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.