A nice summary of several controversies all rolled up in one post!

We have: (1) origins of D&D (2) why 4e isn't D&D (3) why ablative damage is unrealistic. Well done. Of course, if D&D fully followed Fletcher Pratt, characters would also lose their damage-dealing ability in direct relation with the percentage of hit points they'd lost, and would move ever more slowly at the same rate!

Anyway, I dug up a few threads where I either go into still more detail or provide links.

here (gotta say, that lachek was a good sport)
here
and several posts in here

(Sorry, Aos.)

No need elliot, carry on.


I think Senchai makes a good point earlier in the thread, about there being a more varied menu of entertainment choices these days. Nobody blames street and smith for the death of the pulps, or Hearst for the death of the adventure comic strip. TV and rising paper costs killed the pulps, TV by and large killed newspaper comics too- they just don't know they're dead.  The emergence of video games and the internet have taken a tole on the RPG hobby, certianally. Nobody was doing what we're doing right now in 1974, or 1984, or even 1994. they got together instead, and when they did the dice came out.
But I'll tell you what the real elephant in the room is- it's us.
Gamers are a socially inept, argumentative lot, many of whom have questionable hygiene. There are some (many in fact) who wont even consider the idea of bringing new blood into the hobby. Then there is the related issue of the social stigma that still clings to the hobby- despite what you may all want to tell yourselves.
Beyond that, there is the other major issue. Gamers are, by and large, a puritanical lot. Nobody likes a puritan. I know it's hard for a lot of you to believe but it's true. Most adults open the scrabble box and the bottle of wine at the same time. My wife and I just spent some time with her brother and his family and some of their friends. We don't drink, but we don't say anything about it either- They were still uncomfortable having us around. Without even trying, we were the wet blanket. We slept in a separate cabin, and every night after we went to bed the party cranked up- we could hear it.
Whereas there is a huge proportion of gamers who actually GET ANGRY if someone brings booze to an RPG game*, much less anything else. I mean after all RPGs are "serious gaming". Do you think the guys in 1974 felt this way? I dunno, maybe they did, but they are a vanishing breed at any rate. Their kind play video games now, or spend all their time bitching about something or other online. I won;t even get into the social stigmas surrounding obesity, because, you know, we're all skinnny as hell around these parts.
Yeah, yeah self loathing, yeah yeah.

*there's a thread about this somewhere around here.

Quote from: Aos;245993But I'll tell you what the real elephant in the room is- it's us.
Gamers are a socially inept, argumentative lot, many of whom have questionable hygiene. There are some (many in fact) who wont even consider the idea of bringing new blood into the hobby. Then there is the related issue of the social stigma that still clings to the hobby- despite what you may all want to tell yourselves.
Beyond that, there is the other major issue. Gamers are, by and large, a puritanical lot. Nobody likes a puritan.

Which tells me that people have no idea what a puritan IS anymore. Trust me when I tell you that gamers are not puritans. In fact, I'm much less active over on That Other RPG Site because I explained my *relatively liberal* position on a social question and I got flamed into oblivion because I wasn't far enough over the edge on the issue. Those are puritans? No, I don't think so. I know puritans. You lot don't qualify.

That said... any paper-and-pencil RPG is essentially an intellectual exercise. You have to imagine, think, plan. It's more work that a lot of people put into their entertainment. That is why this will always be a niche hobby. People want their entertainment delivered, they don't want to build it themselves. And RPGs tend to involve... I hate to say the word, but... you know.. math. That thing you can't even pay half the population to do. We're nerds, you know, with our pencils and systems and crunching. Except for the narrative nerds, and that's even scarier, because everyone knows that's really all about talking about sex with other guys.

It will never be a popular hobby. It will always appeal to that narrow spectrum of mostly-guys who are into imagination, let's pretend, numbers and dramatics. Though it might help if you all showered more often. *nods*

Well my experiance has been quite the opposite, actually. I've been burnt and sneered at on at least two rpg boards for admitting that I enjoy the weed.
Beyond that check out this thread:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=7239&highlight=drugs

While my argument might well be faulty, it did not come into being in a vacuum. But I agree on the math thing.

Hmm, on the issue of us generally being a socially difficult population, I would also add the incredible resistance to getting people to come out to a local convention.  It's like pulling teeth.  I've worked in event management and in every other sector (woman's products, cars, home and garden, books) you have to beat people off.  They come out, they are psyched to talk with vendors, to interact with each other, to go to panels, to participate in workshops.  With gamers, there is a large segment of the population that refuses to put themselves in any other world but there existing group (and by extension refuses to welcome anyone else into their group).  There is a lot of rationalization, but I think it is ultimately a function of a lack of social self-confidence and it hurts our hobby.

Cons are still going for the hardcore demographic, so it's not like they are going to cause a major explosion of new gamers, but they do help to break down barriers between sub-groups and create unity in the gaming scene.

Still, I think the major factor is what Seanchai said, just competition for time in today's saturated market.  Tabletop RPGs had their moment and will command a niche for a long time, but there are too many competing fun activities that satisfy the same urge today.

Quote from: walkerp;246013Still, I think the major factor is what Seanchai said, just competition for time in today's saturated market.  Tabletop RPGs had their moment and will command a niche for a long time, but there are too many competing fun activities that satisfy the same urge today.

I under no illusion that restoring a D&D boxed to the toy stores is going to ignite a new mass market craze. My purpose in doing so would to be restore or strengthen a flow of new gamers from the mainstream community. Have a full RPG at a price point where people will just try it for the heck of it. I suppose D&D Minis could serve this role somewhat but it is not an RPG.

Quote from: walkerp;246013With gamers, there is a large segment of the population that refuses to put themselves in any other world but there existing group (and by extension refuses to welcome anyone else into their group).  There is a lot of rationalization, but I think it is ultimately a function of a lack of social self-confidence and it hurts our hobby.

I'm certain I fall into this subgroup.

Aos, your theory is begetting of a lack of perspective/experience wiht anything non-gaming. Check out some other hobby pursuits, and compare. You´ll find hostility, righteous flamecrusades and all other infighty things are part of the human condition.

Even pacifists get to blows over how to best organize world peace (actually happened at a pacifist conference).

Quote from: walkerp;246013With gamers, there is a large segment of the population that refuses to put themselves in any other world but there existing group (and by extension refuses to welcome anyone else into their group). There is a lot of rationalization, but I think it is ultimately a function of a lack of social self-confidence and it hurts our hobby.

But isn't that also a problem with RPGs themselves? It's easy to call up your friends and then all go to a sports stadium, a movie theater, the boat show or a music concert as spectators because the "job" of being a spectator is easy. Roleplaying is more like forming a garage band or a team. You have to get people who are into the same kind of stuff, have the skills to entertain and the personalities to get along.

Yeah, that's true, Malleus.  Our hobby does intrinsically require a certain amount of effort to get into it.  But I'm talking about a population that already has made that effort and has all the tools they need to get together and go to a con.

I think this goes along with the majority of our population also being generally really resistant to trying anything new.

I think Aos is right, that we are basically a very conservative lot, conservative in the most general sense of the word.  We don't want to change and when it comes along, we freak out about it and resist.

All together now!

To dream ... the impossible dream ...
To fight ... the unbeatable foe ...
To bear ... with unbearable sorrow ...
To run ... where the brave dare not go ...
To right ... the unrightable wrong ...
To love ... pure and chaste from afar ...
To try ... when your arms are too weary ...
To reach ... the unreachable star ...

I can't comment on forming band, but as compared to making even the shortest and shitiest of short films the effort required to get a gaming session together is nearly non existent.

I'm trying to think of a good comparison for what I'm trying to say, but not coming up with a perfect one, so I'll throw out a couple of imperfect ones.

I went with my school to a kung fu tournament once.  A lot of people were participating, but most of the crowd were there to watch.  But they were all in the scene and it was eminently clear that everyone there wanted to fight.  It was palpable (and hilariously macho).  But the thing was, once the matches started, every spectator was clearly wishing they had signed up to participate.  They are kung fu geeks.  They want to fight.

Same with the women's trade shows.  Those women are lining up at the door and they want to shop, they want to get makeovers, they want to discuss health tips.  Before these shows, when you approach these women, you almost always get a positive response.  Even if they can't go, they'll say "ooh that sounds like fun, I'd love to go some other time."

With gamers, it's like this huge battle.  Don't ever dare approach them in a game store to give them a flyer.  Don't contact them online.  Don't ask them why they aren't interested.  You will get hostility.  There is a hardcore group who are super enthusiastic (and thank god for them) but my very rough guess is that represents about maybe a quarter of the actual people gaming regularily (at least in our region).

Oh yes and let's not forget the people who fight tooth and nail to not have to pay the $20 admission fee (for which you get a $5 rebate for each game you run; we've had DMs refuse to come because we wouldn't waive the last $15 and we all pay the full fee ourselves as organisers!)

Sorry, I realize I'm just bitching about my own frustrations here, but I'm just saying that my experiences have very much confirmed what Aos was saying.

Quote from: estar;245873The Starter sets are not complete RPGs like the Mentzer set was. That the difference.

No, that's the standard bullshit response. We're talking about getting folks into the game - not sustaining them indefinitely on one product. The starter sets have everything they need to a) get a basic understanding of the game and b) play it for a while.

If having an understanding of the game and having played it for a while isn't going to convince them to keep playing, a "complete" RPG like the Mentzer set wouldn't have convinced them to stay either.

Quote from: estar;245873In most stores the three book total more than a video game. Plus novices like to buy one single box for the the game.

Hence my saying "about the price of a video game." Of course, if we're talking about the special editions of video games that are available these days, then it may even be cheaper.

And all three books are available in one box. Even in FLGSes.

But, really, money doesn't stop people - even children - from getting what they want.

Quote from: estar;245873Sorry but that reply shows a lot of ignorance on the subject.  The PHB isn't the complete D&D game and a novice would have difficulty running a game for his friend using that book alone.

So now we're not talking about getting new blood, we're talking creating new groups?

But, as Spike pointed out, the new PHB is pretty damn complete. Moreover, you only need one copy per group of the other two books.

Quote from: estar;245873Most players in the 80s were introduced via the Mentzer Red Book.

Have you ever looked at actual survey data concerning how folks got into the hobby and when?

Quote from: estar;245873Since the late  80s the only time the RPG Market had expanded is when Vampire the Masquerade was introduced. The D20 revival brought back a lot of old player and the new players were by traditional word of mouth.

In other words, it expanded with 3e. And, apparently, it expanded again with 4e (unless there were a whole lot of closet players buying nothing for years).

Quote from: estar;245873Yet the market for RPGS keeps shrinking.

You just finished saying it expanded with 3e.

And you're right - the market does keep shrinking (whether it occasionally expands like a dying sun for a bit or not). Because folks aren't interested in RPGs anymore. Your "complete" boxed set isn't going to change that.

Seanchai

Quote from: JimLotFP;245951Gygax didn't use minis in his game...

Who cares? Who cares how he game, when the matter in dispute is what he actually wrote.

Quote from: JimLotFP;245951OD&D was not a minis game.

No, it wasn't. It just had an emphasis on them.

Seanchai