What would you do if you owned D&D?
I ask because the question has taken on a very small amount of pertinence in the last couple of weeks, in the aftermath of Elon Musk's having expressed his views about the game. I don't wish to get into the ins and outs of those views here and I would like to leave politics entirely to one side. I would just like to raise for observation the interesting point that we now live in an age in which there are lots of very nerdy people who also have veritable bag of holding of billions of dollars in cash - and, that since nerds are much more likely to play D&D than the average person, this makes the purchase of D&D by an eccentric billionaire are not-entirely unthinkable proposition.
Reel off the list: Elon Musk. Bill Gates. Mark Zuckerberg. Peter Thiel. Sundar Pichai. Sam Altman. And so on and so on; the question that is most appropriate to ask is not 'How many of these people have played D&D?' but 'How many of them haven't?' And who is to write off the possibility that one of these people may some day decide that they would actually quite like to be the one who gets to make his favourite role playing game his plaything? The thing about eccentric billionaires is that they do eccentric things with their money. Could we see emerging a future in which D&D, in the manner of a down-at-heel sport club bought by Hollywood Stars, becomes a trophy of of the super-rich?
Elon Musk himself was openly musing in the aftermath of the recent farrago (one assumes jokingly, though possibly not) about buying Hasbro, whose market capitalisation is 'only' about $9 billion. What would you do vis-a-vis D&D if you had just bought Hasbro for $9 billion? Or, for that matter, if you had just prized the D&D IP from Wizards of the Coast, presumably for rather less than $9 billion, and made it your own?
To keep this organised and manageable, I recommend limiting yourself to decisions across up to three axes.
1 - What would you do with respect to the rules?
2 - What changes would you make to the default setting?
3 - What settings would you commission? Bear in mind you are an eccentric multi-billionaire. Probably any book or film franchise is achievable. Which would you pick?
I'm making the D&D brand royalty free, forever.
ReplyDeleteI fire everyone at Wizards and hire my favorite OSR authors.
I commission the settings: Dark Sun, Greyhawk, Lankhmar, Mystara and new settings of my favorite OSR authors.
Who are the authors and what are the settings?
DeleteIt's a good (or, at least, interesting) question to ask. But I'd imagine most of the answers would be dumb because they'd all be based on personal bias...and not necessarily *informed* bias.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about billionaires with respect to such "pet projects" is that they tend to fall into one of two camps; either A) 'what's best for business' (i.e. what will generate the most profitable return on the investment), OR B) weird visionary that manages to catch lightning in a bottle. Actually, scratch that...those two camps might define multi-millionaires, but billionaires ALL tend to land in camp "A."
And camp "A" isn't what D&D needs to rehabilitate it.
Now ol' Elon is in a slightly different position, because of his ability to actually influence public opinion (because of his control over certain enormous social media platforms) so he has a little more ease of "catching lightning" vis-a-vis his "weird ideas." But even he's a busy guy...not just with making money and running his empire, but also with his new government gig.
[yeah, I know that doesn't answer across your three axes. Apologies]
It's just a fun thing to imagine!
DeleteWell for one thing, if I owned D&D, I wouldn't sell it to the Elongated Muskrat.
ReplyDelete1- Probably keep 5e going (its familiar and it sells, and I think its basically a good system); institute a more OSR-oriented version ("Basic") ; and see what else is missing from the market today. 4e was my least favorite, but people played it - would 1-2 releases a year sell well? Who knows??
ReplyDelete2- I'd look at new default settings for the core line and keep the "OSR" line grounded in GH. Maybe? I like settings, so probably a new setting book once a year, or setting book + monsters/treasures book for that setting. I'd also push DIY & homebrew a lot more.
3- people seem to like the big campaign books a lot (ugh) so those can stay, but maybe annually. Add smaller adventures that either fill in around those or explore different settings & themes. Bring back Dragon & Dungeon while I'm at it, probably as POD.
4- There are a lot of good settings out there. I'd have to think about it.
It's interesting how some people approach this as 'what would sell well?' and others as 'I'm a billionaire so who cares?'
DeleteWhen it comes to monsters, I would like to spend fewer words on mechanics and more on fluff, which would require simplifying monsters, maybe something along the lines of "most monsters have a [monster] chassis, plus some modifications," e.g. "as bear, plus the following: ..."
ReplyDeleteBesides that, I'm not sure I'd make any substantial changes. There are lots of fiddly crunchy bits I don't care for, but ultimately they add up to a game I don't want to play but which other people apparently do. Changing the rules to suit myself wouldn't be "fixing" D&D, it would be replacing D&D with something else that just happens to have the same name.
I agree with the first paragraph.
Delete1. I would fragment the rules into a very minimalist base ruleset plus a large number of modular add-on systems, designed to be chosen a la carte and easily kitbashed together.
ReplyDelete2. There wouldn't be one.
3. Original works only. I wouldn't commission any pre-existing IP as a setting, unless the original author played D&D and was interested in coming on board.
I would also probably prefer original works only, though there are some criminally unloved settings out there in the world.... mostly written by Jack Vance.
DeleteReally interesting question that has got me thinking. The D&D fan base is very diverse and rather fragmented, particularly between the OSR camp and the 5E camp, and I don't think I would even attempt to unify them. I would recognise that different customers want different products and not tell them "you're having fun the wrong way". With respect to your three questions:
ReplyDelete1) In terms of rules I would keep the main rules close to 5E but old school rules (OD&D, B/X & 1E AD&D) would be released as free under creative commons (I am not a lawyer, so this might not be quite right),
2) The default setting would probably be Forgotten Realms as it is for 5E. Simply because it is so popular and is something of a "kitchen sink" setting - you can add anything and it would fit inside Faerun somewhere.
3) Greyhawk and maybe Dark Sun. For Greyhawk I would keep the old-school vibes even if that means ignoring races and subclasses (no goliaths or dragon-born). Forgotten Realms is the place for those new character options.
Would you not be tempted just to make it entirely what you wanted, and the fan base could like it or lump it?
Deleterules: Gygax's advanced D&D
ReplyDeletesetting: Tolkien's Wilderland map in The Hobbit
I've no real thoughts on the question posed here, but re "who hasn't played D&D", I was tickled when a friend told me that he once ran a game for David Cameron (who played a dwarf, called something like "Gumli"). They tried to get Boris Johnson involved too, but apparently he wasn't interested.
ReplyDeleteSo: Boris. I know he's not a tech billionaire, but anyway, Boris Johnson hasn't played D&D.
I hear Michael Gove grew up in the hobby.
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/jul/13/from-game-of-thrones-to-michael-gove-the-legacy-of-dungeons-dragons
DeleteYou can imagine Boris not being up for it. He'd think it was 'piffle'.
DeleteI'd eat the banana? Art is for consumption by the rich! I guess the game started as the plaything of a couple of guys who weren't rich, money got made, friends brought in, more money got made, then the knives came out and here we are. For me the charm of (A)D&D is Gary's voice, tone, organization, and usage which I love and most don't. I don't despise any addition between then and now, but your first love is your first love, flaws and all. I suppose I'd try to make something as backwards compatible as possible, so you could bring any old thing off eBay you found exciting to the table and get gaming no matter the edition, but tilting at windmills would probably be more productive and generate greater revenue.
ReplyDeleteI think I'd keep 5E and make a basic version out of Essentials or Starter set to help feed new players into the game. I'm not a great fan of 5E but it has been successful so why kill a good thing.
ReplyDeleteI'd change the modules from adventure paths that go from 1-10 or 1-20. I'd still have the hardbacks but they'd be sandboxes built around the Tiers of play.
1. and 2. Keep 5E, but market it as "Basic". 1E sold as "Advanced", keeping true to AD&D more than OSRIC, but better explained than by EGG. Focus on world-building, and including a Chainmail based wargame - again, better written and easier to grasp than by EGG! Might include some Tony Bath elements. Needs to interact better with 1E rules and setting.
ReplyDelete3. Greyhawk, Al-Qadim, Dark Sun, Planescape, Birthright, Lankhmar, Yoon-Suin.
4. I'm not a billionaire, but I might blog some streamlined naval wargaming rules true to Original and Advanced rules in a few weeks time on my blog. For free. If I don't get distracted by other RPG stuff.
I have a sort of a meta-answer, more about process than content.
ReplyDeleteSimply put, I would liberate the brand from the need to exert market dominance or even make money. I would define what the game is more clearly - even if it is "mechanically and personally detailed characters embodying social justice ideals in lip-service while murdering huge numbers of undesirable life forms in order to get ahead" - and if people want a different style or substance to their game, I would allow games with that other vision to compete, even to the point of allowing open gaming simul-clones (Hardcore D&D! Cosycore D&D!)
Or: the most offensive thing about 5th edition for me is the blob-like will to devour all other genres and play modes, through throwaway rules in the DMG that clearly haven't been playtested for even 15 minutes.
1. I'd simplify the rules, especially the character creation rules, to make them more accessible to new players. I'd make sure that they don't leave things in the rules that give homework to the DM - giving people poisoner kit proficiency but no idea what that means for example.
ReplyDelete2. I'd take the setting out of Forgotten Realms and make it more of a micro-setting like in 4e's Nentir Vale, with the explicit idea that D&D is about creation and so it's supposed to inspire you to create your own small setting or slot into something you make yourself. I'd keep the other settings but I would not have any "default", the default should be DM created homebrew.
3. I'd probably get Middle Earth tbh. It's my favourite fantasy setting after all. But really I wouldn't be that interested in purchasing settings.
What I would do that's not on your list is really focus on good location based design rather than scripted adventure paths. Sell locations (with antagonists) as the units of pre-made material rather than "paths", to encourage open ended gaming and game design.
I'd probably do worse with the company than the current people in charge though because of my strong opinions about these sorts of things which make me less in touch with the average gamer. But I'd like to see the culture of play pushed more toward "adventure gaming" and away from "theatre kids doing funny voices and fanfic".
Rules - Well, I don't know enough to comment meaningfully.
ReplyDeleteDefault Setting - I'd want it to be highly digestible....and also something you were clearly meant to transcend, or use for something else. An ingredient found in every cupboard that you would never think of serving alone.
I guess it would be something like Lankhmar as written by David Eddings with some Tolkienian additions for Elves, Dwarves, &c.
(Is that unappealing? Probably. Is that inedible? Hopefully not.)
Maybe this could be massaged into some a fractured open-ended world - like the things I've clumped together under the label Translucent Polities.
Settings to Commission - Well, leaving aside anything that's managed to slither its way into a blog post....
I'd personally quite like settings that demonstrated the bounds of what D&D could do. So one setting demonstrating something low-magic, low-information...that sat in between Votan, Mythago Wood [as in, when the magic emerged it was pretty mystifying] and the Icelandic sagas. (Which reminds me, I should look into Wulfwald). Then something else with teeming metropolises and numerous wonders - between the 1001 Nights and Europe on the verge of the Reformation. (See some of the Maximalist work from over at Grand Commodore.)
But the two (or more) don't sit in the same world. If there's any crossover at all, it's the vein of the Great Fold. [https://falsemachine.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-great-fold.html]
There would be many lists for recommended reading.
1. Reset the rules to a Holmes + AD&D hybrid. Luckily this just involves buying in Holmes Journeymanne from Michael Thomas.
ReplyDelete2 & 3. Hire Sandy Petersen to resurrect his AD&D Glorantha campaign as the setting. That ensures that a proper design genius would be in charge.
SJB
I think about this too much - to the point that I just ramble.
ReplyDeleteWhat I think I've worked out though is that I'd release something named Dungeons and Dragons Classic that would basically be OSE Classic & Advanced with improvements - look at the core 4 classes in Dolmenwood for some ideas on that. Support for that would be TSR era modules reworked like what's in the recent Endless Staircase release for 5e along with new hardcovers that are made of new 20-40 page modules.
I think that if you split up D&D in to world spanning and dungeon crawling, 5e handles world spanning very well, but for dungeon crawling I want something more resistant to min maxing and the character build metagame that 5e has come to represent in my mind.
5e would carry on as is, but with a more conservative approach to new character options.
1. Make everything already published copyright-free, and allow anyone to publish anything "Compatible with D&D 5e" (or 3e, or 1e, or BX etc.). The new standard D&D rules would be based on OD&D (LBBs + Supplement I), but with a minimal number of monsters (maybe just the monsters mentioned in Chainmail plus normal and giant animals and some different types of ghosts). The rulebooks would be in black and white with great art, useful random tables, and stuff like numbered hex sheets to photocopy. I'd include reprints of the best advice on running the game from old magazines and OSR magazines. the rulebook would include a brief history and explanation of the different published versions of D&D, and point the reader towards the best published adventures and other products (TSR and OSR). There would be an emphasis on encouraging the referee to create their own stuff and plunder all the good stuff that's already been written, and making it easy for them to do so. It would be unashamedly Old School.
ReplyDeleteI'd also try to buy up lots of old IP, like all the D&D stuff from White Dwarf magazine, or everything published by Judges Guild, and make that copyright free too.
2. There wouldn't be any specific world as a default setting.
3. I'd like to do a "reboot" of either Blackmoor or Mystara. On the whole, I like both of these settings but there are some things that I would like to change about them (like, I'd like to see the Blackmoor Castle dungeons with a more comprehensible map and a key that makes more sense).
4. I'm not expecting my vision for the future of D&D to make money!
1. I'd restore the Basic/Classic and Advanced lines, and probably keep 5E under something like "D&D 2K."
ReplyDelete2. By "default setting" are we talking about specific named worlds like Mystara or Forgotten Realms, or something generic largely implied by the rule set, core classes, and such, included in the rules primarily as an example/starter setting for new DMs? If the former, I'm not sure it needs one. For the latter, I'd want something stripped down to the basics to allow for customization by individual DMs and groups, like the Known World in the Expert Set, before it was expanded into Mystara.
3. Honestly, I think I'd pass. Those things always end up looking pretty cringey to me. Lord of the Rings is not D&D, and it just feels weird to try to shoehorn it into the D&D paradigm.
Assuming I was an eccentric billionare, I wouldn't be needing for the thing to actually turn any profit, wich means I could choose the better artistic/historical solution: let it gracefully die. Put out archival editions on perennial print-by-demand (yes, idealsitic didaticism impossible in the real world, but we are just fantasizing, right?). Relinquish all rules copyright in an OGL manner. Publish no further official material. Give back desining D&D to the player's and the indies and forget about selling the latest corporation canned flavour of fluff. Allow it to sink off the mainstream back into mattering only to the group of people that actually play it and, by hell, may they play it any freaking way they want. Give it the chance to be a weird hobby again, instead of a hip, pasteurized thing.
ReplyDeleteSince I am a richie rich guy and I don't need to make money the main things I want to do are:
ReplyDelete1. Diversify the hobby by encouraging people to play different RPGs. The Player's Handbook would explicitly mention other RPGs you could look into (Call of Cthulhu, Pathfinder 2e, and maybe some OSR thing). I would buy the rights to Worlds Without Number and publish it as "Old-School D&D" and publish a new edition of 4th edition as "D&D Tactics" and explicitly encourage you to pick which of the three best suits your playstyle.
2. Encourage people to hack with the rules. In several places I would list explicitly optional mechanics, or other options, with an explanation of what kind of game it encourages. I would try to have explanations for WHY rules are the way they are to discourage Ivory Tower Design and make hacking it easier.
In answer to your actual questions:
1. Rules-wise I'm gonna stick with 5th edition but try to bring in a little more old-school style to it. Have explicit procedures for dungeon crawling and wilderness crawling, have classes with features that interact with it (but with optional replacements for players who only want to do combat), and have the example adventures full of interesting dungeons. Hire some of the better dungeon designers from the OSR to make some cool dungeons. Ditch Darkvision on everyone but Dwarves and Goblins. Bring in slot-style encumbrance, torches, etc. Make the game easier to run without a battle grid to encourage people to do lots of short skirmishes rather than big set piece battles. Codify rules for diplomacy and reactions and shit.
2. Push the default setting further towards both a realistic medieval world AND further towards "gonzo weirdness." Races should have lots of tables I can roll on to generate a weird character that make them different from humans (less "dwarves are generally honorable" and more "dwarves have a long list of everyone who has ever wronged their ancestors and plot revenge on their descendents"). Make a world that's less "good vs evil" and more just, like, neutral, where the players are encouraged to be treasure-hunters and adventurers rather than world-saving heroes.
Also, ditch all the baggage around D&D Orcs and make them back into Tolkien-esque technologically-advanced-colonizing-orcs, which is both less problematic and also cooler.
3. Settings: Star Wars.
Whatever else I did, I'd put the original boxed set back in print, in its original form-factor, crappy art and all. Heck, maybe do that for the core rules for basic and advanced as well.
ReplyDeleteONE magic-user class, with lots of cool fiddly modular bits. no more bullshit distinctions between wizard and sorcerer and warlock and bard. also merge druid and cleric (and maybe parts of warlock).
ReplyDeletealso other things but god, what I'd give for a single MU class.