TheRPGSite

So, here's the thing. I've been roleplaying since the early 80's. I've played, and own, quite a few different systems. Although I live in a rural area of the UK I've never had trouble getting groups together, until the last couple of years which was a real dry spell.

Then, earlier this year, a new tabletop gaming shop opened in a town about an hours drive away. They have gaming tables and a Facebook group to help people arrange RPG games.

Awesome! So I posted to try and get people to join a game of Call of Cthulhu. It's a well known game, I figured, and Cthulhu is recognisable to most nerds, I'll easily be able to get a few people to have a go at least.

Nope. I think one guy was interested but couldn't actually get to the shop for some reason. Since then I've noticed a pattern on that FB group. Two or three times a week people will post looking for 5e games to join, often they are noobs, sometimes with some experience. They often don't even mention "D&D", but refer only to "5e". Occasionally someone will post looking for people to play a game that isn't 5e and they routinely get zero response.

It's like 5e is a hobby in its own right, quite distinct from roleplaying generally, and there's no crossover at all.

Even when the shop recently agreed to actively promote "alternative" system taster sessions there was no interest. None.

Why is this? Here is my theory:

1) Millennials are naturally conformist and its a conformity born from fear.
Speech codes, Twitter kangaroo courts, safe spaces are the norm to people in this age group. They only want to pursue approved methods of interpersonal engagement. The opportunity to encounter something new, and have to make up their own mind about it, scares them.

2) Millennials are brand-conscious
Younger people define their identity increasingly by what they consume. Brand loyalty is an important facet of how they see themselves and how they identify and relate to each other.

3) Millenials encounter D&D differently
When I was a kid there was no internet, smartphones or even home computers. People read books for fun. Myself and my schoolfriends got into RPGs because we were interested in mythology, history and fantasy literature. RPGs were a way to engage with those interests in an interactive way. All the people from that local store who I've spoken to got into D&D by watching Critical Role which they uniformly love. They had no pre-existing interest in D&D's cultural influences. They like it because it's played in a web show they enjoy and they want to imitate that. If Matt Mercer played Runequest, that's what they'd want to do.

4) People purchase games differently now
Again, as a youth I had to go into a physical game shop to buy my RPG stuff. And next to the TSR shelves would be shelves full of other RPGs. And because my interests were in history and mythology, games like Chivalry and Sorcery or Man, Myth and Magic, had a potential appeal. I could physically pick them up and look at them, decide it they were something I wanted to try. If you're searching "D&D Players Handbook" on Amazon you're just not going to get that same exposure to other games.

Anyway, that's my rant. Is the situation similar where you are? Is 5e a separate hobby? Is the explosion in its popularity unique to itself, or are other games getting a boost on 5e's back? My experience suggests not....

My experience is that for every 8 to 10 D&D players, you'll find 1 to 3 interested in also trying another system, and maybe 1 if you are lucky that prefers another system to D&D.  Furthermore, many that are eventually interested in other systems need a good solid run with D&D first, before they'll be all that interested in something new.  This is partly negative, partly positive.  You need time for people to learn about D&D warts, and thus get motivated to try something else.  You also need time for people to absorb what roleplaying is all about and then want to expand their horizons.  There's also a neutral aspect, in that many people have a limit on how much time and money they are willing to put into learning new game systems.

Mainly, though, people want to play with a good GM (from their perspective, whatever that is).  For your stated goals, I'd say you are moving too fast.  If you run some D&D for these players, and they like how you do it, then some of them will be open to trying something else--because you are also running it. Otherwise, you are depending upon a leap of faith that a lot of folks simply aren't going to make.

That said, I have had plenty of luck getting people to start with something else, but usually that was because they were new to the idea of roleplaying entirely.  Describe a game; it sounds fun; they try it.  The new popularity of D&D might be interfering with that dynamic right now, because many of the people that are receptive to the idea are naturally going to be interested in trying D&D 5E first.  I couldn't say for sure, since I'm perfectly happy to run 5E to get new people interested--both for its own sake and to create a (smaller) pool of people that will try other things later.

How are you defining Millenial? I'm 37 and by some counts, I'm a millenial...and you're not describing me or my experience at all.

Ive seen it in FB groups in my local area for recruiting new RPG players. Lots of noobs asking about 5th edition games. When I promote my OSR, Runequest or Sci Fi games I almost always only get responded to by experienced older gamers.

I do find that when people have a year or so under their belts of D&D then tend to be more open to trying other games and in fact we have a couple of new regulars to our longstanding group that started with D&D but now will play pretty much anything our group proposes (WEG d6 Star Wars, Fading Suns, CoC, etc)

Millenials are hipsters who want to latch on to the latest fad thing; geek culture has been largely colonized/taken over by millennials.  This includes pop media and distribution channels - so The Goldbergs and Community and Stranger Things and Big Bang Theory and so on all show D&D as a "fun" and "quirky" thing to do.  Since D&D 5e is the one you can buy at stores it's the one they buy.  If you held up a 1e DMG to them it'd be like garlic to a vampire.

I'm 50, and my group of 7 guys are all close to my age. We've never played anything other than D&D for 20 years now.  Same goes for my other group of 6, with a brief exception for a game by Monte Cook which played remarkably similar to D&D and he was a name we knew from D&D (though that only lasted a couple months, perhaps because we didn't want to keep learning it).

This has nothing to do with age. It's just that learning a new system of rules is not something people want to do with their spare time when they could be playing a game they already know and like.

Millennials are between 24-39 years of age.

I hand pick groups from friends and run them in games I chose. Some were interested because of things like Critical Role, but they didn't particularly care about the system.

Gen Z on the other hand, I have experienced a group asking me to DM for them. When I presented the system I was going to use, they let me know they only wanted to play 5e or nothing. And they got nothing as a result. This group did lean conservative, so I wouldn't put this on politics.

I assume that for organized play I would have to play 5e.

Now what has soured "not 5e" RPGs is most people that suggest something else tend to present storygames like PbtA or FitD or Dungeon World that play nothing like a traditional RPG. I'm not surprised that most people in the hobby aren't willing to try new things if most of the time the new thing is crap.

What about Pathfinder? Is that dead these days?

I'm a Millennial and I started with D&D 3.5 and have barely played 5E at all.

But then again, I'm a self-hating Millennial who completely detests my own generation.

I'm a millennial who hates 5e (boring and same-y), AMA?

I think the actual answer is a combination of these and probably some other factors:

* Lightning in a bottle popularity spike of RPGs/D&D around when 5e was fresh
* Great distribution channels so that you can buy 5e stuff at Barnes and Noble
* "Geek culture" is "cool" and D&D toys are a thing
* Network effect from 5e everywhere/that initial critical mass
* Pushback against vague memory of Satanic Panic ("screw religion I'm playing D&D!")
* Woke marketing
* YouTube
* Sunk costs: "I'll make my next campaign 5e because I learned it already, it's Good Enough, and I'm busy and D&D is something I do not something I'm deeply invested in"

I've floated some alternate systems at largely millennial audiences with some nibbles of interest. We'll see if I have time to execute. I think part of it is packaging Other Stuff up in a digestible, tutorial kind of way. Probably YouTube would help a lot too.

Edit: This didn't address OP as well as I thought it did when I looked back. Being more specific:

Quote from: Alex K;1110158Nope. I think one guy was interested but couldn't actually get to the shop for some reason. Since then I've noticed a pattern on that FB group. Two or three times a week people will post looking for 5e games to join, often they are noobs, sometimes with some experience. They often don't even mention "D&D", but refer only to "5e". Occasionally someone will post looking for people to play a game that isn't 5e and they routinely get zero response.

It's like 5e is a hobby in its own right, quite distinct from roleplaying generally, and there's no crossover at all.

Yeah, I think that's accurate in many cases.

Quote from: Alex K;11101581) Millennials are naturally conformist and its a conformity born from fear.
Speech codes, Twitter kangaroo courts, safe spaces are the norm to people in this age group. They only want to pursue approved methods of interpersonal engagement. The opportunity to encounter something new, and have to make up their own mind about it, scares them.

Ouch. :( Maybe? I think -- I hope -- that this is not that big a factor. I suspect that to the extent that it it's in play, it causes some amount of artificial inflation of interest, and some amount of artificial deflation in interest in certain non-D&D games (e.g. those made by wrongthinkers). I think 5e is just an easily obtained default that is generic enough to do everything and hit just at the right time to get that cultural critical mass going.

Quote from: Alex K;11101582) Millennials are brand-conscious
Younger people define their identity increasingly by what they consume. Brand loyalty is an important facet of how they see themselves and how they identify and relate to each other.

Yeah, definitely.

Quote from: Alex K;11101583) Millenials encounter D&D differently
When I was a kid there was no internet, smartphones or even home computers. People read books for fun. Myself and my schoolfriends got into RPGs because we were interested in mythology, history and fantasy literature. RPGs were a way to engage with those interests in an interactive way. All the people from that local store who I've spoken to got into D&D by watching Critical Role which they uniformly love. They had no pre-existing interest in D&D's cultural influences. They like it because it's played in a web show they enjoy and they want to imitate that. If Matt Mercer played Runequest, that's what they'd want to do.

Yeah, sort of. I think nerds still read books for fun and always will. :D The TV show/YouTube/cast of characters to follow aspect is big. If you're not a capital-G Gamer, people's social natures and interest in other people helps to be a "hook" into interest into the hobby, I think.

Quote from: Alex K;11101584) People purchase games differently now
Again, as a youth I had to go into a physical game shop to buy my RPG stuff. And next to the TSR shelves would be shelves full of other RPGs. And because my interests were in history and mythology, games like Chivalry and Sorcery or Man, Myth and Magic, had a potential appeal. I could physically pick them up and look at them, decide it they were something I wanted to try. If you're searching "D&D Players Handbook" on Amazon you're just not going to get that same exposure to other games.

I think people who are into games because they deeply love games continue to be interested in this way. I think D&D's omnipresence including in brick and mortar regular bookstores helps to keep D&D synonymous with "playing RPGs", so even if you're not actively interested enough in games (or with enough free time) to pursue them for their own sake, D&D 5e is on the periphery of your vision quite a bit if you're looking for an offline, social, fun thing to do once a week with relatively low startup investment. (Groups are readily available, quickstart rules, YouTube videos, whatever thing you feel like doing is supported.)

Put another way, not to trip on any 3rd rails or anything, but I think this is the distinction between "gamer" and "person who casually plays games". Not in a gatekeep-y way, just in a nature-of-interest way.

D&D is the most popular RPG (again) and the latest edition is the most popular edition. That's nothing new.

My entire Old School gaming group -- other than myself -- are millennials .  I think it has more to do with the fact that you're recruiting through your local gaming store than it does the age of the players. It seems to me that a commercial locale for gaming is most likely to attract commercially-minded players, and of course 5e is the most prominent commercial product out there right now.

Word of mouth is what important. Thanks to the internet they are bombarded with a thousand pitches every day on a variety of topics and to deal with it they filter shit a lot.

For example I had zero issues with getting some member of the boy scout troop I was involved with to try out Swords & Wizardry but they knew me and respected my opinions. But I been unable to get traction at one local hobby store because I don't go there enough for the regulars to get comfortable with my ideas. But at yet another hobby stores I was able too because I went there often enough and the game store owner knew what I wrote and was a fan.

It has nothing to do with being a hipster, that stuff exists like it does in every generation. The barrage of information from the internet is the new thing in this era. My advice if you get resistance is to ask is how well do they know you?

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1110193D&D is the most popular RPG (again) and the latest edition is the most popular edition. That's nothing new.

^^Exactly this. Don't overthink it, it's not rocket science. Popularity and availability are why 5e groups are more common. It has nothing to do with age. You can walk into any Target in America and grab a 5e D&D box. When all your friends are playing 5e, then 5e it is.

Also, 5e is a very user-friendly game and the basic rules are totally FREE! Don't overlook the brilliant move Hasbro made by making the basic game 100% free of charge. That strategy alone will get noobs involved in gaming that wouldn't otherwise. Older editions cost money with no guarantees of any gaming returns or even simple participation.

I believe I qualify as a millenial, and I haven't played or run D&D in around a decade or so. I would imagine that it's true most groups around here play exclusively 5e, but I think that's been true of every D&D edition too. As estar said, I think it's primarily the propagation of ideas and suggestions. If you live exclusively in your own little microcosm of RPG play then yeah, that will breed homogeneity. Fortunately I haven't found an issue with playing or running different games for people (though to be fair, these days I *do* pretty much just run one game system; not for lack of players to choose from, more just because I've found my personal "sweet spot").

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1110193D&D is the most popular RPG (again) and the latest edition is the most popular edition. That's nothing new.

Yeah it reminds me of my experience when D&D popularity hit my grade school in 1980-81, and for less than a school year, most/all of the boys in my class were into D&D - meaning blue-book Basic D&D, whose rules most of them had not really read, but they wanted to pretend like they were expects and brag about how high their supposed characters were and the five-button swords and armies of invisible elves they had.

Then that interest was replaced in 90% of them by "doing the hand-bone" and pencil-fighting...

I think now there seems to be a much more widespread interest / understanding in RPGs thanks to the hobby's history, the Internet, and of course computer games, but it seems to me that the people who these days might be starting to get into RPGs for the first time are liable to be overwhelmed enough just by the one current edition of the mainstream in-print game, which is D&D 5e and which costs a lot and involves lots of reading just to digest that.

I do know of some new kids who are into actually reading and digesting other games. E.g. A non-gamer parent recently told me about his young teen who just got (the latest edition of) Pathfinder and was snarfing up the rules. I think there are still people who will find and actually read and play other games as there always have been. What seems different to me is the amount of interest by more casual and new people, their access to information (Internet, Youtube, etc) and games (game stores now have less diverse RPGs on their shelves), and gaming experience including computer games (which do all the math and GMing for people playing them).

I started gaming in the early 80s, and I've noticed a split between types of groups that existed already back then. You had groups that tried lots of systems/genres and groups that were strictly the most current version of D&D only. My group played D&D more than anything else, but we tried all sorts of rpgs and had long running CoC and (later) CP2020 campaigns going on along side our regular D&D game. I thought everyone was like that and was surprised the first time I encountered a D&D only group.

1. Network externalities
2. It's a good game.

If you want to recruit players, from their perspective offering to GM some 5e is a nice safe intro. Once players trust you, most of them will try other games.

Quote from: S'mon;11102291. Network externalities
2. It's a good game.

If you want to recruit players, from their perspective offering to GM some 5e is a nice safe intro. Once players trust you, most of them will try other games.

Yep. Back in the day, we started with Rules Cyclopedia and 2e. Then, to mix things up, we tried Robotech, Shadowrun, Palladium, FASERIP, and some others I'm probably forgetting. D&D is the perfect gateway drug into the larger RPG scene. Officially supported D&D will almost always be up-to-bat first, just due to its ubiquitous nature.

Of course, we ended up going back to D&D because, for whatever reason, it was the most fun for us.

Everyone starts with the most easily available D&D unless they have a compelling reason otherwise--interest in a license or a gaming culture or subculture that steers them into something else. I do wonder how things have changed, though, with the decrease of vectors for awareness of other games (physical game stores, magazines like Dragon) and the growing centralization and commonality being encouraged by Organized Play and the focus of products, marketing, and OP around the 'big campaigns' model WotC's been using for 5E as an evolution of 3E/PF adventure paths.

Twenty years ago it was hard to find any game that wasn't 3.x.  For a while.  A lot of people continued playing 3.x, but people also gradually became more open to other games.  

It's a lot to ask someone to start playing a game that isn't well-supported and they can't really buy-into on their own.  

It's kinda rude to ask the game store to support a game that they can't monetize, either.

I don't think it's fair to make the generalization about millennials. As others have pointed out, a 34 year old who has been playing RPGs for 15 years qualifies as a millennial.

However, I do agree that very, very few of the people who have taken up D&D in recent years have any interest in other RPGs. It's always been the case that many players are happy enough with the current edition of D&D and feel no desire to try other games. But some fraction of the player-base was always curious about other games, whether it was Gamma World, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, or Call of Cthulhu. That fraction, whether it was 10 per cent or 20 per cent of those introduced to the hobby through D&D, kept every other RPG publisher alive.

That is not the case with the newest cohort of D&D players. The 'rising tide lifts all boats' phenomenon I expected to see with the recent boom does not seem to have materialized. Even Pathfinder,  a professionally produced and marketed D&D variant, has not benefited from the D&D boom.

Some reasons:

The brand. The allure of D&D as a brand is more powerful than it has ever been. The references in pop culture that have brought so many to D&D in recent years are references to D&D. Not to tabletop roleplaying. Not to Call of Cthulhu. D&D. I tried to introduce my kids and their friends to Beyond the Wall, but they wouldn't hear of it. D&D was what they heard about on Stranger Things, etc. so D&D is what they wanted to play.

Technological expectations. The main externality in favour of D&D has always been getting a group together. That's still a big factor. But today that are other powerful externalities that younger gamers expect, like digital game aids. If your game doesn't have an online rules database, character generator, and virtual tabletop, it's a non-starter for digital natives.

Social media and youtube. In a world where some rando on Youtube posting D&D monster profiles or ranking spells gets 200k hits in a week, any game competing for prominence and mindspace faces an enormous challenge. Look at how many hits actual play channels of Pathfinder get compared with D&D games of similar quality. It's not 1/4, it's more like 1/20. The network effect, including things like Youtube algorithms, work powerfully against any alternatives to D&D.  

I suspect tabletop RPG publishers are starting to recognize that their hopes of a rising tide lifting all boats will not be fulfilled. At least not beyond the very low volume collector market, which can probably scrape by on kickstarter hype. The biggest loser will probably be Paizo, who were banking on taking a decent chunk of a growing tabletop RPG market, only to find it was only a growing D&D market.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1110235Everyone starts with the most easily available D&D unless they have a compelling reason otherwise--interest in a license or a gaming culture or subculture that steers them into something else. I do wonder how things have changed, though, with the decrease of vectors for awareness of other games (physical game stores, magazines like Dragon) and the growing centralization and commonality being encouraged by Organized Play and the focus of products, marketing, and OP around the 'big campaigns' model WotC's been using for 5E as an evolution of 3E/PF adventure paths.

Heh.  I've met a handful of people that started when it was all hobby and game stores and mail order, that played something other than D&D as teens, by accident.  They heard about D&D.  They wanted to try D&D.  But in the translation to parents of what they wanted, or their own misunderstandings, they ended up with some other game.  And since money was tight, they played that.

Is this even really true? From what I've seen, tabletop of all kinds has been booming the last few years. Look at Kickstarter.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110243Twenty years ago it was hard to find any game that wasn't 3.x.  For a while.  A lot of people continued playing 3.x, but people also gradually became more open to other games.  

It's a lot to ask someone to start playing a game that isn't well-supported and they can't really buy-into on their own.  

It's kinda rude to ask the game store to support a game that they can't monetize, either.

Twenty years ago I had no problem finding Shadowrun and WoD games.

You know a lot of people who play D&D may do it a bit in their highschool/college years and then never touch RPGs again.

5e depends on a constant wave of new players so those getting into the hobby just to see what D&D is about are obviously not going to be into any other system.

Quote from: Haffrung;1110246I suspect tabletop RPG publishers are starting to recognize that their hopes of a rising tide lifting all boats will not be fulfilled. At least not beyond the very low volume collector market, which can probably scrape by on kickstarter hype. The biggest loser will probably be Paizo, who were banking on taking a decent chunk of a growing tabletop RPG market, only to find it was only a growing D&D market.

Sounds plausible.
I do wonder why so few publishers are doing 3rd party D&D stuff now, considering the 3e OGL glut. Some books like Kobold Press Tome of Beasts surely sell far more than any non-D&D product is likely to.

Quote from: S'mon;1110299Sounds plausible.
I do wonder why so few publishers are doing 3rd party D&D stuff now, considering the 3e OGL glut. Some books like Kobold Press Tome of Beasts surely sell far more than any non-D&D product is likely to.

There are a lot of independent/small works coming out on PDF, but certainly not a lot of hard copy books like in the 3e days.

Quote from: Kael;1110215Also, 5e is a very user-friendly game and the basic rules are totally FREE! Don't overlook the brilliant move Hasbro made by making the basic game 100% free of charge. That strategy alone will get noobs involved in gaming that wouldn't otherwise. Older editions cost money with no guarantees of any gaming returns or even simple participation.

Wow giving your rules out for free (http://www.d20srd.org/).  So new, so brilliant, so hard to get older editions.

Nope.

From what I read usually people born between 1980 and 2000 are considered millenials, though sometimes it's 1985 - 2000. So either 19-39 year-olds, or 19-34 year-olds. That's a pretty wide range.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110255Is this even really true? From what I've seen, tabletop of all kinds has been booming the last few years. Look at Kickstarter.

Boardgames are booming; not non-D&D RPGs I'd say. Very noticeable at my FLGS Orc's Nest - space is at such a premium that it's easy to track game & genre popularity by what goes where. Most RPGs are now vanished to upper floor with the historical miniatures gaming, while eurogames dominate the non-D&D premium shelves.

I've had an easy time finding a variety of games online... but face-to-face, locally, D&D is just about the only game going. People might mention an interest in some other game, in addition to 5e... but then end up just running 5e.
Another thing I've noticed, on our local Facebook group, is a number of people who talk about their games as if they're proposing a business venture. There are several that are trying to film their games and get them up online. So their choice of game is all about attracting the widest audience.
No clue if this is limited to any age group though.

Quote from: Shasarak;1110309Wow giving your rules out for free (http://www.d20srd.org/).  So new, so brilliant, so hard to get older editions.

Nope.

Yep.

I never said it was new or that older editions are hard to get, so...

I did say that older editions aren't free (which is true, SRDs are not complete games) and there is no SRD for anything TSR-era, so my point stands about older editions costing money with no guarantee of player participation, unlike 5E, which is totally free and can be guaranteed to easily find a game somewhere IRL or online.

And yes, it is brilliant. SRDs are not free basic rules that can be downloaded as a professional PDF and printed out, if desired. 5E's free basic rules make the old 3E and 4E SRD's look clunky and amateurish by comparison. Those aren't gonna get anybody "new to RPGs" or even "new to D&D" excited.

Speaking for myself, I completely skipped 3E and 4E because the SRD's made zero sense to me and the hardbacks were dense with arcane rules and, more importantly, prohibitively expensive. The 5E basic rules? Clean, concise, and professional-quality. 5E free basic rules got me back into gaming after a long, multi-decade layoff and then stoked my curiosity to purchase the B/X and OD&D official PDF's. I don't spend a dime without those easy to read and download 5E basic rules. The 5E SRD likewise would not have done the trick either.

Wait. D&D 3.0 was 20 years ago ?!?

Holy shit, yes! I just had a "feeling old" moment.

Anyway, on topic, whoever posted upthread about 5e being the most current version of the most popular game probably has it. As much hell as I like to give Millennials, I don't think this is a generation thing. I knew guys who were like this with AD&D 2e. Literally wouldn't even discuss playing anything else. It's what they liked, played and by God would keep playing come hell or high water!

Quote from: Kael;1110215^^Exactly this. Don't overthink it, it's not rocket science. Popularity and availability are why 5e groups are more common. It has nothing to do with age. You can walk into any Target in America and grab a 5e D&D box. When all your friends are playing 5e, then 5e it is.

Also, 5e is a very user-friendly game and the basic rules are totally FREE! Don't overlook the brilliant move Hasbro made by making the basic game 100% free of charge. That strategy alone will get noobs involved in gaming that wouldn't otherwise. Older editions cost money with no guarantees of any gaming returns or even simple participation.

I recently saw the 5E Starter Set on the shelf at a nearby Walmart for $20.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110243Twenty years ago it was hard to find any game that wasn't 3.x.  For a while.  A lot of people continued playing 3.x, but people also gradually became more open to other games.  

It's a lot to ask someone to start playing a game that isn't well-supported and they can't really buy-into on their own.  

It's kinda rude to ask the game store to support a game that they can't monetize, either.

20 years ago, DnD 3.x didn't exist. It is 2019, remember?

Quote from: Kael;1110215^^Exactly this. Don't overthink it, it's not rocket science. Popularity and availability are why 5e groups are more common. It has nothing to do with age. You can walk into any Target in America and grab a 5e D&D box. When all your friends are playing 5e, then 5e it is.

You are right. It is the same reason why McDonald's fast food is considered a popular dining experience.....

Quote from: Kael;1110331Yep.

I never said it was new or that older editions are hard to get, so...

I did say that older editions aren't free (which is true, SRDs are not complete games) and there is no SRD for anything TSR-era, so my point stands about older editions costing money with no guarantee of player participation, unlike 5E, which is totally free and can be guaranteed to easily find a game somewhere IRL or online.

And yes, it is brilliant. SRDs are not free basic rules that can be downloaded as a professional PDF and printed out, if desired. 5E's free basic rules make the old 3E and 4E SRD's look clunky and amateurish by comparison. Those aren't gonna get anybody "new to RPGs" or even "new to D&D" excited.

Speaking for myself, I completely skipped 3E and 4E because the SRD's made zero sense to me and the hardbacks were dense with arcane rules and, more importantly, prohibitively expensive. The 5E basic rules? Clean, concise, and professional-quality. 5E free basic rules got me back into gaming after a long, multi-decade layoff and then stoked my curiosity to purchase the B/X and OD&D official PDF's. I don't spend a dime without those easy to read and download 5E basic rules. The 5E SRD likewise would not have done the trick either.

RPGs are prohibitively expensive?  Really $20 is prohibitive?  How much do you pay to print out those "free" rules of yours so that you can walk around with a bunch of loose leaf paper.

because they once smelled a grognard.

~~
JUST KIDDING
;)

Quote from: jeff37923;1110349You are right. It is the same reason why McDonald's fast food is considered a popular dining experience.....

McDonald's sucks but fast food is a disposable investment/experience so who cares. You can always go somewhere else next time, with no social repercussions. Gaming (and RPGs in particular) necessitate a minimum time buy-in and unless you only play one-shots with strangers, are not disposable. An ongoing RPG campaign is more like choosing *not to eat fast food everyday* rather than eating at McDonald's on occasion.

And hey, isn't there a Wendy's RPG out there somewhere?? What's up with RPGs and fast food lately??? LOL... :D

Quote from: Shasarak;1110352RPGs are prohibitively expensive?  Really $20 is prohibitive?  How much do you pay to print out those "free" rules of yours so that you can walk around with a bunch of loose leaf paper.

How much did the 3e and 4e core books cost when they came out? Printing is optional and costs almost nothing. I wanted to like those 3e and 4e books, but the pricing was insane and the SRDs made my eyes glaze over in frustration.

5E fixed both of those issues for me. Readable and understandable PDFs, gratis.

Quote from: jeff37923;111034820 years ago, DnD 3.x didn't exist. It is 2019, remember?

Thank you Mr. Literal.  

3rd edition was released in August of 2000.  That was 19 years 2 months ago.  The true 'boom' was more around 2001.  

In any case, any normal person would accept that ~20 years ago (ie, it is more than 15 but less than 24) would round to 20.  Even my 3rd grader knows that.

Quote from: Kael;1110359How much did the 3e and 4e core books cost when they came out? Printing is optional and costs almost nothing.

The 3.0 PHB/DMG/MM each cost $19.95 list price.  

The 3.5 PHB/DMG/MM each cost $29.95 list price and were published 3 years later.  

Adjusted for inflation in today's dollars, the 3.0 books would be $29.81 per an online inflation calculator.  The 3.5 books would cost $41.85.  

The 5th edition PHB list price is $49.95.

Quote from: S'mon;1110299Sounds plausible.
I do wonder why so few publishers are doing 3rd party D&D stuff now, considering the 3e OGL glut. Some books like Kobold Press Tome of Beasts surely sell far more than any non-D&D product is likely to.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1110301There are a lot of independent/small works coming out on PDF, but certainly not a lot of hard copy books like in the 3e days.

It is puzzling that even a small bite of the D&D pie hasn't enticed more publishers to release hardcopy D&D adventures and setting guides. It's not as though WotC is flooding the market with content.

Maybe some of those network externalities are having an impact on not just D&D as a system, but on WotC adventures. People only want to play the same official WotC campaigns they watch on streams and actual plays and read about on forums?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110368Adjusted for inflation in today's dollars, the 3.0 books would be $29.81 per an online inflation calculator.  The 3.5 books would cost $41.85.  

The 5th edition PHB list price is $49.95.

Yeah, $90 - $120 in today's prices wasn't going to happen for a poor college student like myself. If 5e's free rules had been around then, I probably wouldn't have quit RPGs and I'd guess that finding a group would have been easier. That's just conjecture though, I was super busy at the time.

I haven't and will never buy the 5e hardbacks. No reason to. $150 is still too rich for my blood for something that's free. The starter sets are much better values, IMO.

Quote from: Kael;1110377Yeah, $90 - $120 in today's prices wasn't going to happen for a poor college student like myself. If 5e's free rules had been around then, I probably wouldn't have quit RPGs and I'd guess that finding a group would have been easier. That's just conjecture though, I was super busy at the time.

I haven't and will never buy the 5e hardbacks. No reason to. $150 is still too rich for my blood for something that's free. The starter sets are much better values, IMO.

It would probably put a sizable dent in 5E's popularity if you couldn't pick up the books for around half price on Amazon.  I'm not sure I'd have tried it $50 each.  At the very least, I'd have been much slower to adopt.

Quote from: Kael;1110377Yeah, $90 - $120 in today's prices wasn't going to happen for a poor college student like myself. If 5e's free rules had been around then, I probably wouldn't have quit RPGs and I'd guess that finding a group would have been easier. That's just conjecture though, I was super busy at the time.

I haven't and will never buy the 5e hardbacks. No reason to. $150 is still too rich for my blood for something that's free. The starter sets are much better values, IMO.

Only if you want to play the first 5 levels and stop.  Which is a cool way to play; but not the only way.

I'd prefer they offer about 10 levels of character progression, and 4 or 5 classes; but I can get that with White Box FMAG, in a $5 soft cover edition.

I'm 34 years old and my system of choice has always been Palladium, from Heroes Unlimited to Rifts. Most of my generation is fixated with 5E due to celebrities coming out of the woodwork saying they have been longtime D&D nerds, and thus it is now cool to play D&D. Shows such as Critical Role have also helped to popularize the game, making it sexier than 5 unnattractive fat/skinny dudes sitting in a dank basement eating doritos and playing the game (not that there's anything wrong with that). As others have mentioned, 5E is also the most accessible and least offensive version of D&D, also contributing to it's widespread appeal. Millennials disdain other systems because it's harder to, and I'm making this term up as I go along, gamer signal to others than if they had just said "I play D&D" to instantly collect their coolness cred.

Basically, my generation is full of sycophantic sheep.

Quote from: Razor 007;1110385Only if you want to play the first 5 levels and stop.

Combining the free rules with the starter set is what I ended up doing the first time I DM'd 5E. Worked great. No level limitations. $15 all-in. Lost Mines is solid, but I could have saved the $15 and just made up an adventure myself, but I was being lazy and I needed some practice.

5e is not written for hardcore gamers, it's written at a very low level for maximum public accessibility and saturation, which is the main reason I could never get into it. The only thing of any use I found in it were the descriptions of alignment which are useful for running low intelligence NPCs.

Quote from: Kael...Speaking for myself, I completely skipped 3E and 4E because the SRD's made zero sense to me and the hardbacks were dense with arcane rules and, more importantly, prohibitively expensive....

Niche hobbies and entertainments tend to go bad once they become popular. When AD&D became a fad, large numbers of outsiders swarmed in and Gary and company turned their backs on us hardcore gamers and focused on the masses because they thought they were going to get rich, which is how we got abominations like UA and Angry Mothers From Heck (https://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?articleid=13032).

Doctor Who used to be just for us nerds. I remember when it first came to the USA in 1978, the grad students from England (physicists, chemists, mathematicians mostly) got really excited when they saw me watching it since they didn't know it was available here. But when the new Doctor Who came out and the outsiders came swarming in to watch it, it was only a matter of time before it was trashed and turned into an ideological platform.

I can't see a popular form of D&D going anywhere good.

Arcane texts, lack of bright colors and paint-by-numbers rules, and prohibitive costs (whether measured in time or money) are useful barriers to gate-keep against those who are just following the latest trend.

Quote from: deadDMwalking...In any case, any normal person would accept that ~20 years ago (ie, it is more than 15 but less than 24) would round to 20. Even my 3rd grader knows that.

Nerds aren't normal people. I always use the atomic mass of hydrogen rounded to 6 significant digits even if I don't have to.

Quote from: KaelYeah, $90 - $120 in today's prices wasn't going to happen for a poor college student like myself...

When I was 11 I had no problem shelling out that kind of money. I had a treasure trove of cash (~$200) which I hoarded specifically for AD&D.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110363Thank you Mr. Literal.  

3rd edition was released in August of 2000.  That was 19 years 2 months ago.  The true 'boom' was more around 2001.  

In any case, any normal person would accept that ~20 years ago (ie, it is more than 15 but less than 24) would round to 20.  Even my 3rd grader knows that.

Normal people understand how 34% is a majority and that the Australian Space Academy isn't part of the Australian Space Agency......

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1110193D&D is the most popular RPG (again) and the latest edition is the most popular edition. That's nothing new.

Quote from: S'mon;11102291. Network externalities
2. It's a good game.

If you want to recruit players, from their perspective offering to GM some 5e is a nice safe intro. Once players trust you, most of them will try other games.

These. It's the gateway drug RPG. D&D always has been, due to cultural cache from the '70s fad boom to now and namebrand recognition over generations.

(You always want to lead with the biggest name to get the most people inside the circus... Then you can subdivide with side attractions. Once they enter the trap you can spring Kult on them soon after. :D)

I agree 100% with the idea that it has name brand recognition, and is a "safe" intro.  It also has FAR more successful video game, movie, and book crossovers likely to draw folks in than other systems.

I will also say it's hard to get a relatively large number of people together on a fairly regular, dedicated schedule.  So when trying to set something like that up, it makes sense to cast the largest net possible.  If you go with something esoteric, it's exponentially harder to have everyone committed than the "big name".  It's like asking why Call of Duty or Battlefield are popular.  They're popular, so they have a large playerbase, which means quickly matching up with decently balanced opponents, and that in and of itself is attractive and makes them more popular.  It sounds inane to say "they're popular because they're popular", but large playerbases are a real draw, and as such popularity feeds upon itself and results in the big names growing in popularity well out of proportion to any advantages it may have in quality or design which resulted in the popularity in the first place, if that makes any sense.  Hopefully it does.

Quote from: Egyptoid;1110353because they once smelled a grognard.

~~
JUST KIDDING
;)

I smell of bourbon and Irish Spring!

Maybe I'm kidding, maybe not.....

Quote from: Alex K;1110158If you're searching "D&D Players Handbook" on Amazon you're just not going to get that same exposure to other games.

The Player's Handbook is for sale at Target (at a discount). I think that answers a lot of your question.

Quote from: Kael;1110357McDonald's sucks but fast food is a disposable investment/experience so who cares. You can always go somewhere else next time, with no social repercussions. Gaming (and RPGs in particular) necessitate a minimum time buy-in and unless you only play one-shots with strangers, are not disposable. An ongoing RPG campaign is more like choosing *not to eat fast food everyday* rather than eating at McDonald's on occasion.

And hey, isn't there a Wendy's RPG out there somewhere?? What's up with RPGs and fast food lately??? LOL... :D

So the McDonald's analogy fits more with convention games and Organized Play. I can agree to that.

DnD is commonly known. So commonly known that often people do not even realize that there are any other RPGs out there. It is the biggest and baddest of the RPG scene - and I would say that may also be one of its problems. I bought the Essentials Kit and much of the writing is just plain bad, like the staff decided that since they are already on top that they do not have to even try anymore. Thing is that with a lot of the newer players, since they do not have a lot of experience with RPGs in general or even a variety of different RPGs in particular, they do not even know that they are not getting their money's worth with writing that poor.

As far as the Wendy's RPG, it is more entertaining than a "re-imagining" of an older AD&D module. People hate on it because it is original and funny to read (I haven't got a chance to play it yet).

Quote from: Mistwell;1110433The Player's Handbook is for sale at Target (at a discount). I think that answers a lot of your question.

Yes. Yes it does. (https://www.target.com/c/clearance/-/N-5q0ga?Nao=0)

Quote from: jeff37923;1110409Normal people understand how 34% is a majority.

Dude, they really, REALLY don't. In no sense are you anywhere close to accurate on this. Not even kinda. This is an island of just you. Pretty sure almost everyone (you might say an overwhelming majority, even) comprehend that majority means more than 50%. It's a concept taught in math and civics and history and the sciences. You're going to be hard pressed to find any field which uses it the way you're trying to use it.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110435Yes. Yes it does. (https://www.target.com/c/clearance/-/N-5q0ga?Nao=0)

Not sure why you linked to that particular page as it is not on the clearance page. Unless that page is tied to your location, in which case it's not on clearance in Los Angeles. It's $42.49 here (https://www.target.com/p/dungeons-38-dragons-player-39-s-handbook-core-rulebook-d-38-d-roleplaying-game-hardcover/-/A-16165625).

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1110408I can't see a popular form of D&D going anywhere good.

Huh? 1E? RC? 2E? Holmes? B/X? Redbox? All popular. All great. All influential and the most popular of all (Basic Redbox) is still used as the basis for most OSR games 35+ years later.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1110408Arcane texts, lack of bright colors and paint-by-numbers rules, and prohibitive costs (whether measured in time or money) are useful barriers to gate-keep against those who are just following the latest trend.

Yes, we need less people in the hobby, not more. /s

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1110408Nerds aren't normal people. I always use the atomic mass of hydrogen rounded to 6 significant digits even if I don't have to.

It's 2019. Nerds are the new normal.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1110408When I was 11 I had no problem shelling out that kind of money. I had a treasure trove of cash (~$200) which I hoarded specifically for AD&D.

When I was eleven I bought a Sony color TV, a Super Nintendo, the 2E core books (later in middle school along with M:TG cards), Rules Cyclopedia, Ravenloft, Robotech, Palladium Fanstasy, Faserip, Battletech, and dice. I also bought comic books, Marvel cards, sports cards, Wizard magazine, toys, ninja shit, army shit, Rambo shit, and all the other things nerdy kids buy with their money in the late 80's/early 90's...

In college, (2000-2006, grad school FTW) the WOTC offerings were garbage and not worth my scholarship money.

Quote from: Mistwell;1110440Dude, they really, REALLY don't. In no sense are you anywhere close to accurate on this. Not even kinda. This is an island of just you. Pretty sure almost everyone (you might say an overwhelming majority, even) comprehend that majority means more than 50%. It's a concept taught in math and civics and history and the sciences. You're going to be hard pressed to find any field which uses it the way you're trying to use it.

I see you conspicuously did not mention the business world. It amuses me greatly that most people understood me while the same nattering nabobs of negativity insist that they do not understand.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110450I see you conspicuously did not mention the business world. It amuses me greatly that most people understood me while the same nattering nabobs of negativity insist that they do not understand.

You...realize my entire career is running a small business, right? And I am a corporate attorney. Who writes contracts. About stocks, and the board, and voting rights. Which includes clauses like "majority". Which always - ALWAYS - mean more than 50%.

I think you got "plurality" confused with "majority" and decided to dig in rather than admit it, even though you realized that mistake a while ago.

It's weird.

The textbook business school (Harvard, etc.) definition of a majority shareholder is any single entity (including conglomerates, equity firms, investment groups, etc.) that owns 50.1% of outstanding stocks. Anything less than that is a minority shareholder.

A controller (or controlling interest) may be a minority shareholder if they own golden stocks (stocks with elevated voting rights) or have the cooperation of other minority shareholders to achieve a majority. This is considered hostile behavior (legally speaking of course) and the legality of such behavior varies by state.

But by any legal definition, a majority shareholder owns at least 50% of outstanding stocks plus one.

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/04/26/controlling-shareholder-transactions/

"Key Principles Relating to Controller Status
The general principles that have been established by the Delaware courts relating to control are as follows:

A majority stockholder generally is a controller. A more than 50% stockholder almost always will be deemed to be a controller--absent circumstances, such as contractual or other restrictions on the voting of its shares, which indicate that the stockholder does not have the ability to appoint, elect or remove a majority of directors or to block or bring about action by the board. Of course, as discussed, a controller may seek to "disable" its control with respect to any given transaction (for example, by being separated from the board's consideration of the transaction and agreeing to fully support any alternative transaction approved by the board or subjecting the transaction to a fully informed and uncoerced vote of the unaffiliated stockholders).

A minority stockholder generally is not a controller. There has been a high bar to establishing that a less-than-50% stockholder is a controller. The most critical part of the inquiry is whether the person (or group) has "actual control" over the board (rather than solely operational or managerial control). In other words, whether through equity ownership, contract or other rights, personality or status (for example, as a founder), and/or as a practical matter for any reason, can the person appoint, elect or remove a majority of the directors, block or bring about action by the board, or have a dominating influence over the board's decision-making? Generally, to be deemed a controller with respect to a given board decision, (a) the person must have, directly or indirectly, actually exercised control with respect to the specific decision (i.e., the person dominated the directors in the board room) or (b) the person must generally exercise control over a majority of the board (i.e., the person's control "looms over" the board)."

Quote from: Alex K;1110158Why are millennial players ONLY interested in 5e?

I don't know, why are boomers assholes who want to bitch about every other generation, when theirs is complete trash?

Do you see what I did there?

Quote from: GnomeWorks;1110457I don't know, why are boomers assholes who want to bitch about every other generation, when theirs is complete trash?

Do you see what I did there?

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooh.... I see what you did there! It's also mostly true. Those crotchety old fucks needs to settle the fuck down.

In related news...

I'm having a SHIT time recruiting for any game. I have no idea how I'm going to make this shit happen but I'm not giving up. Probably move back to HERO so I can test out my first offering. Maybe I'll entice people with free books, swag or donuts. I thought it was system, but not getting any interest in SWADE either. Maybe because I'm running on SAT? I have a M-F 11 - 9pm job. I can't run on weekdays. Why can't these fucking kids just do what I tell them to?!?!!!!??!

Quote from: Razor 007;1110385Only if you want to play the first 5 levels and stop.  Which is a cool way to play; but not the only way.

5-6 levels from SS/EK then print and staple the Basic Rules is a good way to go IMO - you get a nice complete 1-20 game which can be expanded with hardbacks etc if funds allow, and is even fully compatible with the WoTC campaign adventures.

I printed and bound a copy of the 180 page 5e Basic Rules pdf and it is a great game in its own right, with a bit of a neo-OSR feel.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;11104085e is not written for hardcore gamers, it's written at a very low level for maximum public accessibility and saturation, which is the main reason I could never get into it.

Well I think anyone who knows me would say I'm a hardcore gamer; not all hardcore gamers like maximum rules crunch. Heck most of us played 1e AD&D back in the day ignoring half the 'rules'.

It's not new. Back in the TSR days, there were the "we only play AD&D" people and the "hey, what are we playing this week?" people. For every 5 gamers, I assume 1 will play something not-D&D.

And that's fine because that 1 player is almost always the best of the 5 and who you'd want at your table.

D&D is a hobby onto itself. Other RPGs can be considered a sub-hobby or hobby-adjacent.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110434I bought the Essentials Kit and much of the writing is just plain bad, like the staff decided that since they are already on top that they do not have to even try anymore. Thing is that with a lot of the newer players, since they do not have a lot of experience with RPGs in general or even a variety of different RPGs in particular, they do not even know that they are not getting their money's worth with writing that poor.

I think they're getting their $20 worth. I'd say 5e writing (including EK) is generally plain dull, rather than 'bad' per se. The adventures also tend to be dull in presentation. This drives me to go buy Venger Satanis madness just to feel alive. :D

Quote from: S'mon;1110474This drives me to go buy Venger Satanis madness just to feel alive. :D

Venger's new setting Cha'alt (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41269-John-Vs-Cha%92alt-by-WarpScream) is very cool.

Quote from: Mistwell;1110451You...realize my entire career is running a small business, right? And I am a corporate attorney. Who writes contracts. About stocks, and the board, and voting rights. Which includes clauses like "majority". Which always - ALWAYS - mean more than 50%.

I didn't know that you were until you just told us.

This explains why you are so butthurt over my colloquial use of the word.

Quote from: Mistwell;1110451I think you got "plurality" confused with "majority" and decided to dig in rather than admit it, even though you realized that mistake a while ago.

Maybe, but I'm not a lawyer. Most of the people reading this are not lawyers and I wanted to communicate to that MAJORITY of people. So I used language that would be understood by people who were not "corporate attorneys".

Quote from: Mistwell;1110451It's weird.

No, it is hysterical! You are losing your shit over a word that has a specific definition in your profession! I'm very amused! :D

Quote from: S'mon;1110474I think they're getting their $20 worth. I'd say 5e writing (including EK) is generally plain dull, rather than 'bad' per se. The adventures also tend to be dull in presentation. This drives me to go buy Venger Satanis madness just to feel alive. :D

The rulebook is pretty good, it is the adventures that poorly written IMHO. If they just kept that rulebook and added on a selection of monsters for those levels, a section on treasure/magic items, and a quick how-to on adventure creation it would rival B/X D&D.

5E is the easiest edition to find and run and play at the moment. Given how the younger generation is more used to using the Internet and Social media when doing their research.  While too many of the older players and DMs in the hobby at least from what I can see are VERY unwelcoming and just can't help drawing lines in the sand, and engaging in edition warring and coming of as uncompromising Grognards who hate change. Well it's not too hard to see why they play 5E imo. If it's not calling out the younger generations dislike for older editions "what's wrong buttercup can't handle Thaco" to those like Pundit shitting on players running any non-standard core race. To complaining about using tablets and apps at the gaming table. To just being very unwelcoming of the younger generation. Not all yet way too many who forget they uses to be in the place of the millennials entering the hobby. Players and DMs must play and run their way and only their way or it's the shits.

No surprise why they prefer 5E.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110450I see you conspicuously did not mention the business world. It amuses me greatly that most people understood me while the same nattering nabobs of negativity insist that they do not understand.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110477I didn't know that you were until you just told us.

This explains why you are so butthurt over my colloquial use of the word.



Maybe, but I'm not a lawyer. Most of the people reading this are not lawyers and I wanted to communicate to that MAJORITY of people. So I used language that would be understood by people who were not "corporate attorneys".



No, it is hysterical! You are losing your shit over a word that has a specific definition in your profession! I'm very amused! :D

No, "Most People", some might even say the MAJORITY, REALLY did not understand you.  Note the replies you got.

Quote from: jhkim;1110019This is a tangent - but can you unpack your answer here, jeff37923? Offhand, I would say that less than 50% is a minority share. What defines a minority vs a majority share to you?

Quote from: jhkim;1110046I would call 51% or more a majority, and 49% and less a minority. There might be some other terms for this, but I don't think my nomenclature is crazy or anything.

Quote from: Mistwell;1110095Um, no? Because, by definition, another voting block exceeds 50% or else sufficient numbers are voting with you to exceed 50%. There is no scenario where your statement can be correct, unless a meaningful block is not voting at all.

And rest assured they spoke for others.  I also had absolutely no clue what you were prattering on about or what you thought you were demonstrating with your posts, which were objectively wrong.  You clearly got plurality confused with majority, which is fine, but my god, you have kept digging relentlessly since finding yourself in that hole.  Note that literally NO ONE had your back or said 'oh yeah my conception of a majority is the same'.  

Sorry but the "appealing to the imagined majority", taking the presumption that your viewpoint is the majority one as a means of bolstering its supposed merit, especially when you have no evidence to support such a position, is one of my biggest pet peeves.  Combine that with the fact that you were so wildly and demonstrably wrong in this, and I was a little irked.  I don't mean to offend, but dude, you should have quit while you were ahead, or way less behind than you are now.

Quote from: sureshot;11104865E is the easiest edition to find and run and play at the moment. Given how the younger generation is more used to using the Internet and Social media when doing their research.  While too many of the older players and DMs in the hobby at least from what I can see are VERY unwelcoming and just can't help drawing lines in the sand, and engaging in edition warring and coming of as uncompromising Grognards who hate change. Well it's not too hard to see why they play 5E imo. If it's not calling out the younger generations dislike for older editions "what's wrong buttercup can't handle Thaco" to those like Pundit shitting on players running any non-standard core race. To complaining about using tablets and apps at the gaming table. To just being very unwelcoming of the younger generation. Not all yet way too many who forget they uses to be in the place of the millennials entering the hobby. Players and DMs must play and run their way and only their way or it's the shits.

No surprise why they prefer 5E.

I think it has much more to do with people their own age always trying to get people to play PbtA or some other shit.

By the time they get to you, they are real tired of trying not D&D games.

@Octopodes: does this even matter? The topic is about 5e.

As for myself, I'm a millennial and 5e fan. I'm also into other games, but I prefer 5e because it's so lightweight it makes it easy to just take what I like from those other games and add it into 5e.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110539@Octopodes: does this even matter? The topic is about 5e.

As for myself, I'm a millennial and 5e fan. I'm also into other games, but I prefer 5e because it's so lightweight it makes it easy to just take what I like from those other games and add it into 5e.

No, it doesn't.  My bad.  I'm also theoretically a millennial albeit barely, and I'm also definitely not "ONLY" interested in 5e, but I took the question as 'for those millennials who ARE only into 5e, why would that be the case', as such an overgeneralization has to be hyperbolic in intent.  I highly doubt anyone who is on these boards as compared to the WOTC boards (or more likely, no boards at all) is within the scope of the people the OP is discussing.  That being said, what in your mind makes it easier to import to 5e vs say World of Darkness or some other system?  Even if another system has a given setup for something, it's generally not difficult to rip the system out wholesale and replace it with something else, the only real trouble is when you try to merge disparate systems in my experience.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1110421These. It's the gateway drug RPG. D&D always has been, due to cultural cache from the '70s fad boom to now and namebrand recognition over generations.

(You always want to lead with the biggest name to get the most people inside the circus... Then you can subdivide with side attractions. Once they enter the trap you can spring Kult on them soon after. :D)

I don't think anyone is disputing that D&D has always been by far the most popular RPG, and the gateway to other games. But some of us are suggesting that this latest boom has not seen D&D act as a gateway to other games. That the new players are pretty much all sticking with D&D exclusively.

I have no way to back up the numbers, but my sense is that while in the 90s or 2000s maybe 20-25 per cent of groups who played D&D would branch out at some point and try other games, that number is much smaller today. That the 5E era has seen D&D not only massively grow the tabletop RPG pie, but take an even bigger portion of that pie than it has traditionally. Other publishers and games do not seem to be enjoying the kind of uptick in participation you would expect during an RPG boom.

I *STILL* have not played or even read 5e yet. But I am hoping SHARK will find a way to publish material for it so I can find an excuse.

Quote from: Haffrung;1110546I don't think anyone is disputing that D&D has always been by far the most popular RPG, and the gateway to other games. But some of us are suggesting that this latest boom has not seen D&D act as a gateway to other games. That the new players are pretty much all sticking with D&D exclusively.

I have no way to back up the numbers, but my sense is that while in the 90s or 2000s maybe 20-25 per cent of groups who played D&D would branch out at some point and try other games, that number is much smaller today. That the 5E era has seen D&D not only massively grow the tabletop RPG pie, but take an even bigger portion of that pie than it has traditionally. Other publishers and games do not seem to be enjoying the kind of uptick in participation you would expect during an RPG boom.

1) That's pure speculation, anecdotal at best, and may be wildly incorrect.  Certainly that has not been my personal experience.

2) Even if it were the case, that would not necessarily mean smaller numbers going to other systems.  Let me give you a VERY theoretical example.  It may well be that whereas before say 5% of people (being very generous here) tried D&D, but they were the most hardcore of nerds and would have interest in Any system, so a solid 2.5% of people went on to other systems.  Let's say now 10% of people (again just roll with it) try D&D, but a lot of the other 5% of people picked up are far more casual in their interests and are only trying D&D because it's (relatively) cool, and they want to know what the fuss is about.  As other systems don't carry the same Geek Chic factor, they have no real interest, so of the additional 5% picking up games, only .5% are trying other systems.  That would mean 3% of people are trying other systems, a far lower percentage of those playing D&D (3/10 instead of 5/10), but the overall percentage of those playing other systems has still increased.

Again just speculation, wild speculation all around.  But it does bare clarification as to the intent of the question.  Is it "Why are so many folks interested in D&D compared to other systems", which is what I took it as and answered originally, or "Why are so few folks interested in other systems compared to ye olden days", which is a deceptively similar but entirely different question, and one with which I'd have to disagree with the premise.  I Don't think, for example, we've seen an overall decline in interest in non-D&D systems, and especially with the internet and the tools it provides, I think it's FAR easier to assemble a group for a non-D&D system than it was say 20-30 years ago.

Quote from: Haffrung;1110546I have no way to back up the numbers, but my sense is that while in the 90s or 2000s maybe 20-25 per cent of groups who played D&D would branch out at some point and try other games, that number is much smaller today. That the 5E era has seen D&D not only massively grow the tabletop RPG pie, but take an even bigger portion of that pie than it has traditionally. Other publishers and games do not seem to be enjoying the kind of uptick in participation you would expect during an RPG boom.

I don't have a link, and am going off of a faded memory ... but if I remember correctly, there is a quote from Steve Jackson during the height of GURPS popularity to the effect that the non-D&D games were quite ecstatic when they collectively got interest from 1/10th of the D&D market.  It's also a lagging indicator, and probably even more difficult to estimate today, due to the sheer number of other games out there.  

That is, it's more difficult for a heretofore D&D-only player that thinks they might want to try something else to determine which game they might want to try.  It's not as if they can go to a message board, say what their issues are with D&D, and ask for a good recommendation.   Of the answers they get, only a tiny slice will answer the question at all, and at least half of those will be someone recommending their favorite system instead of one that fits the stated needs. :)

Quote from: Giant Octopodes;1110545No, it doesn't.  My bad.  I'm also theoretically a millennial albeit barely, and I'm also definitely not "ONLY" interested in 5e, but I took the question as 'for those millennials who ARE only into 5e, why would that be the case', as such an overgeneralization has to be hyperbolic in intent.  I highly doubt anyone who is on these boards as compared to the WOTC boards (or more likely, no boards at all) is within the scope of the people the OP is discussing.  That being said, what in your mind makes it easier to import to 5e vs say World of Darkness or some other system?  Even if another system has a given setup for something, it's generally not difficult to rip the system out wholesale and replace it with something else, the only real trouble is when you try to merge disparate systems in my experience.

Millennial is a very broad term that gets thrown around a lot. When people mean 18 - 22 year olds they're really talking about Gen Z, or "zoomers". I'm taking millennial back for my older age group.

As for why 5e, it's the classic case of D&D being what I know already. It's a lot easier to take a few ideas and make them 5e-ified, than to take on an entire new game system. It also helps that D&D has a way bigger audience, so I can just introduce those elements into 5e games instead of having to ditch the community.

I think 5e really encourages this with its modularity, since it's not so rigidly made, as compared to 3.5 or 4e.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1110548I *STILL* have not played or even read 5e yet. But I am hoping SHARK will find a way to publish material for it so I can find an excuse.

There is no reason to.

Are you looking for 4E D&D with a ton of mechanics removed and lathered in nostalgic themes? No? Then it's rather useless.

5e has thematic strength, a robust level 1-4 experience, and good marketing.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1110558There is no reason to.

Are you looking for 4E D&D with a ton of mechanics removed and lathered in nostalgic themes? No? Then it's rather useless.

5e has thematic strength, a robust level 1-4 experience, and good marketing.

That's more-or-less the impression I got from reading about others experiences with it. I'm also not sure I'm even a fan of Advantage/Disadvantage which a lot of people seem to like and port to other D20 systems, but I'll reserve judgement until I have occasion to use it myself.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1110559That's more-or-less the impression I got from reading about others experiences with it. I'm also not sure I'm even a fan of Advantage/Disadvantage which a lot of people seem to like and port to other D20 systems, but I'll reserve judgement until I have occasion to use it myself.

I think it's worth giving it a chance. What I normally see it described as is a streamlined, simpler 2e. And you'll have a lot of people to play with.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110573I think it's worth giving it a chance. What I normally see it described as is a streamlined, simpler 2e. And you'll have a lot of people to play with.

Oh sure, I wouldn't turn my nose up at giving it a shot. I mainly haven't picked it up yet because my current groups are happy with what we've got already and they're largely uninterested in D&D in general (some are the "been there, done that" types and a few are the "eh, but we could just do X for heroic fantasy instead" types). :) That's not to say I wouldn't be interested in giving it a try with others at some point though, or running it for my wife's nieces and nephews for instance.

Streamlined 2e sounds nice. Though I did like many of 2e's wonkiness quotients and odd little lumps and scars.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1110559That's more-or-less the impression I got from reading about others experiences with it. I'm also not sure I'm even a fan of Advantage/Disadvantage which a lot of people seem to like and port to other D20 systems, but I'll reserve judgement until I have occasion to use it myself.

The Black Hack 2e makes better use of that system anyways.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1110580The Black Hack 2e makes better use of that system anyways.

Is that also the one that uses the usage die for consumables?

Quote from: Antiquation!;1110582Is that also the one that uses the usage die for consumables?

It does. 2e has a table to convert UdX to a fixed amount of uses if that is what the GM wants.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1110590It does. 2e has a table to convert UdX to a fixed amount of uses if that is what the GM wants.

Hmm. I might have to take a look then, if for no other reason than to jack some of the stuff to use with TFT. I'm open to the idea of OSR, just haven't felt any particular need to dive in yet (aside from grabbing some of Kevin Crawford's stuff and some other miscellaneous products containing good system-neutral assets).

Quote from: Giant Octopodes;1110496No, "Most People", some might even say the MAJORITY, REALLY did not understand you.  Note the replies you got.





And rest assured they spoke for others.  I also had absolutely no clue what you were prattering on about or what you thought you were demonstrating with your posts, which were objectively wrong.  You clearly got plurality confused with majority, which is fine, but my god, you have kept digging relentlessly since finding yourself in that hole.  Note that literally NO ONE had your back or said 'oh yeah my conception of a majority is the same'.  

Sorry but the "appealing to the imagined majority", taking the presumption that your viewpoint is the majority one as a means of bolstering its supposed merit, especially when you have no evidence to support such a position, is one of my biggest pet peeves.  Combine that with the fact that you were so wildly and demonstrably wrong in this, and I was a little irked.  I don't mean to offend, but dude, you should have quit while you were ahead, or way less behind than you are now.

You haven't been here for long, but you are also amusing me greatly with this. Knowing that you got "a little irked" over my colloquial use of the word is a great way for me to wake up in the morning.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3922[/ATTACH]

As far as millennials only playing D&D 5E, meh. Instead, I'd like to point out the reactions I am getting for my use of the word "majority" because the ones most offended by it are demonstrating the exact behavior that I find loathsome at the game table. These are the rules lawyers who will suck the fun out of a game over what is a "5 foot step, or a "sideslip" or how a spell works, or why the game isn't medieval enough fantasy. They understood what I was saying, but got hung up on and hyper focused on a single word until that word has become the message as far as they are concerned. This isn't just a millennial thing or a generational thing, it is a specific type of Player personality thing.

Quote from: The_Shadow;1110179What about Pathfinder? Is that dead these days?

I helped run a gaming convention in Dallas. It was attached to an anime convention, so getting hard numbers on who just played games would be tough - but I can speak about numbers of tables filled. We allocated 16 tables each to Pathfinder and 5e, and while the 5e tables filled their room, Pathfinder filled at peak 9 tables, and generally ran at about 7 tables playing to capacity.

Let me note that this is far from dead - at our four day convention, Pathfinder ran an order of magnitude more games than GURPS or Savage Worlds, for example, or even OSR D&D.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110603As far as millennials only playing D&D 5E, meh. Instead, I'd like to point out the reactions I am getting for my use of the word "majority" because the ones most offended by it are demonstrating the exact behavior that I find loathsome at the game table. These are the rules lawyers who will suck the fun out of a game over what is a "5 foot step, or a "sideslip" or how a spell works, or why the game isn't medieval enough fantasy. They understood what I was saying, but got hung up on and hyper focused on a single word until that word has become the message as far as they are concerned. This isn't just a millennial thing or a generational thing, it is a specific type of Player personality thing.

Personally as a player if something is occurring which is different from my understanding of how it should be based on the rules, I roll with whatever the DM says is happening, accept the results being whatever they are, and then after the session is over or before the next session begins, ask for clarity regarding whether the intent is for things to be as described during the session, if I have a misunderstanding regarding the "default" rules, or if it was perhaps just an in-the-moment mistake, as we're all human.  Whatever the answer is, I accept it, and update my expectations internally so I am better prepared moving forward.  I do, however, greatly prefer that things have consistency, and the rules that we play by don't change on a session by session basis.  I ask that my players handle any discrepancies the same, as any inconsistencies on my part are not intentional barring unusual circumstances.  This way we make sure we're on the same page, but we don't interrupt the flow of the game.

For example, my homebrew world is flat, and has a top and bottom.  A hole (at least one the players are aware of) runs all the way through it, and when going down that hole gravity shifts, going from "down" being perpendicular to the plane of the disc, to "down" being towards the center of the disc, to "down" being the opposite of what it was, and being "correct" for the other side.  When the players are fighting enemies while in that hole, it calls for rather unusual rules and a completely custom set of falling behavior which don't apply elsewhere.  Such situations arise in fantasy environments, and when they do it is to be expected there may be incongruencies between them and what one might expect based on "standard" rules.  It's also perfectly acceptable for a GM to decide they want to change how they run scenarios, or to realize they've been running things "wrong" and want to correct behavior moving forward, or to need to adjust balance.  The only thing I have qualms with is if the behavior is changing from session to session seemingly without consistency or rationale.  It certainly isn't what I shoot for as a GM.

If this is not the behavior you exhibit or expect, in what way does it differ from your play / GM style?  From your standpoint do the rules not matter at all, and folks shouldn't bother to clarify any discrepancies which may exist?  Should we not strive for intellectual consistency in setting or effect?  Is asking about something, in your eyes, the same as criticizing it?  Does an RPG need to be "protected" in your eyes from examination lest the 'fantasy' all fall apart?  I'm legitimately very curious on your viewpoint regarding this sort of thing, and I am looking forward to your response.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110603Instead, I'd like to point out the reactions I am getting for my use of the word "majority" because the ones most offended by it are demonstrating the exact behavior that I find loathsome at the game table.

This is an online discussion forum, not a gaming table.

If, in the course of a discussion about B/X you reference something applicable to BECMI, you should expect that people ask for clarification or, if they think you're wrong, bring it to your attention.  

It certainly would surprise me if you, of all people, would turn out to be unable to handle being corrected (and/or ridiculed) when you have done exactly that - even in cases where you were incorrect.

Quote from: Giant Octopodes;1110609Personally as a player if something is occurring which is different from my understanding of how it should be based on the rules, I roll with whatever the DM says is happening, accept the results being whatever they are, and then after the session is over or before the next session begins, ask for clarity regarding whether the intent is for things to be as described during the session, if I have a misunderstanding regarding the "default" rules, or if it was perhaps just an in-the-moment mistake, as we're all human.  Whatever the answer is, I accept it, and update my expectations internally so I am better prepared moving forward.  I do, however, greatly prefer that things have consistency, and the rules that we play by don't change on a session by session basis.  I ask that my players handle any discrepancies the same, as any inconsistencies on my part are not intentional barring unusual circumstances.  This way we make sure we're on the same page, but we don't interrupt the flow of the game.

For example, my homebrew world is flat, and has a top and bottom.  A hole (at least one the players are aware of) runs all the way through it, and when going down that hole gravity shifts, going from "down" being perpendicular to the plane of the disc, to "down" being towards the center of the disc, to "down" being the opposite of what it was, and being "correct" for the other side.  When the players are fighting enemies while in that hole, it calls for rather unusual rules and a completely custom set of falling behavior which don't apply elsewhere.  Such situations arise in fantasy environments, and when they do it is to be expected there may be incongruencies between them and what one might expect based on "standard" rules.  It's also perfectly acceptable for a GM to decide they want to change how they run scenarios, or to realize they've been running things "wrong" and want to correct behavior moving forward, or to need to adjust balance.  The only thing I have qualms with is if the behavior is changing from session to session seemingly without consistency or rationale.  It certainly isn't what I shoot for as a GM.

If this is not the behavior you exhibit or expect, in what way does it differ from your play / GM style?  From your standpoint do the rules not matter at all, and folks shouldn't bother to clarify any discrepancies which may exist?  Should we not strive for intellectual consistency in setting or effect?  Is asking about something, in your eyes, the same as criticizing it?  Does an RPG need to be "protected" in your eyes from examination lest the 'fantasy' all fall apart?  I'm legitimately very curious on your viewpoint regarding this sort of thing, and I am looking forward to your response.

Thanks for demonstrating the behavior. You make an excellent example.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110621This is an online discussion forum, not a gaming table.

If, in the course of a discussion about B/X you reference something applicable to BECMI, you should expect that people ask for clarification or, if they think you're wrong, bring it to your attention.  

It certainly would surprise me if you, of all people, would turn out to be unable to handle being corrected (and/or ridiculed) when you have done exactly that - even in cases where you were incorrect.

I'm still laughing about the Australian Space Academy......But good try.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110632Thanks for demonstrating the behavior. You make an excellent example.

Cool, so you're someone who hates discussion, or anyone disagreeing with him, and perceives questions as challenges.  Good to know.  That makes it unproductive to attempt to engage you in conversation, which is fine because so far from everything I've seen you have nothing useful or interesting to say.  Duly noted.  Not sure why you're on a discussion forum then, but hey, you do you.

So the original poster here seemed like he did a great job in Trolling folks, he's only got 4 posts total so far and he spawned a 10 page discussion with people arguing over the definitions of majority, what millennials are, and if we are as bad as Boomers and Gen X say we are. And he hasn't posted in this thread since he started it.

Excellent Troll post.

Quote from: Orphan81;1110654So the original poster here seemed like he did a great job in Trolling folks, he's only got 4 posts total so far and he spawned a 10 page discussion with people arguing over the definitions of majority, what millennials are, and if we are as bad as Boomers and Gen X say we are. And he hasn't posted in this thread since he started it.

Excellent Troll post.

^^This guy gets it!^^

Quote from: Giant Octopodes;1110609Personally as a player if something is occurring which is different from my understanding of how it should be based on the rules, I roll with whatever the DM says is happening, accept the results being whatever they are, and then after the session is over or before the next session begins, ask for clarity regarding whether the intent is for things to be as described during the session, if I have a misunderstanding regarding the "default" rules, or if it was perhaps just an in-the-moment mistake, as we're all human.  Whatever the answer is, I accept it, and update my expectations internally so I am better prepared moving forward.  I do, however, greatly prefer that things have consistency, and the rules that we play by don't change on a session by session basis.  I ask that my players handle any discrepancies the same, as any inconsistencies on my part are not intentional barring unusual circumstances.  This way we make sure we're on the same page, but we don't interrupt the flow of the game.

For example, my homebrew world is flat, and has a top and bottom.  A hole (at least one the players are aware of) runs all the way through it, and when going down that hole gravity shifts, going from "down" being perpendicular to the plane of the disc, to "down" being towards the center of the disc, to "down" being the opposite of what it was, and being "correct" for the other side.  When the players are fighting enemies while in that hole, it calls for rather unusual rules and a completely custom set of falling behavior which don't apply elsewhere.  Such situations arise in fantasy environments, and when they do it is to be expected there may be incongruencies between them and what one might expect based on "standard" rules.  It's also perfectly acceptable for a GM to decide they want to change how they run scenarios, or to realize they've been running things "wrong" and want to correct behavior moving forward, or to need to adjust balance.  The only thing I have qualms with is if the behavior is changing from session to session seemingly without consistency or rationale.  It certainly isn't what I shoot for as a GM.

If this is not the behavior you exhibit or expect, in what way does it differ from your play / GM style?  From your standpoint do the rules not matter at all, and folks shouldn't bother to clarify any discrepancies which may exist?  Should we not strive for intellectual consistency in setting or effect?  Is asking about something, in your eyes, the same as criticizing it?  Does an RPG need to be "protected" in your eyes from examination lest the 'fantasy' all fall apart?  I'm legitimately very curious on your viewpoint regarding this sort of thing, and I am looking forward to your response.

Not who you asked, but in my view, rules are more like "suggestions". Something to help the DM get going with training wheels, but after that the DM should do what he thinks is best for the game and not treat it like a bible.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110658^^This guy gets it!^^

That is just because he is in the majority.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110539@Octopodes: does this even matter? The topic is about 5e.

As for myself, I'm a millennial and 5e fan. I'm also into other games, but I prefer 5e because it's so lightweight it makes it easy to just take what I like from those other games and add it into 5e.

Does anyone do that, though? I trust you when you say that you add rules. But I think 5E is the least house-ruled game I have ever seen.

Quote from: Aglondir;1110676Does anyone do that, though? I trust you when you say that you add rules. But I think 5E is the least house-ruled game I have ever seen.

I see it a lot online. If you check around the dnd reddits you see people discuss various ones all the time. I don't know how much it is compared to previous versions though and there is a strong undercurrent of RAW-is-right. But they seem to be different subgroups.

I've basically been converting Diablo 1 and 2 into D&D and running it as a campaign. Tons of extra class features to make it feel like Diablo along with new system rules.

And then there's just regular tweaks here and there. It's less "house rules" and more "rules to fit the kind of specific game I want." And they are different per game.

Quote from: Shasarak;1110672That is just because he is in the majority.

I consider both he and you part of the 34%.  :D

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110678I see it a lot online. If you check around the dnd reddits you see people discuss various ones all the time. I don't know how much it is compared to previous versions though and there is a strong undercurrent of RAW-is-right. But they seem to be different subgroups.

Cool, I will check that out. I'm on the fence if I want to run Curse of Strahd, mostly due to everyone wanting to play 5E and I'm not sold on it. Maybe some house rules would help.

Quote from: Aglondir;1110687Cool, I will check that out. I'm on the fence if I want to run Curse of Strahd, mostly due to everyone wanting to play 5E and I'm not sold on it. Maybe some house rules would help.

One way to look at it is it's not changing the game itself overall -- you're not saying it's better or worse, but certain rules are better suited to certain kinds of games.

For instance, in my Diablo game, I wanted to make it feel scarier, so you die instantly at 0 hit points. At the same time, in the actual Diablo game, you die a lot but also respawn. So I implemented a "respawn" mechanic that is kind of like Dark Souls where you become tainted and lose humanity, becoming more hollow each time. It mimics the arc of Diablo heroes that become more distorted by the evil they fight.

It's good to mention these things up front when you're doing it though unless you have a long standing group that's okay with you figuring it out as you go.

Quote from: jeff37923;1110686I consider both he and you part of the 34%.  :D

We are a third of a Legion.  ;)

This probably doesn't need saying, but millennial here checking in. I started with 5e but haven't played it for a few years now. I'm not going back.

Quote from: Giant Octopodes;1110496No, "Most People", some might even say the MAJORITY, REALLY did not understand you.  Note the replies you got.

Yeah, AFAICS 'majority' means 'more than half'.

I think most new players need to become comfortable and get a good campaign under their belts before they are ready to branch out.

Some players never want to branch out, and that's OK too.

For some gamers, D&D is their version of a Milton Bradley game, where the whole point is to have something to do while you hang out with your friends, and you don't think too hard about creating drama or system mechanics.

Quote from: GnomeWorks;1110457I don't know, why are boomers assholes who want to bitch about every other generation, when theirs is complete trash?

Do you see what I did there?

Yep. Apologies to all actual millennials who took offence to my generalisation about you!

And thanks to all for 11 pages of responses! Very interesting.

I'm still a bit baffled by all the lamentations here. If you want millennials to branch out and try new games, then maybe you need to branch out and try new avenues for recruiting. Trying to get people to do unconventional things through conventional channels is a losing proposition.

I'll just reiterate that I have no problem getting millennials to play my old school homebrew, and quite frequently it's their first foray into TTRPGing of any kind. Several who have subsequently tried 5e were unimpressed, preferring our game.

It's really not about generations. Mainstream venues attract mainstream thinkers, it's that simple.

I've run a small chain of Comic and Game stores in KY for the last 20 years. Most roleplayers are, in fact, D&D players. They either coming looking for the edition they used to play or coming looking for the new edition. At my stores they outnumber roleplayers who even know about other RPGs around 30 to 1. Most of them barely know when a new supplement is released and generally will get a Player's Handbook and maybe 1 other book. They don't know about this site, probably only belong to a FB group tied to their group, and they are pretty darn happy playing D&D.

We are the outliers. My group could spend years just playing 5E. I don't want to, but they are the best group I've ever had so I go along with them.

Maybe the answer to the Millennial question is to SKIP trying to recruit the Millennials.

There are plenty of GenZ (college kids) and GenX (old farts) who can be recruited, perhaps with less effort.

Though I have a question about the "5e Only" players. Will they only play WotC D&D 5e or will they play the various "Based on 5e" RPGs that have been published? I see plenty of those on Kickstarter getting funded with 500+ sales, so somebody is buying them.

I think the importance of Dragon Magazine to the greater industry back in the day is the big thing.  You could advertise to D&D's fans in D&D's magazine.

I'm tired of everyone hating on the Boomers.

Boomers are better than Millennials.

There, I said it.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1110941I'm tired of everyone hating on the Boomers.

Boomers are better than Millennials.

There, I said it.

get back to us when the national debt isnt crippling

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1110943get back to us when the national debt isnt crippling

Not to dip too far into politics, but I am a millenial, when I hit 18 the national debt was a bit under 40% of the GNP, it's now over 100%.  As the GNP has grown, it's not just that it's more than doubled in terms of percentage of the GNP in the last 15 years (the last 10, really) and instead, it's that it's gone from 4 trillion when millenials began voting to over 22 trillion now.  So I am not sure millenials haven't played their part, just saying.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1110937Though I have a question about the "5e Only" players. Will they only play WotC D&D 5e or will they play the various "Based on 5e" RPGs that have been published? I see plenty of those on Kickstarter getting funded with 500+ sales, so somebody is buying them.

I know one dude tried to get players for a 5e game set in Greek mythology. No one was interested.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1110937Maybe the answer to the Millennial question is to SKIP trying to recruit the Millennials.

There are plenty of GenZ (college kids) and GenX (old farts) who can be recruited, perhaps with less effort.

Seems to be the answer which can produce the best results.

That is definitely an option.

Being a GenX myself, I have been recently discussing with a lot of GenZ what systems they like.

Results have been Pathfinder 1, Call of Cthulhu, DnD 3.5 and Shadowrun of all things.
A few others systems too and they showed interest in DCC when I mentioned it.
D&D 5E was not really mentioned much as I feel they had moved on or dismissed it outright.

They seem more interested in the systems that don't have market saturation and may be more off the radar:  Either that or I met some really cool young people by accident.

I was really surprised as I thought GenZ would be the exact audience that the Twitch D&D 5E feeds would have targeted.  Guess not.  Market over saturation perhaps?

Needless to say I was quite happy with the feedback.

Interested players are out there for whatever system you like:  You just need to track them down.

Quote from: rocksfalleverybodydies;1111129I was really surprised as I thought GenZ would be the exact audience that the Twitch D&D 5E feeds would have targeted.  Guess not.  Market over saturation perhaps?

Yeah. It's definitely much more a Millennial, 20-something thing than an early-Gen-Z thing. It is good to see the kids of '80s D&Ders playing 5e, but this seems very dependent on parents or similar exposure. I know a couple 12-14 year olds (my son, & my ex's bf's older son) who run D&D at school for their friends; normally they'd be on their phones but school confiscation of smartphones has the advantage of creating a zone of breaktime boredom that lets some D&D flourish. :)

I still think it's a basic issue of social dynamics. ;)

Most people need to ease into the societal pool of any social gathering, and often they dip their toe and then ease in at the shallows where there's handholds and stairs. D&D is the vanilla ice cream of the ice cream social, it is the charming leading man action movie, it is the beer on tap at the bar, it is the tweenager's first rock festival. D&D is the baby food, lingua franca, and sine qua non of RPGs.

This is not a bad thing. It means D&D is of itself a nexus for gathering, which can then break the ice and develop friendships. Once you have that trust you can ply your weirdness with freak flag semaphore to find fellow weirdos amid your new friendly pool. :)

Remember, RPGs had a good period where they were re-ghettoized. A lot of this has to do with the nerdy spaces (FLGS, Comic Stores, etc.) hidden away in niche stores. Without exposure no one knows and no one can care. Only reintroduction through mass media has brought new circulation to the gaming tide pools.

As a millennial myself, let's just say I'm glad I've found this place because discussion of RPG's is asinine online in other places online. Looking at you, Reddit and RPGnet.

I think the game has had something of a boom, and D&D is just the main face of tabletop. It was inevitable that whatever the current edition was at the time was going to get a ton of attention. The boom being Critical Role, all these TV shows, etc. Do I think it is a good thing? Yes and no. I'm 29, I remember a time when being a nerd was frowned upon, and I got enough shit when I brought RPGs to my nerdy friend group for the first time in 2003. So I do feel a little tilted that these things are cool now. (Cultural appropriate much? lol.)

I will say, don't give up on millennials. We're not all fucking crazy, maybe a slight majority, but there are plenty of us that are sick of identity politics and the shit it has done with the hobby.

As for preferred systems, eh. I play pretty much anything, including my home brewed Palladium rewrite.

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1111610As a millennial myself, let's just say I'm glad I've found this place because discussion of RPG's is asinine online in other places online. Looking at you, Reddit and RPGnet.

I think the game has had something of a boom, and D&D is just the main face of tabletop. It was inevitable that whatever the current edition was at the time was going to get a ton of attention. The boom being Critical Role, all these TV shows, etc. Do I think it is a good thing? Yes and no. I'm 29, I remember a time when being a nerd was frowned upon, and I got enough shit when I brought RPGs to my nerdy friend group for the first time in 2003. So I do feel a little tilted that these things are cool now. (Cultural appropriate much? lol.)

I will say, don't give up on millennials. We're not all fucking crazy, maybe a slight majority, but there are plenty of us that are sick of identity politics and the shit it has done with the hobby.

As for preferred systems, eh. I play pretty much anything, including my home brewed Palladium rewrite.

Welcome to this wretched little hive of scum and villainy, ZetaRidley! Enjoy your stay!

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1111610As a millennial myself, let's just say I'm glad I've found this place because discussion of RPG's is asinine online in other places online. Looking at you, Reddit and RPGnet.

...

Welcome! Pull up a chair or sit on the floor. Make yourself at home.

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1111610As a millennial myself, let's just say I'm glad I've found this place because discussion of RPG's is asinine online in other places online. Looking at you, Reddit and RPGnet.

I think the game has had something of a boom, and D&D is just the main face of tabletop. It was inevitable that whatever the current edition was at the time was going to get a ton of attention. The boom being Critical Role, all these TV shows, etc. Do I think it is a good thing? Yes and no. I'm 29, I remember a time when being a nerd was frowned upon, and I got enough shit when I brought RPGs to my nerdy friend group for the first time in 2003. So I do feel a little tilted that these things are cool now. (Cultural appropriate much? lol.)

I will say, don't give up on millennials. We're not all fucking crazy, maybe a slight majority, but there are plenty of us that are sick of identity politics and the shit it has done with the hobby.

As for preferred systems, eh. I play pretty much anything, including my home brewed Palladium rewrite.

Welcome aboard!

I'm a generation X member myself; and the popularity of something on TV or the internet, doesn't mean shit to me.

I have purchased the numerous editions of D&D, so that I can contrast and compare them myself.  All I care about, is what I myself like.  That doesn't mean that anyone else has to agree with me.

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1111610As a millennial myself, let's just say I'm glad I've found this place because discussion of RPG's is asinine online in other places online. Looking at you, Reddit and RPGnet.

I think the game has had something of a boom, and D&D is just the main face of tabletop. It was inevitable that whatever the current edition was at the time was going to get a ton of attention. The boom being Critical Role, all these TV shows, etc. Do I think it is a good thing? Yes and no. I'm 29, I remember a time when being a nerd was frowned upon, and I got enough shit when I brought RPGs to my nerdy friend group for the first time in 2003. So I do feel a little tilted that these things are cool now. (Cultural appropriate much? lol.)

I will say, don't give up on millennials. We're not all fucking crazy, maybe a slight majority, but there are plenty of us that are sick of identity politics and the shit it has done with the hobby.

As for preferred systems, eh. I play pretty much anything, including my home brewed Palladium rewrite.

Welcome! As a side-tangent, may I ask how you approached the MDC issue in your Palladium rewrite?

They are not. I run 0D&D games for them, Traveller games for them, Star Wars d20 games for them, and they love it! My former gaming group though preferred 5e over 0D&D, becuase 0D&D is very leeeeeeeathal! And they wanted storyline characters not RPG oldschool killfest characters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GULItNlBvJc

Quote from: Ninneveh;1111657Welcome! As a side-tangent, may I ask how you approached the MDC issue in your Palladium rewrite?

We basically just threw it out. Armor works now that it has an AR rating, works like AC. If the d20 + Strike roll beats AR, character takes damage to HP. We threw out SDC for characters, having two numbers seems redundant. So obviously, this being the "high tech" setting, ceramic armors have high AR ratings.

Skills are still percentile, to determine base chance for success you take your attribute score, add any applicable bonuses (Primary class skills get + 30%, secondary gets +15%).  Each class gets a certain number of skill points, you spend them on whatever you want.

Lastly, combat bonuses are determined by class, you just look up your chart under your class description. Combat is the same, with being able to dodge and parry. We also buffed spells a bit, because lets be honest, magic was always under powered in the game despite being a catalyst.

Can't really show much because its palladium, and I don't want to get sued, ha. But I cut my teeth on homebrew and Palladium games. So they have a place in my heart. Currently running this version of Rifts and a 5e campaign with RL friends over Roll20, since the boys live in a bunch of different places these days.

I'm a heroes unlimited and ninjas and superspies sdc palladium guy and I reskinned armor rating to damage reduction, untied it from the strike roll, eliminated stacking bonuses, and replaced bonus attacks per round with bonuses to initiative instead.  Its workin pretty well.  My players always hated how powerful magic was in D&D so the fact that magic sucks so bad in palladium nobody ever uses it wound up being a feature not a bug with my group. I tend to avoid Rifts entirely both because I never liked mdc and am also not a fan of being beholden to 'published canon settings'.  Wont deny that my homebrew has a tendency to short circuit the brains and raise the ire among certain other palladium fans.  Some folks are reeeeealy addicted to stacking bonuses so its kinda my fault stepping into a system where that can play such a big role and just snatch it away.

I run games for Meetup.com.

I run alternating games using Basic Fantasy and D&D 5E. In my admittedly small sample size, I've found that preference for one or the other isn't based much on age. I have people who play in both of my 5E and Basic Fantasy games, I have people who only play in the Basic Fantasy game and I have people who only play in the 5E game. Some younger players will only join in on my Basic Fantasy game. Some older players favor the 5E.

I think it's about presentation. I don't see any reason why millenials wouldn't like old school. I think this is more about the fact that D&D 5E is the defacto current and most popular version. Those coming into the hobby are going to naturally experience it first and possibly think that it is all there is.

I am involved in several groups (beyond just mine) where there are significantly younger players enjoying old school style games. If you want to bring old school into the mix in a world of 5E, my advice is to just throw your glove in the ring. My original point of starting my Basic Fantasy Meetup games was to throw old school into a mix of all 5E games. I found it to be a resounding success (I have had regularly 5-6 players every week for over a year playing Basic Fantasy).. many much younger than me.

Bring your game to the fore and invite people to play and run a good game and it won't matter what rules you use.

I ran BECM Classic dnd for a Millennials group for ca 2.5 years,  they liked it a lot. There are more player personality problems with this cadre than with Gen X or Gen Z, if anything I think 5e is rather well designed to minimise those issues. Eg the defined backgrounds system and sub classes helps with the special snowflake-ism; the GM empowerment plus fairly robust systems helps keep them on the straight and narrow so everyone can have a good time.

Quote from: VincentTakeda;1111670I'm a heroes unlimited and ninjas and superspies sdc palladium guy and I reskinned armor rating to damage reduction, untied it from the strike roll, eliminated stacking bonuses, and replaced bonus attacks per round with bonuses to initiative instead.  Its workin pretty well.  My players always hated how powerful magic was in D&D so the fact that magic sucks so bad in palladium nobody ever uses it wound up being a feature not a bug with my group. I tend to avoid Rifts entirely both because I never liked mdc and am also not a fan of being beholden to 'published canon settings'.  Wont deny that my homebrew has a tendency to short circuit the brains and raise the ire among certain other palladium fans.  Some folks are reeeeealy addicted to stacking bonuses so its kinda my fault stepping into a system where that can play such a big role and just snatch it away.

MDC always did drive me nuts, its just a little too out there. Like, I get the intent, but I just think giving a mech a big SDC pool would, you know, work. With Magic, that's fair. The idea here is that we wanted options that work well enough for everyone that would like to pursue that class.

Stacking bonuses don't bother me much, but we did set a hard limit of +10 at level 15, the only addition to that would be attribute bonuses or like laser targeting addons.

I read an article a while back about their strategy to keep the game as accessible as possible and to strongly embrace the community aspect of it. They only release a few books a year in order to create maximum buzz around each one, and know that there will be streamers just lining up to be "first" running each adventure in an attempt to make some money. Here is the article.

https://merricb.wordpress.com/2017/01/03/mike-mearls-a-summary-of-the-interview-on-tabletop-babble/

Clearly it has worked very well for them. With the dominant market share you might expect them to flood the market with books to make the most money they can, as TSR did in the past. Maybe being just a small part of a larger company allows them to be this disciplined about it. And I think it makes a lot of sense. "Buy the Player's Handbook or one of the starter boxes" is a lot more intuitive than, say, Savage Worlds where a new player has a head spinning number of options to pick from.

Personally, this hasn't been an issue. One of my all millenial D&D group linked to another game in our group chat a few years ago and we tried it. They have been very open to new systems ever since and we have not yet returned to 5E. Now, I don't play at game stores or conventions (and would do that only to find the right people to invite to private games), so I may be an outlier from the sounds of it.

It's really not "millenials" at all.

It's the way it has always been with D&D.

Most D&D players are only interested in playing D&D.

Millenials just happen to be the latest batch of "new" players doing what most D&D players have always done.

In my opinion people are noticing this old trend a bit more because of the current state of the hobby: D&D has gone from the 800lb gorilla in the room to the 800,000lb King Kong of rpg's.