I was online today, and can't remember where, but it said that 95.56% of all DND players are in their late 20's or 30's. That means the percentage of high school kids and college kids (me included) playing is 4.44%! What has happened? Please, someone come up with a link to a contradictory statistic, or at least a reason why this is happening!
If it is happening, then it is a good thing for WotC. People in their mid 20s to early 30s spend more than high school kids. With the short period most people play D&D, they need people to start playing later to boost their bottom line.
It's the damn X-Box generation. Kids no longer care about fantastic worlds and characters, and can't sit still for 30 seconds without blowing something up in Halo 3.
So true! D&D was from a time before video games had realistic graphics, or sandbox capability. Hell, when D&D first came out, the only video game available was Pong (and even then, the game still sucked)!
I have played lots of video game RPGs, and I find a number of Roguelike games to be better then many of the VG RPGs of today. Naturally, none of the kids today would understand such games, and balk at such cruddy graphics - like table-top RPGs, you need imagination to play!
Just easier to afford things when you can reliably get a job. Or when you aren't coming up for college $.
I was online today, and can't remember where, but it said that 95.56% of all DND players are in their late 20's or 30's. That means the percentage of high school kids and college kids (me included) playing is 4.44%! What has happened? Please, someone come up with a link to a contradictory statistic, or at least a reason why this is happening!
Did it say anything about where they were getting their statistics? High schoolers are notoriously difficult to poll, and if they're using sales statistics it's going to skew very heavily towards the 22-28 demographic that's out of college and making money, but doesn't have a family to support yet.
Even if it was just a casual survey of gaming stores (which even given it's questionable methodology would probably be more accurate than the other methods I mentioned) they'd still come up against the issue of adults buying the game for kids in their family, or as gifts.
While I don't doubt the study in it's entirety, I'd have to see some details as to where they got the info before believing that it's that heavily skewed in reality.
They're like "what's that?"
Me: "dungeons and dragons."
Them: "huh?"
Me: "it's a role-playing game. like lord of the rings, but with paper and dice."
Them: "and rpg? like WoW?"
Me: *sigh* "yes, kind of like WoW, except you play with paper and pencil and sit around talking with a bunch of your friends."
Them: "on the computer?"
Me: "no, we go play at someone's house."
Them: "how can everyone see the computer?"
Me: "it's not on the computer. you have this guy called the dungeon master and he controls all the monsters and you play with paper and dice."
Them: "how do you play with dice?"
Me: "you roll a twenty-sided die, add applicable modifiers and then ask the dungeon master is the result was high enough to achieve what you were trying to do. You usually do it for stuff like attacking a monster or picking a lock or something."
Them: "what does 'applicable' mean?"
Me: "never mind..."
So what is the point of playing a game where you might die, run out of ammo, or not be able to do anything YOU want to do?
*****
The problem is DMs don't have a cheat that players can exploit.
LOL
Too true.
I think younger people are playing the game, I just don't know how many. There is still a stigma attached to the game unfortunately. And in high school especially I can imagine it must be hard to play something so very socially involving that still carries the concept of being for, pardon my saying it, "dorks".
(Sigh, when will people learn...)
I didn't start playing until college myself. Before then, it was video games.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
The problem is DMs don't have a cheat that players can exploit.
Umm Pizza - or our gaming group uses Rollos. And one GM that I played with (not for long) had a cheat exploit that involved a nice rack.
They let KIDS play AD&D? THEY ARE NOT WORTHY! How can they understand the complexity of the game? This is a game that requires a significant mature mindset! Yes indeed that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Things have changed. We are groomed to be consumers these days, not citizens. That is often how you are defined and seen in the world view, especially in this country. Videogames, MMOs particularly, really benefit from this MO in that expansions, monthly fees, etc, and relatively free advertising w/in the net community make it incredibly profitable.
And card games...oh, God, don't get me started. I personally despise the whole buy, use, grow bored, buy again mentality. It's finite and depends heavilly on mass consumption. YuGiOh and Pokemon...totally prey on kids and their parents' wallets. This is why I like RPGs; fosters good mental growth, requires social interaction, infinite possibilities whereas code is code and finite, and isn't easilly exploited into gimmicky kids stuff.
Didn't it used to be "Products of your imagination" (TSR)? I don't find alot of the crap passing for kidsplay to be that imaginative now...
Still, in its defense, America's youth has so many more entertainment venues and options, it boggles the mind. Like, too many choices and connectivity, it's making us more apathetic and detached, so instant gratification becomes the mantra (texting, videogames, movies/music on demand). This has seriously birthed a major MAJOR sense of entitlement. Your nightly news, MTV, any paper lays it out pretty plainly, but I think if you sit in the mall w/ a coke and just watch a few of them in non **** fashion, you'll learn quick enough.
This isn't true for all youth btw. Some good kids out there that know the score and fall in line. RPG gamers as a whole tend to be a bit more cerebral and socially responsible...but I think we can safely say America is becoming less intelligent and way the Hell more irresponsible, yes?
When frivolity, whimsy, and incompetance like Ms. Hilton, the new MTV, texting while driving, suing McDonalds for making you fat and the like are commonplace, it speaks volumes for the populace...
Hey, I'm in high school and I play dnd. But I only know about 8 other people my age who play. Most of the people in my year have NEVER EVEN HEARD ABOUT IT. EVER.
Peoples in your school have never heard of DND? Well, most people in my school have. The problems behind it is that they tend to be not smart enough to comprehend the game. Seriously, theyr'e too obsessed with video games and whatever. Also, you know 8 other people who play? I've only got one group with people in high school. Seriously, DND needs to make a major comeback.
Peoples in your school have never heard of DND? Well, most people in my school have. The problems behind it is that they tend to be not smart enough to comprehend the game. Seriously, theyr'e too obsessed with video games and whatever. Also, you know 8 other people who play? I've only got one group with people in high school. Seriously, DND needs to make a major comeback.
Yes, maybe they should make a new edition with rules simplified and world updated? Oh wait...
All the cool kids of my highschool played D&D.
We claim a wargame that sells a few thousand units is a success.
If you think explaining a non electronic rolegame is frustrating, try making a board game that's dripping history sound fun.
I am in a high school larger than many colleges and our D&D club comes up to about ten. out of four thousand.
I was online today, and can't remember where, but it said that 95.56% of all DND players are in their late 20's or 30's. That means the percentage of high school kids and college kids (me included) playing is 4.44%! What has happened? Please, someone come up with a link to a contradictory statistic, or at least a reason why this is happening!
WotC's target group is in the young-adult range (18-35), so they geared their products toward them.
While a few young teens find it cool to play an adult-level game products, others find the product too rules-heavy to play "out of the box."
And there is always the ever-present "geek" stigma that goes with D&D.
Come to think of it, the young'uns are more interested in Facebook, texting, iPod, and pay-2-play MMORPGs (as long as their parents are paying for them month-to-month) than they are in pen-n-paper RPGs.
(If I have kids, I'm not getting them iPod, pay-2-play MMORPGs, and open a Facebook page. They will live and breathe pen-n-paper RPGs.)
The percentage of people who are young who play D&D is much, much higher than that.
Peoples are not bad for not playing it. The debates and criticism on D&D are prooves of that, and another reason. (Albeit the scorn it get from the Rest of RPG World is a bit... unfair indeed.)
That is a completely made up number.
The percentage of people who are young who play D&D is much, much higher than that.
Yes. Everyone knows that 95% of all information on the internet is made up. Of that 95%, 45% is untrue and 55% is true.
By the time you finished reading this 300 people died from choking on their food.
I like this thread because it reminds me of the first thing I said to my players when we first started reading the new 4e Players Handbook. "This must be WOTC's attempt at keeping up with the 'no child left behind' social approach. Its so simplified that you dont even have to be a geek to understand it anymore."
"This must be WOTC's attempt at keeping up with the 'no child left behind' social approach. Its so simplified that you dont even have to be a geek to understand it anymore."
Yeah, that made me mad. As a geek, this is our thing. Jocks have their own thing, sports.
"This must be WOTC's attempt at keeping up with the 'no child left behind' social approach. Its so simplified that you dont even have to be a geek to understand it anymore."
We nerds are no elite. We are not in any way superior. We are egal to the other groups, to any other man or woman.
This is a game, who should be enjoy by all without elitism factoring in.
I hate that elitist bent. It's joking surely that post, but why D&D should be kept 'safe from the stupid norms'?
"This must be WOTC's attempt at keeping up with the 'no child left behind' social approach. Its so simplified that you dont even have to be a geek to understand it anymore."
Funny, first thing I thought when I saw 4e was "finally someone pulled their head out of their ass", however it was followed shortly by "where the **** is my necromancy!?!?"
You know, the 70's..... the decade where people actually went out and protested rather than let 'events' like Guantanamo drift over them, where TV actually had a "closedown" time, where video games consided of @ moving around a maze made up of = whilst being chased by + and where, if you wanted a dose of fantasy, you read a book (rather than downloaded a film).
Welcome to the New Generation(TM) - sponsored by Mastercard.....
Also, the current generation is also engaged; ecology, fair trade, anti-excesses of globalization, etc... There is also artists amongst them, expressing themselves in less explored musical genres by examples. But the media like to paint otherwise of course, more seller. Teen scare....
A generation that may very well earn less than their parents - and not by lazyness. Or who may not even live as old.
The Ubbergeek - neitheir old not new at 30.
I play Video Games and MMORPG's all the time. I like them.
But since within only a few hours I'll "break the system" of those games I get bored quickly.
Or feel like I'm not getting anywhere. (Anyone who's spent 8 hours grinding up XP on WoW will know that feeling.)
I sit down and play DnD... Wow there's something I can interact with. Something which is more than point, click, kill.
I like both experiences. It just so happens that I can spend a hell of a lot longer focused on a dynamic world than a static one.
DnD turned up in the 70's...
You know, the 70's..... the decade where people actually went out and protested rather than let 'events' like Guantanamo drift over them, where TV actually had a "closedown" time, where video games consided of @ moving around a maze made up of = whilst being chased by + and where, if you wanted a dose of fantasy, you read a book (rather than downloaded a film).
Welcome to the New Generation(TM) - sponsored by Mastercard.....
I don't remember the 70's being that noble. Such noble efforts of social awareness was from the early 60's, which quickly got deluded by naive thinking and a lifestyle of no responsibility or accountability. I remember the 70's was a clinical post-hippie age of shameless, selfish indulgences (drugs, free love, unchecked perversion), and all without giving a dame about the state of the world! If the folks from the 70's had what we have today (the technology, the entertainment, and such), would they be any better?
[don't even get me started with all the Feminism from the 70's! I'm truly all for equality and all, but the 2nd wave of Feminism was a bit naive about how gender was just a relative state of mind, and the ball-crushing nature of 3rd wave Feminism is anything but equal!
... sorry for going a little off-topic, I just venting]We nerds are no elite. We are not in any way superior. We are egal to the other groups, to any other man or woman.
This is a game, who should be enjoy by all without elitism factoring in.
I hate that elitist bent. It's joking surely that post, but why D&D should be kept 'safe from the stupid norms'?
The elitism is mostly from the old-school gamers from the OD&D and 1e years. These old-timers (Grognards) see themselves as pioneers in the role-playing industry. When D&D first came out, there was no complete rulebooks, fans had to do most of the legwork with booklets that was nothing more then guidelines.
The early editions never dictated how a your setting should be played, the rules was so loose, that any setting was possible - Hyboria, Middle Earth, Tékumel (the vary first D&D setting), the Arthurian Age, and any historical or imaginary age you can think of. You cant really do that with 3.X/4e as both of the game are geared only to the high-fantasy/dungeonpunk genres.
This was also a time when you did not need fancy splat books to get a fancy race, class, or power. So if you wanted to play a Barbarian, then play a Fighter, as Fighters use to be a catch-all for any type of warrior, much like how Magic-Users used to be a catch-all for wizards, sorcerers, illusionists, necromancers, and so on. If you wanted to play a goblin or a Drow, just do it, because back then game-balance took a backseat to role-playing. There was no skills & feats to choose from or rules for role-playing as players did not need it (as it is, a number of Grognards feel that the introduction of Thieves' Abilities was a bad idea, as it felt that in limit the abilities of a Fighter to climb or sneak around, but that don't stop them from having vary capable adventures). When a player needed his PC to do something, they just did what felt right, that is within character. This is a major contradiction to the exception-base rules of 3.x/4e.
Folks who have never played the old game would think the "Points of Light" concept is a new thing, but the truth is, D&D has it's roots with that concept (long before "Points of Light" was ever coined). Hell, Grayhawk started of as a huge "Points of Light" setting!
Yes, in the early days of role-playing, gamers had to put in a lot of effort just to make OD&D playable, but its like getting your first junker of a car. At first its looks ugly, then you fix it up, you give it a spin, re-tool it until it runs smoothly, give it a good custom paint job and the right accessories, and you end up with something that feels really personal. Hell, a number of popular of old-school game systems (Tunnel & Trolls, Judges Guild's Universal System, Metamorphosis Alpha, so on, and so forth) started off as personal tweaks to the OD&D rules! You are not going to find to same faith or loyalty with the 4th edition. I cant even think of any self-respecting publisher that would even touch a game system in which you cant even redefine the goddame corerules or chargen!
I don't remember the 70's being that noble. Such noble efforts of social awareness was from the early 60's, which quickly got deluded by naive thinking and a lifestyle of no responsibility or accountability. I remember the 70's was a clinical post-hippie age of shameless, selfish indulgences (drugs, free love, unchecked perversion), and all without giving a dame about the state of the world! If the folks from the 70's had what we have today (the technology, the entertainment, and such), would they be any better?
[don't even get me started with all the Feminism from the 70's! I'm truly all for equality and all, but the 2nd wave of Feminism was a bit naive about how gender was just a relative state of mind, and the ball-crushing nature of 3rd wave Feminism is anything but equal!
Lol, I dont think the 70's were noble, they were just less jaded and more active (as compared to the soma-supplied world we live in now; where people are quite effectively bribed in passivity or brow-beaten into apathy).
"This must be WOTC's attempt at keeping up with the 'no child left behind' social approach. Its so simplified that you dont even have to be a geek to understand it anymore."
:heehee
That reminds me about the retards in A-hall
they shouldn't be in a high school, they should be in specialized facilities where highly skilled educators and not a few doctors can try treat or compensate for he children's problems, rather than ignoring them and letting them stew in their own drool.
back to D&D, but I do like how there are allot of abilities defined in 3ed. Then you move on to d20 modern, where you could do anything.
but then a new boss and that policy set in.
:heehee
That reminds me about the retards in A-hall
they shouldn't be in a high school, they should be in specialized facilities where highly skilled educators and not a few doctors can try treat or compensate for he children's problems, rather than ignoring them and letting them stew in their own drool.
back to D&D, but I do like how there are allot of abilities defined in 3ed. Then you move on to d20 modern, where you could do anything.
but then a new boss and that policy set in.
Dude, don't use that word for mental handicap sufferers.
For the 70s, to be fair, that was the time where Punk subculture came... And for all they said on the 80s and Rap, that was about as violently shoutting 'ya basta!' now and then.
(Also, cyberpunk for the 80s...)
The early editions never dictated how a your setting should be played, the rules was so loose, that any setting was possible - Hyboria, Middle Earth, Tékumel (the vary first D&D setting), the Arthurian Age, and any historical or imaginary age you can think of. You cant really do that with 3.X/4e as both of the game are geared only to the high-fantasy/dungeonpunk genres.
But you can. Also, D&D was always High Fantasy, look at Mystara.
You sounds a bit condescendant, and a bit wrong, albeit in a polite manner.
Judging by this very forum, the ones who like this edition are able to be creative, imaginative... they 'play hands in the motor oil', and don't necessarly needs add-ons. Also, there is criticisms and counterpoints toward the old edition's alegated weak points.
All in all, the current generation is able to think and create.
You're mistaken there. It was the 90's that were apathetic. This is a transition period, and rather active.
But I don't like what its transitioning to. I like my freedom to choose, I like my freedom to make myself better. And I like my freedom to be ready to defend my freedom.
Nowadays, kids have 'Net friends and RL friends, who they still meet on-line everyday. If you're going to have fun with friends, near or far, you'll probably be using the web.
Hopefully, DDI can facilitate the Net generation learning what P&P RPGing is about.
The problem is DMs don't have a cheat that players can exploit.
In my games, Raise Dead costs 680 gp or $20 IRL ;)
Wow. This thread has turned from lamenting the loss of young DND players to arguing about which decade is better. Never underestimate the twists and turns in a thread a DND player can make
It went also of course into the obligatory youth-bashing, ageism.
But I don't like what its transitioning to. I like my freedom to choose, I like my freedom to make myself better. And I like my freedom to be ready to defend my freedom.
There is peoples engaged precisely for that... Young ones are not engaged in traditional politic, that don't means however not engaged at all...
But you can. Also, D&D was always High Fantasy, look at Mystara.
Actually D&D use to be a mix of Sword & Sorcery and High-Fantasy. Sword & Sorcery is basically like the gritty nihilistic pulp-yarns you would read in Conan, and High-Fantasy is the epic tales of good vs evil you would read in Lords of the Rings. Both sub-genres handle things vary differently.
Unfortunately, the 3rd edition don't allow for Sword & Sorcery gaming without taring apart the the rule-heavy system. I should know, I tried to develop a Sword & Sorcery setting with the d20 system without much success. Thankful Mongoose Publishing did some awesome work converting the High-Fantasy 3e system into a playable S&S system for the Conan RPG line, and frankly put, they did a lot of improvements beyond the normal d20 rules.
As for 4e, its feels like it go beyond even High-Fantasy. It feels more like a Hyper-Fantasy, like the Exalted game or what ever the hell the Eberron setting falls under (pulp/dark-fantasy my ass! :rolleyes
. I have read the 4e rules and played some adventures, it has some good ideas (not a lot, just enough to cannibalize into other systems), but the system as a whole would not be worth the effort to make it something it not!Actually D&D use to be a mix of Sword & Sorcery and High-Fantasy. Sword & Sorcery is basically like the gritty nihilistic pulp-yarns you would read in Conan, and High-Fantasy is the epic tales of good vs evil you would read in Lords of the Rings. Both sub-genres handle things vary differently.
Unfortunately, the 3rd edition don't allow for Sword & Sorcery gaming without taring apart the the rule-heavy system. I should know, I tried to develop a Sword & Sorcery setting with the d20 system without much success. Thankful Mongoose Publishing did some awesome work converting the High-Fantasy 3e system into a playable S&S system for the Conan RPG line, and frankly put, they did a lot of improvements beyond the normal d20 rules.
As for 4e, its feels like it go beyond even High-Fantasy. It feels more like a Hyper-Fantasy, like the Exalted game or what ever the hell the Eberron setting falls under (pulp/dark-fantasy my ass! :rolleyes
Have you tried d20 modern? It gets much grittier when massive damage is equal to your con modifier, and every NPC has more than one hit die.
Do you think certain genres of RPGs are more age specific? That is, do certain demographics, age or otherwise, seem to be drawn to a particular setting more than another?
Small refresher course for the rest of us:
-Greyhawk (standard, high fantasy)
-Ravenloft (gothic horror)
-Darksun (pseudo post-apocalyptic)
-Forgotten Realms (high fantasy)
-Spelljammer (space opera-ish)
-Eberron (noir, mage-punk)
Etc. I know there are more, feel free to add.
Actually D&D use to be a mix of Sword & Sorcery and High-Fantasy. Sword & Sorcery is basically like the gritty nihilistic pulp-yarns you would read in Conan, and High-Fantasy is the epic tales of good vs evil you would read in Lords of the Rings. Both sub-genres handle things vary differently.
Unfortunately, the 3rd edition don't allow for Sword & Sorcery gaming without taring apart the the rule-heavy system. I should know, I tried to develop a Sword & Sorcery setting with the d20 system without much success. Thankful Mongoose Publishing did some awesome work converting the High-Fantasy 3e system into a playable S&S system for the Conan RPG line, and frankly put, they did a lot of improvements beyond the normal d20 rules.
As for 4e, its feels like it go beyond even High-Fantasy. It feels more like a Hyper-Fantasy, like the Exalted game or what ever the hell the Eberron setting falls under (pulp/dark-fantasy my ass! :rolleyes
D&D was never gritty or realistic.
Also, the same old canard, cliché...
D&D was never gritty or realistic.
Also, the same old canard, cliché...
yup, I'm sure that the d20 modern massive damage rules were as gritty as they got.
Unfortunately, the 3rd edition don't allow for Sword & Sorcery gaming without taring apart the the rule-heavy system.
You know, it never fails to amaze me how hung up on the rules everyone always seemed to be. And this applies for any edition of the game. If you're the DM and you have a problem with the rules, then by all means, adjust them. Just do it consistently and never in favor of one particular person or instance and you'll be fine.
I'm hoping some of the younger people who start playing this game will understand this. The problem is that the games they have been playing, either online or stand-alone have been of a much more linear type than previous RPGS were. While MMOs have a greater capacity for variance in the experience of the quest, the basic guidelines apply. See person A, find object/person B, gain prize.
I'm hoping that instead of those straight lines from A to B the new batch of players have the chance, (and a decent enough DM) to be able to stop by points C and D on their way through sometimes. And if you have to bend, break, or replace the rules along the way, well, then so be it.
Ah well. Just another rant from a tired crazy guy.