examined its mechanics it has more 4e DNA in it then there is 1-2e. ...I find 5e sloppy, dumbed down and crap, and I see its success as evidence of that strategy paying off.
I believe that there is nothing inherently special about 5e's mechanics either.
5e was simply "good enough" at the time, for the majority of the player base.
And as the market leader, that is all D&D generally needs to reign supreme over its competitors.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
The grey mass also doesn't want to be lectured, but are also less likely to make a fuss, so expect some mild resistance to SJW trash but not a ton.
Agreed. Generally an IP's fandom will consume what is delivered to them.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
The Star Trek reboots made more money then the originals. Trekkies thought 'Oh I guess this means there is a rising interest in Star Trek, maybe this will cause more classic star trek', when the reality was that there was interest in the nostalgic idea of star trek as a candy wrapper over the same old shit. And it caused more streamlined rebooted same old shit.
All true. But we have seen with other IP that there is a point where fandom will abandon them in mass.
It is a long process; but both Dr. Who, and The "new" Star Treks: Discovery and Picard have succeeded in alienating their respective fanbases to the point that no one is really watching them anymore.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 19, 2021, 08:03:08 PM
I don't think this will cause a loss in sales because the demographic that wants to pretend to roll some dice while having the barebones of a system while they pall around and have the gm flub the results for the best story is significantly larger then people that want a properly curated experience.
I agree that in the near term it will not cause a big loss in sales.
In my opinion – the
"gm flub the results for the best story" crowd do not make for the good long term hobbyists that RPG's need to keep their network effect going that popular RPG's rely upon to maintain their player base.
I believe that when the bubble pops on this current wave of D&D popularity the contraction will be bigger than expected. Not that D&D won't still be the #1 RPG, but it will contract much more than WotC thinks it should.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 20, 2021, 07:39:43 PMI specifically said: "5e devs seem more than happy to completely jettison all the 'old guard' fans they brought back with the release of 5e... ."
What I meant was, I was suprised the 'old guard' tolerated it at all. I did not think it was 'good enough'. I thought it was anemic. I had a good campaign with it (because of friends) and in general we also all found it anemic. I feel like the 'old guard' where dazzled by (theoretica) bones thrown their way to notice how shallow it all was. 5e didn't fix any of the issues past editions of D&D had, and barely added anything new and good.
But I see what you mean about the networking effect. I think in practice, its already happening. D&D has become more popular, but any alternatives are now much weaker competitors then they where before, because its attracting passerbys and not hobbyists. Which I think was your point?
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 20, 2021, 07:48:07 PM
What I meant was, I was suprised the 'old guard' tolerated it at all. I did not think it was 'good enough'. I thought it was anemic. I had a good campaign with it (because of friends) and in general we also all found it anemic. I feel like the 'old guard' where dazzled by (theoretica) bones thrown their way to notice how shallow it all was. 5e didn't fix any of the issues past editions of D&D had, and barely added anything new and good.
Agreed.
D&D's network effect and deep player base covered up a lot of 5e's shortcomings.
When you look at Kevin Crawford's Worlds without numbers in comparison 5E is a very slapdash product.
In fact a great opportunity was wasted IMHO, because I think people would have accepted a lot of actual streamlining and improvements to a D&D d20 system coming off of the reviled 4e era.
Instead we got a game designed by committee in separate sections, then thrown together for release. But I think that is the norm for WotC's D&D design since 3e.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 20, 2021, 07:48:07 PM
But I see what you mean about the networking effect. I think in practice, its already happening. D&D has become more popular, but any alternatives are now much weaker competitors then they where before, because its attracting passerbys and not hobbyists. Which I think was your point?
Yes.
1: Its attracting passerbys and not hobbyists.
And they are making the mistake of giving more weight to what these casual fans say that they want vs the hobbyists who will actually carry the game forward after the current boom is over.
2: Any alternatives are now much weaker competitors then they where before.
D&D has benefitted greatly since 3e's release by having every major contender mismanaging themselves straight into 6th tier also-ran status. Even Baizuo, with their D&D clone that took over Vampire's perennial #2 throne is currently in a process of self destruction.
D&D has benefitted from no less than 3 deep pocket bailouts when they have screwed the pooch business wise. But as the market leader it is in a position to benefit from that type of thing.
Other RPG lines/ game companies... Not so much.
And now with its market position the D&D OGL actually serves to deleverage other RPG lines network effect for their house systems because it has become far more profitable to release a '5E compatible' version of your setting that feeds off of the perceived desire to not have to learn a new system. Which was the true purpose behind Dancy's OGL idea from the beginning IMHO.
The One Ring RPG vs the much better sales of Adventures in Middle Earth 5e (x10) is a good example of this.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 20, 2021, 08:20:43 PMWhen you look at Kevin Crawford's Worlds without numbers in comparison 5E is a very slapdash product.
Exactly! I thought I was on crazy pills when people where giving it praises for the bare minimum of not imploding in your hands.
Kevin Crawford has actually got me interested in playing some OSR inspired stuff with friends. I tried Godbound, but the group kinda needed more structure and where not the world-building sort.
QuoteIn fact a great opportunity was wasted IMHO, because I think people would have accepted a lot of actual streamlining and improvements to a D&D d20 system coming off of the reviled 4e era.
YES, I remember following the promised design posts and being disapointed when the end result was a pale imitation of that. I know some things are always just marketting speak, but this wasn't even in the ballpark.
And there are good things to be taken from 4e (which you can actually see in Kevins stuff for instance), and only its worst made it over to 5e.
QuoteYes.
In which case we are in agreement.
Quote from: tenbones on December 20, 2021, 10:03:29 AM
1) Not if old-school players keep buying "D&D" because of the name.
2) You may still be correct, but I think it's a much longer dwindling line than you might think. Because of #1 above.
I agree with this.
While I do believe that things will eventually catch up with WotC – there are unique aspect of the RPG industry that can delay the inevitable:
1: First mover status in RPG hobby is HUGE. HUGE!
Every commercially-viable genre in the medium is already taken, and held, by a title no younger than the early 90's.
Only the evergreen IP's of Star Wars, Conan, and Lord of the Rings get people to look past already established Systems. (And people will still snap up D&D 'compatible' versions like candy.)
In spite of the moves WotC made with 4e, and the way that they treated the 3e fanbase; the second 5e came out people dropped the clone like a bad habit and came
flooding back to 'official D&D'.
2: Established RPG IP fans are
very long-suffering. (It's ridiculous IMHO.)
Shadowrun is a prime example of this. Catalysts Shadowrun 4-6e: There was nothing about the SR 3e rules that couldn't have been fixed. 4-6e changed the way the die pools worked for no reason because Catalyst never addressed the underlying system complexity that made the game unwieldly in play.
(Which in fairness FASA should have addressed by 3e)As one of the first mover cyberpunk games it does gets attention when a new edition comes out, because people really liked the setting premise. SR 6e was the #3 best selling game on ICv2's list for about half a year in 2019. But then people saw that it was still a hot mess, and stop playing it just like the previous editions. This is the main reason Shadowrun has faded. People will come for the IP, but you can drive them away with the system!
But when Shadowrun 7e comes out, people will
still give it a look!
Same with R.Tal's Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk Red was briefly ICv2's #2 selling RPG in late 2020. And the first edition of the game hit in 1998...
And no one has released an even remotely competitive Cyberpunk game to these two even during the years they were largely defunct.
Mutant and Masterminds has taken the top Superhero RPG spot by default largely because the various owners of Champions can't get out of their own way...
The long-suffering nature of RPG fandoms love for their favorite gaming IP is the major reason why Star Wars, Conan, and Lord of the Rings always seem to do reasonably well regardless of what system they use. Only SJG managed to nerf a Conan RPG when they briefly held the license.
3: Making an objectively better competitive product
is not enough to effectively challenge the first movers when faced with #'s 1&2.
The First mover has to make a huge mistake that alienates the fanbase, or be incompetent enough, long enough, for you to take a big enough chunk out of their market share,
(preferably both at the same time) so that the network effect for your game is built up to the point that it is literally not worth the effort of the old IP's players to switch back.
(Baizuo was in place to take advantage of the 4e debacle - but took a design shortcut with PF1e that ensured that they would lose out to WotC once they so much as halfway got their act together.)That is a tall fucking order. Especially considering that in the current RPG market that means releasing 4-6 supplements per year. On top of having a Character app, and having stuff ready to go for virtual table tops.
The cost of competition is high!
So while I do believe WotC D&D will fade, it will be up to ten years after their 50th anniversary before any real competitor truly dethrones them.
And that is assuming someone throws their hat into the ring sometime in 2024-28 and can make a good enough product for long enough before WotC pulls their head out of their ass. Even then, the power of mega corp promotional $$ is a mighty big obstacle all on its own even if put behind an utterly woke and mechanically shit version of D&D...
D&D just crashing, with no game taking its place, and the rest of the RPG hobby just continuing to trundle along with their narrow slice of players is a viable outcome to WotC's woke madness.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 21, 2021, 10:17:07 PMWotC once they got their act together.
This is again what il debate: WOTC zeroed in on attracting based on nostalgia over quality. 5e is the worst designed edition so far considering its point in time.
A product made by 1 dude and a few playtesters is FAAAAR superior. WOTC has no excuse.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 10:29:11 PM
Quote from: Jaeger on December 21, 2021, 10:17:07 PMWotC once they got their act together.
This is again what il debate: WOTC zeroed in on attracting based on nostalgia over quality. 5e is the worst designed edition so far considering its point in time.
A product made by 1 dude and a few playtesters is FAAAAR superior. WOTC has no excuse.
I think we are talking past each other here more than we really disagree. (It seems you typed your reply as I was editing typos and adding to my comments - but my reply is functionally the same.)
In my opinion; The Bar for WotC "getting their act together" post 4e was
very low.Baizuo had taken the design shortcut with Pathfinder in just layering their employee's house rules on top of the OGL. They fixed
none of the underlying issues with the 3.x system.
And 3.5 was already getting rather unwieldly under WotC... And despite the merits it did have, 4e was
reviled.
Enter "D&D Next" a.k.a. 5E: "Saving" D&D players from two unwieldly systems in one stroke...
As an example of game design by a group of so-called professionals, IMHO your critiques are 100% correct.
But it just didn't matter.
5e was "good enough" that people could squint real hard to see the game they wanted to see, and it said D&D on the cover.
The "grey goo' got something that resembled what they thought they were getting.
And they never though to question if it was actually very good before they gobbled it up...
Missed this last time:
Quote from: tenbones on December 20, 2021, 10:03:29 AM
I do not understand the idea of bitching and complaining about WotC while many give it all the monetary support to continue the cycle. It's like spousal abuse.
Yes, yes it is...
How Woke CRT cancel culture gets people to behave, and the symptoms for Battered Woman syndrome, have a lot in common:
• The abused thinks that the violence was their fault. – White Privilege + Colonialism.
• The abused has an inability to place the responsibility for the violence elsewhere. – White Privilege + Systemic Racism.
• The abused fears for their life, and/or, the lives of loved ones whom the abuser might or has threatened to harm - Cancel Culture + Doxxing + Online Smear Campaigns, Deaths threats etc,.
• The abused has an irrational belief that the abuser is omnipresent and omniscient. – Self Censoring speech at all times lest you say something that can be used to accused you of being some kind of ist-a-phobe.
Quote from: Jaeger on December 22, 2021, 03:19:25 PMI think we are talking past each other here more than we really disagree. (It seems you typed your reply as I was editing typos and adding to my comments - but my reply is functionally the same.)
Yup.
WOTC getting their act together reminds me of 'GW' getting their act together. It infuriates me that so many alternative games only existed until GW lessened to stomping on toes in place of kicking in the groin. And then everybody FLOODED back.
Its more like they needed an excuse to start giving GW money because its friggin pathologic. And what a shock they started kicking your groin again.
Im not a commie, but I can still critique this sort of rabid mindless consumerism.
Quote from: KingCheops on December 17, 2021, 10:05:49 AM
Quote from: 3catcircus on December 17, 2021, 08:37:55 AM
Quote from: Rhymer88 on December 17, 2021, 02:39:34 AM
I don't want to disparage anybody but could this phenomenon also be partly due to mental illness? A great many woke people complain of mental health issues and in my experience people with such issues simply don't last long in a game. Having a bunch of such players in a group will quickly make it fall apart and could explain the extremely short duration of many "campaigns".
How did we get a generation of mental defectives? They didn't just develop mental health issues she to covid lockdowns, there have been these insane people for at least 5 years or more being prominent and being taken seriously.
Arm people with Google searches for psychological and medical conditions and incentivize them with a victimhood culture where they can gain power over people through their self-diagnosed "illnesses" and bingo bango you have a society full of weaponized narcissists.
This right here is entirely spot on. I started noticing this behavior while in college in Seattle. Just the very trace beginnings of it...but it was just as insidious and vile.
Social media's growth has exacerbated it.