Ryan posted in my year end recap the following:

"It is already impossible to ignore the economic impact MMORPGs are having on the tabletop sub-segment - they decimated it in 2005. Only time will tell if some value premise can be rebuilt from the foundations available to entice a new generation of gamers into the hobby - or if the battle has already been lost.

Me, I'm betting on the guys with $480,000,000."

This is noteworthy for two reasons.

1. Ryan's a sharp guy.
2. This is the first time I've heard him say this. It's a change of course on his previous takes, AFAIK.

Obviously, I don't agree that the race is already over. Otherwise, I wouldn't work at WotC. But I think we are seeing some effect from WoW, but I don't think it's the effect people expect.

The past year has seen a dip in RPG sales, but the tea leaves I'm reading tell me that we're seeing the second tier companies mauled the worst. If we look at the market, we see that fewer and fewer new games establish themselves in the market.

I think WoW is sponging up the TRPGers who can't find groups.

Who are the people who can't find groups? They're not D&D players - remember, D&D's strength is that so many people play, it's easy to find a group.

I think WoW is taking away those gamers who fall through D&D's grasp and seek out other games. Those are the gamers who can't find groups, and for whom WoW might fill that gap.

(Post a new comment)

frabjousdave 2005-12-21 05:34 pm UTC (link)

Anecdotally, after a year of WoW, I and my wife began a D&D campaign with four other novice players and two veterans. Of the group, two others are WoW players, and at least two want to play but dare not for fear of its eating into other quality time. Meeting biweekly for D&D, however, is comfortable to them. And the reason we're playing D&D instead of Cthulhu or another of my favorites is that electronic games like WoW and Diablo gave some of the novices immediate familiarity with a fantasy setting and the D&D paradigm. Still, I think Ryan is largely right on this one, but I'm glad to think the MMORPGs will send some players back to the tabletop even as they pull some away. It'll almost certainly mean a net loss, but perhaps not a total loss. (Reply to this)

gamescribe 2005-12-21 05:39 pm UTC (link)

Let me tell you the one game that World of Warcraft has killed -- the Wacraft tabletop RPG. Now that my group all plays WoW, well, why the hell would we want to play the tabletop game? I mean, theoretically I know that there are still stories to be told and adventures to be had that could never be repicated by the PC game, but everytime my players would go to Stormwing, for example, they'd just say, "Oh, I'm going straight to Shop X to buy my XXXXX" and player knowledge would constantly override character knowledge. The only reason Galaxies didn't do it to Star Wars gamers is because, well, Galaxies sucked. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	gamescribe 2005-12-21 05:40 pm UTC (link)
	And by the way, I hate these "ergonomic" keyboards. As you can tell, they absolutely murder my spelling ability. Stupid office computer. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - entsuropi, 2005-12-21 05:43 pm UTC

(no subject) - kadath, 2005-12-21 05:43 pm UTC

(no subject) - gamescribe, 2005-12-21 05:50 pm UTC

(no subject) - kadath, 2005-12-21 06:03 pm UTC

(no subject) - jhkimrpg, 2005-12-21 06:26 pm UTC

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-21 06:22 pm UTC

(no subject) - wordwill, 2005-12-21 08:26 pm UTC

	entsuropi 2005-12-21 05:47 pm UTC (link)
	I find MMORPG's frustrating to roleplay in - there just isn't enough power to change the world, too many other people and it's a lot harder to do 'stories' of any kind without the ability to mesh space/time to my bidding. Also known as 'later that week...'. (Reply to this)

	rentagurkha 2005-12-21 05:47 pm UTC (link)
	I think the MMORPGs are also getting most of the people who WOULD have become D&D players in the past. That, I think, is where the real falloff will happen. (Reply to this)

	dirkcjelli 2005-12-21 05:48 pm UTC (link)
	Another matter to consider is, where will MMORPGs be in 5 years... with voice headsets and a capability to customize character design and perhaps character environments further, the distinction between MMOLRPGs and the pen-and-paper variety will still be distinct, but shrinking. (Reply to this) (Thread)

autopope 2005-12-21 06:05 pm UTC (link)

If you think that's all there is to where MMORPGs are going in the next five years, you drastically underestimate them. Thing is, MMORPGs are the first commercially viable multi-user virtual reality environments. And as the bandwidth available to mobile telephony in 3G, WiMAX and then 4G systems blows through the bandwidth available to broadband home PC users today, and as mobile handsets acquire more MIPS than a Pentium IV, and ubiquitous positioning services and head-up displays come in (like the one Nokia started selling last month in France) ... let's just say, in the 5-10 year frame MMORPGs aren't only going to eat TRPGs, they're going to eat LARPGs as well. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - kadath, 2005-12-21 06:28 pm UTC

(no subject) - jaydedone, 2005-12-21 07:01 pm UTC

yeloson 2005-12-21 05:49 pm UTC (link)

MMORPGs also place a lot of control into the hands of individuals about their commitment levels- I can log on, play whenever I feel like it, for only an hour if only an hour is what I want, and I don't necessarily HAVE to coordinate with other folks. I don't have to get a group of people, try to "feel out" what their style of play is or what they're about, and if people are snarky, I don't have to play with them. The rules of MMORPGs are consistant and do not "fudge" or change based on someone's whim or personal issues. I don't think it's the issue of "finding a group" it's the overhead of work that goes along with it. You can find D&D groups, but finding one you like? That might take some work. You can play WoW without having any of that effort involved. (Reply to this)

Heresy! rsdancey 2005-12-21 05:50 pm UTC (link)

I will now make a very heretical argument. Blizzard should cut Wizards of the Coast a giant "thank you" check, because I believe that D&D3E is the exact reason that WoW is doing so well. In 1998-99, our market research uncovered the fact that there were several million people playing RPGs annually, and more than a million playing D&D monthly. That data stunned us - because the number of active >purchasers< in the category at the time was likely just several tens of thousands. For a host of reasons, the market had lost contact with its customers - people who remained committed to an RPG component of their lifestyles, but had little or no contact with the business of making and selling RPGs. D&D3E got a lot of those people back in retail stores, and revitalized the business of selling RPGs. People who may not have made an RPG purchase in more than a decade shelled out $100 for the three core books, and likely some other products in addition. And it is a lot easier to redirect purchasing power once it is active than it is to activate it in the first place. EQ never addressed the fun/not-fun ratio problem. EQ required players to substitute "boredom" as a primary resource for character advancement. "How long were you willing to wait to do something" became a fundamental game design paradigm. I know people who learned to play guitar, taught themselves a foreign language, and worked on masters and PhD dissertations while camping in EQ. As a result, the game remained a niche player compared to D&D. At its height, EQ boasted perhaps 400,000 paying customers - and as with many service-based businesses, I suspect that means that only 40,000 played on any given month. WoW addressed this problem and then some. WoW (and City of Heroes) still require you to use "boredom" as a resource - but the level of boredom required is tiny compared to that of EQ. Having addressed the fun/not-fun ratio problem, these games were rewarded with the ability to sell into a market recently revived by D&D3E - a million or so consumers who were buying RPG products and had money to spend. Now tabletop RPGs (TRPGs) have a network externality problem. The core network of TRPGs (D&D) is being predated upon by the WoW network - which continues to grow. The WoW network is extremely dangerous for the TRPG network, because it has a twin attack: 1) It is cheap. $15/mo is nothing compared to what most people spend for entertainment, and a lot less than an active, engaged purcahser of a TRPG line spends during the purchasing cycle. 2) It uses time as a resource. Player time. Time that could be spent engaged in TRPG activities (scheduling, prep, play, and post-game). All MMORPG players know that time spent in the game is rewarded in the form of increased power and range of action. So time spent playing a TRPG is actually >hurting< them in relation to their peer group in the MMORPG. Since the release of 3.5, I believe we've seen a "flight to quality" in the TRPG segment. Players are increasingly unwilling to buy products they think they can't use - so they buy D&D products, because they think they can use those products universally. As the WoW network predates on the TRPG network, it will be increasingly hard to justify that mentality. I am hearing about far more gaming groups moving on-line and suspending tabletop play than I am the reverse. And that's a trend I think will accelerate. Worse, the real profit-making business of D&D is selling core rulebooks. Core rulebooks are sold to younger, new players who are interested in the hobby and are becoming ensnared in the TRPG network externality. WoW blocks that acquisition path - it is much more likely that a young, fantasy oriented, otherwise likely target customer will get diverted into WoW than that they'll pick up D&D or another TRPG. Cutting off the acquisition engine of D&D will kill the TRPG category as a viable business - even if millions of grognards continue to meet and play into their golden years. Ryan (Reply to this) (Thread)

Wizard's writer shot themselves in the foot. (Anonymous) 2005-12-22 03:17 am UTC (link)

3.5 books do have a fair bit of the writer's own personal political views in them, I've notice. I think this has turned off many. Orphans not interested in trying C&C or another fantasy RPG, instead waiting.. waiting.. And along came Warcraft to adopt them. No preachy lizardFOLK, no WereFOLK, no multi-cultural euro-centric fantasy worlds. No global warming in the Forgotten Realms. Characters were archtypes again, not comic book superheroes. No worrying about miniature rules when you didn't use them. It's all there free (for the fee) on Warcraft. - V (Reply to this) (Parent)

Ryan.. - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 07:34 am UTC

Re: Heresy! - jdigital, 2005-12-24 01:24 pm UTC

Re: Heresy! - rverghes, 2005-12-29 05:43 am UTC

Re: Heresy! - (Anonymous), 2006-01-12 05:01 am UTC

(Anonymous) 2005-12-21 06:12 pm UTC (link)

If I remember correctly, you also have to take into account that roughly 2/3 of World of Warcraft's subscribers come from overseas (especially in China and Korea where that's the only type of video games that are often played), so the comparison isn't really analogous. You could also probably argue that WoW has more of a depressing effect on the sales of other videogame products (i.e. MMORPG players less likely to buying new games) as I know that there have been some videogame industry folks (like EA's president) who have stated as such. One of my good friends who is a video game designer whose been in the industry a long time has the same sentiment regarding MMORPGs. (Reply to this)

spkelley 2005-12-21 06:41 pm UTC (link)

You know, this brings up an interesting thought on the industry itself that I, and some friends, have been pondering. Its kind of off topic but bear with me. Us 30+ year olds have grown up with D&D. The system was like no other. There were no video games of its type that matched it. Looking back, it was nuts on how it worked, and even more nuts that we understood it. Now, some of us are behind the development wheel, either as pro designers, amateurs, or active participants. But now the audience is changing. The generation is changing. There are video games that people can plug into. Some of the table-top game systems are even making it more video-game-like and taking away much of the RP'ing factor found in years past. One example is that we didnt use minis in 1st Ed D&D and we had fun. It worked for us. Now, the rules basically require you to have some type of mini or avatar to conduct any action sequence that occurs in-game so that there is no mistaking what is happening on grid laid out on the table. As time goes on that EQ or WoW generation will be entering the game developer market place. What will we see then? I worry about this and I heed much of what rsdancey mentioned. (Reply to this) (Thread)

jaydedone 2005-12-21 07:12 pm UTC (link)

You know, I will say that I thought it interesting that mearls' own creation, IRON HEROES, added an element that immediately conjured other mediums, like video games but also board games, in my mind. When you look at the various tokens used to power up certain attacks in the IRON HEROES game, the immediate comparison I drew was to the various pools in MMORPGs. The Barbarian's Fury tokens conjured up the various MMORPG games in which Rage is built up and spent on various attacks, for example. The use of Tokens, as opposed to some numerical value, to me felt like a nod to those systems, which themselves use graphical gauges, usually line increments or dots, to guide the player in choosing among his options. Granted, the systems behind these graphical implementations themselves harken back to the old pen-and-paper roots, but the use of the Token, especially when I think of it in shiny, colored Pente-stone form, REALLY evoked the flashiness of another sort of game. And while I lack a local group to test this hypothesis out on, I'm willing to bet that the added perk of playing with pretty stones as Tokens and the potent flexibility of the systems behind them will be the number one thing my players cite as being a plus in playing IRON HEROES as opposed to "vanilla" D&D. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - spkelley, 2005-12-21 11:01 pm UTC

Minis Killed the Radio Star - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 04:26 am UTC

rickj 2005-12-21 07:03 pm UTC (link)

Just to add my $0.02 - The big win that online games have over tabletop games is the scheduling issues. My cohort of gamers is largely over 30, many are married and have kids. Finding time where we can all get together to play on a regular basis is a scheduling nightmare. In a MMORPG, if I've got a free hour I can find a group of folks in my super-group (City of Heroes' version of a Guild) to team with. If I've got a half hour, I can run a mission solo. And I'll argue that there is little to no boredom factor in CoH. The only time I'm sitting around twiddling my thumbs is when a group is getting together and we're waiting for the group to convene. The downside is, of course, I can't be a GM or have house rules. But the big win for me is that I can play when I have the time, instead of when six people have the time. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Long distant playing (Anonymous) 2005-12-22 04:28 am UTC (link)
	I think Monte Cook might of been on to something when he mentioned on his blog about the game he played with long distance players. Now that's what is needed. A tell all about how to set up one's home computer (cheaply and easily) for playing. But nope.. minis , minis, and dull ecology books. - V (Reply to this) (Parent)

zgaidin 2005-12-21 07:38 pm UTC (link)

I have several only semi-related additions to this conversation. I make these as an avid WoW player and someone who's been playing TRPGS and fiddling with game design since I was nine. 1) rsdancey gets it right nearly all the way down the page, especially in his comments about the commercial power of MMOs. It's just infinitely cheaper to MMO than any other form of entertainment since free MUDs died, and WoW has fixed so many of the problems that kept EQ a niche game for the hardcore gamist. 2) rickj hits my frustration with TRPGs in the last few years right on the head. I've gone from a group of 7-8 adults that met every week to 3, one of which is me and another is my wife, that I even talk to once a week. This is, by and large, true for totally different reasons for the target audience that TRPG companies are trying to pull into the hobby. Who are they? They're usually pre-driving age teens. That was -the- hassle about gaming when I was a kid. We had all the free-time in the world, but we had to find a way for everyone to get to the same place to do it. If I was twelve years old again, I wouldn't bother. $15/month was much more within my budget than the untold sums I mowed lawns for to purchase RPG books. No hassle about getting anywhere, I can play with my friends whenever I want, none of has to be the DM, etc etc. That will hurt TRPGs and the companies that make them in the long run. 3) Here's the positive news. If you can stand the drivel, swing by the WoW official General Forum linked off their homepage. There are 2 linked 40+ page threads (because their forum software will only let any given thread get so long) from the last week about how the end-game of WoW is fundamentally flawed. These two threads were birthed out of the 10+ 20 page threads from last week about the same thing. WoW managed immense commercial success by marketing itself as the opposite of all the things that kept EQ niche. It was marketed for casual gamers, solo gamers, etc. And until you hit the level cap, that's absolutely the case. They did a beautiful job. Once you hit the level cap, you don't have the hassle of coordinating your schedule with 3-5 other gamers to get anywhere as you do in a tabletop game. You have to coordinate with 39 other players. I refer, in a mix of playfulness and scornful derision, to the end-game of WoW as it stands as "Tarrasque" design. Despite the color and creativity they managed to squeeze out of small group and solo play up to the end of the game, they just have yet to come up with much that isn't just MUCH BIGGER to really challenge the players woh've hit the level cap. Due to the massive outcry and the fact that only, by their estimations at Blizzcon, about 10% of all players engage in 40-man play (and less like it), they are talking vaguely about adding smaller group content for people at the level cap. It's going to be a challenge and how they answer it really says a good deal about the future of TRPGs. If they manage it successfully, things begin to look pretty bleak. The one thing that TRPGs have always had over MMOs is that human element to the DM. He's not scripted, he can get creative, and he's often not predictable. If they can capture that same feel with a computer, things look kind of bad for TRPGs. If they fail at it, then I predict that WoW will slowly fade into the same niche play that EQ had. The hardcore players will stick it out for 40-man raiding, and many people will return to TRPGs. The question is where will the kids go? That's harder to answer without more knowledge of the overal MMO market than I have. My gut instinct is that if WoW collapsed tomorrow the MMO market would be a long while recovering. They've already descimated their competition, and there are no real contenders for the throne looming on the horizon. The kids would go somewhere and a good number of them would wind up with TRPGs. Anyway, enough rambling from me. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2005-12-21 10:29 pm UTC (link)
	"It's just infinitely cheaper to MMO than any other form of entertainment since free MUDs died" Let's just say that are definitely ALOT of people (including video gamers) who would vehemently disagree with that assertion (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - zgaidin, 2005-12-21 10:48 pm UTC

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-21 11:00 pm UTC

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 12:45 am UTC

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 12:47 am UTC

(no subject) - ranneko, 2006-01-08 09:15 pm UTC

	kunimatyu 2005-12-21 07:54 pm UTC (link)
	What this says to me, is that if WotC wants to draw players away from WoW/MMORPGs in the future, they'd better have Living Greyhawk as integral to 4E, and with a good deal more support than it has now. It'll be far, far easier to players to make the jump from WoW to D&D if there's a style of play they can identify with. (Reply to this) (Thread)

jaydedone 2005-12-21 08:08 pm UTC (link)

I'm not sure I follow your rationale here. What about Living Greyhawk is going to provide this draw you're talking about? The campaign world? The RPGA networking? St. Cuthbert? Why in particular would you go Living Greyhawk when you've two properties in Forgotten Realms and Eberron that have larger established fanbases and more tie-ins to other entertainment platforms as potential gateways back into D&D TT? (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - pneumatik, 2005-12-22 03:10 am UTC

(no subject) - blakesrealm, 2005-12-22 03:13 am UTC

(no subject) - pneumatik, 2005-12-22 02:36 pm UTC

(no subject) - blakesrealm, 2005-12-23 04:16 am UTC

(no subject) - thorkull, 2005-12-30 11:15 pm UTC

TRPG vs MMORPG adamdray 2005-12-21 08:28 pm UTC (link)

Raph Koster talks about the "Open Big" strategy of WoW on his blog. That is, talk up the opening of your game and have smart beta testing programs to hook gamers early, make your money early, and don't worry too much about attrition. WoW may not threaten TRPG for long because they'll make their money and get out. That doesn't mean, however, that some other game won't step in and be the next big thing. I think MMORPG in general is going to cream the TRPG market. In a way, D&D 3E killed itself. The style of gaming that 3E facilitates is done just about as well on a MMORPG, maybe better in certain instances. All the leveling and character advancement choices and the combat tactics -- easier on WoW and often more fun. Where TRPG still blows MMORPG out of the water is in the limitless possibilities of the imagination, face to face socialization, inter-character role-playing, and ability to make stories with real meaning. The D&D rules don't do much to help a player there. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: TRPG vs MMORPG chryx 2005-12-27 06:30 am UTC (link)
	Raph Koster is full of crap. Sure, WOW opened big, but WOW also constantly adds new content, is fun, and is also well-balanced. I know many people who abandoned WOW for say, Guild Wars or CoV, only to come back later. If anything, WOW has done the best job of any MMORPG of retaining customers over the long term. Reducing the boredom factor plays a big role, I'm sure. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: TRPG vs MMORPG - thorkull, 2005-12-30 11:21 pm UTC

	bishi_wannabe 2005-12-21 08:31 pm UTC (link)
	Do tabletop games have anything to learn from MMORPGs? While they are different mediums, they have several interesting facets, including their ability to collect vast amounts of data on actual play as they run. I'd be surprised if they weren't learning something of use to us in the process. (Reply to this) (Thread)

zgaidin 2005-12-21 09:40 pm UTC (link)

The answer to you question is: "Yes, lots." There are a couple of specific areas where MMOs and WoW in particular really, and seemingly effortlessly, correct several problems with TRPGs. #1 - Roles in an MMO stay the same throughout. The fighter's job is always to hold the monsters attention and take a beating. The mages job is always to do ranged damage. In a pen and paper, these roles tend to swing around a bit and relative levels of contribution do as well over the course of levels. #2 - MMOs don't jerk you around about what they are. If we use the GNS model to provide a vocabulary for the discussion, MMOs are smothering gamism with hot, greasy love. They don't make any bones about it, and it's reliable. There's no concern about meta-game information or any such thing - viable concerns in tabletop that just melt away in MMOs. Using your metagame knowledge to enable your success is just playing smart. #3 - Scalability. The single, over-riding factor that has caused the remnants of my gaming group to not even crack a gaming book in the last year is that, while we'd like to play TRPGs, we don't have the people (that we like enough to play with) to make it happen. The entire CR system is built around the concept of a group of 4 players, specifically a warrior, a rogue, a mage, and a cleric who are geared "appropriately" following a specific chart of wealth by level. You can fudge with some of the classes. You can remove a member, and you can add a few, but much more than that and it just falls apart because of fundamental assumptions inherent to the design of each encounter. Not so in an MMO, it can handle solo encounters, small group content, and content so large and ridiculous it requires 40 dedicated players decked out in uber-loot to even attempt. #4 - Player freedom. I'm of the school of thought that the best DM in the world just crafts a very ellaborate and easily believed illusion of freedom for the players. He is still, always, fundamentally in control. He has to be because only he knows all the facts. As such, while he's crafting this illusion, he has to subtly convince/trick the players into agreeing/believing that what they want to do and what he wants them to do coincide. Sure, a good DM can roll with an off-the-wall decision by the players, but that's still fundamentally retaining his control and no matter how good he is, all this control is limited by his very human ability to hold a finite number of facts in his head at once. No matter how much it exists on their world map, the players in a TRPG can't go to the Swamp of Endless Horrors at level 3 if the DM didn't design it or even really give it any thought yet because he was saving it for level 9. Sure, they can in theory, but he either has to recraft his view of that place and design it on the fly, or the whole party dies and the game is over. In an MMO, the whole world is already there. Some places are fundamentally restricted by level, but the vast majority of the world is free to any poor sap that wonders in. If you're too little to be here, you'll die. Ress up and go somewhere else. #5 - An MMO is numerically comprehensive beyond the ability of a single person with a pen and paper to keep up with where it counts and behind the scenes, and down-right lean where it can be. A WoW mage has, in reality all of about 15 spells at the end of the game. He has a few single target damaging spells, a few AoE spells, a couple of utility spells, a crowd control spell, and some travel spells. That's it. He doesn't need to spend small fortunes scribing in the fourth volume of his growing arcane library (good thing he crafted that Bag of Holding), and he doesn't spend 30 minutes of play time each "morning" agonizing over spell selection for the day. He has 15 spells, all the time, and no more, and they're all he'll ever need. Those are off the top of my head, each and every one places where, in some form or fashion TRPGs could (and possibly must) learn from MMOs if they intend to survive. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 01:06 am UTC

sim_james 2005-12-21 08:34 pm UTC (link)

There’s a lot of talk about WoW from non-players in my area (often bythe wives and fiancees of players  :D ). The anecdotal experience with RPG players turned WoW players is that most of them were able to find groups (I live in a capital city) and that some of them are GMs who would normally be running their own games (and have a choice of what game system to use). I think there are other factors that make it more attractive than RPGs for some players (and not just the pretty graphics). As noted by many people, WoW doesn’t require as much investment from players as an RPG campaign. It also allows socialising, but in a somewhat proscribed way. That seems to be a benefit for some people I know. Having a global player base, which means that you can play at whatever odd, antisocial hours you prefer, is also a plus.    Some of these players consider WoW to be a seperate hobby from their normal gaming. WoW seems to take time away from lots of activities, not just gaming (the term “WoW Widow” is pretty popular). And if you’re spending hours each week playing WoW, it’s hard to justify putting RPGs ahead of other activities that are also getting short shrift.    I don’t think it’s just people who can’t find groups (and thus, primarily non-D&D gamers) who are spending most of their time on WoW, I think it’s anybody whose needs weren’t being adequately met by RPGs. Sometimes this isn’t a problem that can be fixed by better games – the guy who likes to be in bed by 8.30pm every night and habitually fell asleep in any game that ran later won’t notice the difference between Iron Heroes and RIFTS.     (Reply to this) (Thread)

mhacdebhandia 2005-12-21 11:02 pm UTC (link)

Some of these players consider WoW to be a seperate hobby from their normal gaming. That's me, baby (coincidentally, I live in James' city too). Even if you took one of my favourite settings - say, Planescape - and made a WoW-quality MMO set there, I'd still want to play tabletop games. On the other hand, I have ready access to a pool of players because I stay in close contact with my university's gaming society, which helps. I don't have that level of frustration with being unable to find a game that might cause a player to turn to MMOs exclusively. On a side note, when I was visiting my girlfriend in the U.S. a few months ago, we made a visit to meet the couple who ran our WoW guild, and I ran "Crypt of Crimson Stars" from Dungeon Magazine for them. Since the male half of the couple had been my girlfriend's original D&D DM before turning to WoW, though, I don't think it necessarily indicates a widespread ability to interest WoW players in tabletop RPGs. (Reply to this) (Parent)

wordwill 2005-12-21 08:39 pm UTC (link)

"I think WoW is sponging up the TRPGers who can't find groups. Who are the people who can't find groups? They're not D&D players - remember, D&D's strength is that so many people play, it's easy to find a group." More generalizations with a dose of "the problem is everything except D&D" thrown in, Mike? Here's an ugly fact, which many have been reporting both above and across the internet (for all that's worth): WoW is sponging up RPG players with groups, too. Whether they can find a group has little bearing on it. The folks at my office play WoW in addition to and despite a surplus of gaming groups playing D&D and other games. I know plenty of people who's D&D games have unraveled because the players get together online in WoW instead. The question to me is whether the newness of WoW will wear off, and how. Also, can anyone find a way to turn the vast communication system of WoW into a successful TRPG group-building mechanism, too? (Reply to this) (Thread)

boymonster 2005-12-21 09:20 pm UTC (link)

Right. In fact, I would be very surprised if the greatest proportion of TRPG gamers who leave the tabletop behind and migrate to MMORPGs like WoW aren't D&D players. Dancy is spot on in noting that WOTC made WoW possible, and in truth, I think you're much, much more likely to see a D&D gamer heading off into WoW than, say, a Forge regular who finds greater value narrative or parlor-style gaming. (Reply to this) (Parent)

maliszew 2005-12-21 09:01 pm UTC (link)

I can only add anecdotal evidence to what others have said. In the year since WoW was released and my friends and regular gaming buddies started playing it, we've played D&D only a handful of times. Prior to that, we had played weekly in a campaign that ran nearly two years and prior to that another weekly campaign that ran nearly two years. WoW has killed our interest in D&D specifically and fantasy in general. Any tabletop RPGs we've played succesfully since WoW was released have been in other genres. I honestly think games like WoW will hurt RPGs on two fronts: at the top end, where married with kids people like myself dwell and at the bottom where younger gamers graduate from regular computer RPGs and card games. Most tabletop RPGs take too much time to prepare and play and MMORPGs deal with both of those issues handily. Couple that with, as a friend once said, "better graphics than my imagination" and evolving worlds independent of GMs and players and you have a very real threat to the RPG industry. I can't say my experiences are universal. I can only say that, in 5-10 years time, I highly doubt I'll be playing D&D, but I will certainly be playing some form of MMORPG. (Reply to this)

bishi_wannabe 2005-12-21 10:34 pm UTC (link)

As a counterpoint to my question above, what marketable aspects do pen&paper games that definitively differentiate between them and MMORPGs? To my mind, one of the prime attractions of RPGs over MMORPGs is the uniqueness and distinction of play and character. There are thousands of level 20 Guild Wars characters, but only one person in the world became Shogun of the Dragon Blooded through ritualised duelling with her schoolmates (to pick an example from one of my Exalted games). It's trivial to play characters of world-shaking importance in a pen&paper game, and almost impossible to do so in a MMORPG. (Reply to this) (Thread)

zgaidin 2005-12-21 11:04 pm UTC (link)

Your point is well made, but not particularly relevant. You're talking about shades of gray. Only one person in the whole world, that we know of, became Shogun of the Dragon Blooded, but only ~5 people know about it. On one server of WoW only about 4 people have Thunderfury (currently the best weapon obtainable), but 10,000 people know about it, see it daily, and are regularly exposed to the pain and havoc it can cause in PvP. From a gamist perspective, those 4 guys have your Shogun beat hands-down. You really made the point yourself. "It's trivial to play characters of world-shaking importance in a pen & paper game, and almost impossible to do so in a MMORPG." It's trivial in TRPGs because it's sort of expected. Players find other ways of measuring their progress and prowess against the others and their environment. The same is true in MMORPGS, except you're swimming in a much bigger and deeper pond. As an aside, list all the marketable qualities you like from TRPGs, and it won't top the development cycle of an MMO all by itself. A table-top game takes a long time to develop, write, revise, publish, distrubute, and gain market acceptance. The same is true of an MMO, but the difference is that once the TRPG is written, any changes require a repeat of the process (though sometimes on a smaller scale) and the changes are based off of potentially faulty and always spotty feedback with lots of holes. An MMO automatically, by the nature of database design, generates reams of meaningful feedback constantly, provides your development team with hundreds of thousands of free and willing play-testers, and as soon as new content is ready to go live, you just patch it in. If TRPGs are going to survive and thrive, they're either going to have to hope the the entire MMO wave comes crashing down, or start providing networking software for people to do their pen&paper stuff over the internet, release new content in much the same way, and find a way to more accurately track how the game is played. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-21 11:48 pm UTC

The Game You Never Wrote - zgaidin, 2005-12-22 12:44 am UTC

Re: The Game You Never Wrote - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 01:18 am UTC

Re: The Game You Never Wrote - jaydedone, 2005-12-22 01:34 am UTC

(no subject) - bishi_wannabe, 2005-12-22 03:09 am UTC

(no subject) - bishi_wannabe, 2005-12-22 03:10 am UTC

(Anonymous) 2005-12-21 11:21 pm UTC (link)

I'm just flat out skeptical regarding the end-of-the-world scenarios that seem to have cropped up since the annual WOTC layoffs. My guess is that people are extrapolating recent trends much further into the future then they should. I think the real truth here is that gamers will generally appreciate any sort of new and well done gaming experience, be it table top of software. I know a number of people who like both TTRPGS and MMORPGS and don't really prefer one over the other. I also have a fair amount of annecdotal evidence that most people that play a particular MMORPG get pretty bored with it after playing for six to nine months, tops. (Reply to this) (Thread)

rsdancey 2005-12-21 11:39 pm UTC (link)

> I also have a fair amount of annecdotal evidence that most people that > play a particular MMORPG get pretty bored with it after playing for six > to nine months, tops. Care to comment on this graph? http://www.mmogchart.com/ You know, we've heard this "get bored with it" mantra before, right? In the 1970s, when the wargamers said that about the RPGs. Then in the '90s, when the RPG'ers said it about the CCG'ers. How many hundreds of millions of dollars, and millions of players, does it take before you'll say "it's here to stay, and we better start factoring it into our analysis?" (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-21 11:58 pm UTC

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 01:31 am UTC

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 04:00 am UTC

(no subject) - rsdancey, 2005-12-22 05:18 am UTC

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-22 06:17 am UTC

(no subject) - jdigital, 2005-12-24 06:13 pm UTC

(no subject) - anarchangel23, 2005-12-24 08:12 pm UTC

(no subject) - diabhol, 2005-12-22 03:10 am UTC

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 04:02 am UTC

(no subject) - rsdancey, 2005-12-22 05:15 am UTC

(no subject) - eberron_scribe, 2006-01-04 12:51 am UTC

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 04:08 am UTC

(no subject) - rsdancey, 2005-12-22 05:22 am UTC

nellisir 2005-12-22 01:45 am UTC (link)

Just throwing this out there... 3 or 4 years ago I ran a "beginners" D&D game at the local youth club. I had 8 takers, no problem -- half the boys in the club. None of them had played D&D or any tabletop RPG, but they were all familiar with the basics. But what stunned me was, so were their girlfriends. Every game had at least two or three girls standing around, "advising". The standards and basics of fantasy are FAR more mainstream now, and that's a huge change, and one that'll take years to shake out. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	anarchangel23 2005-12-22 06:17 am UTC (link)
	The Harry Potter effect? (Reply to this) (Parent)

Advantages of TRPGs odhanan 2005-12-22 01:56 am UTC (link)

What about the advantages TRPGs propose as opposed to MMORPGs? The later require you to own a computer. And a good computer, at this moment, with a good video card etc. You also need a DSL internet connexion. You also need to know what you're doing with a computer (like knowing you have to slide the mouse on your table to make it work. Don't laugh, I actually know people who believe a mouse works by moving it in 3D). What do RPGs need to be practiced? Core rules, dice, paper, pencils. Period. Then you have fun. That's the same reason why board games work really well. What do board games have that TRPGs don't? You don't need much preparation time, you don't need a huge culture, you don't need to read a thousand pages to play board games. Maybe TRPGs could survive this way. Personally, I'm a grognard, that's very clear. To me, a computer interface, no matter how stunning, fluid, whatever, will never replace my own imagination. I don't want to have guys imposing on me what an "elf" is supposed to look like. No thank you. So I'll stick to my TRPGs. (Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Advantages of TRPGs jdigital 2005-12-24 07:07 pm UTC (link)

D&D is played mainly by geeks, so a disproportionately high number of them - especially the new crop of younger players - are proficient with computers. Worse still for D&D, computers and broadband internet are becoming cheaper and more ubuquitious. Luckily, they're not getting more user-friendly, at least not particularly quickly; except in the mobile technology market, and I'm not going to play a MMORPG on a little mobile phone. I suspect that if the goal is to obtain more players, more needs to be done by Wizards to start groups and pull players into these groups. A great many people begin by joining a group without buying so much as dice initially, only to load up on core rulebooks and go on to buy every D&D book that comes out. I think another problem is that not enough is being done by the RPG market to capitalize on other markets. Since the big money is in selling the core rulebooks and most people only buy the core rulebooks once, you'd think the obvious choice would be to recruit new D&D players. Wouldn't it be a good idea to market the game to the M:tG and Yugioh playerbases (they owe D&D one, anyway!) while exploiting the recent popularity boost of fantasy novels provided by Lord of the Rings,Narnia and Harry Potter? (Reply to this) (Parent)

	diabhol 2005-12-22 03:01 am UTC (link)
	*shrug* People have been predicting the death of TRPG's for a while; we'll see what happens. Me, I don't play MMORPG's because I'm not a video gamer, I'm a roleplayer. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2005-12-22 04:03 am UTC (link)
	I don't think there's EVER been a year that people weren't proclaiming its utter collapse LoL (Reply to this) (Parent)

WoW is for teens and losers (read first my explaination pls) (Anonymous) 2005-12-22 03:11 am UTC (link)

I think also WoW attracts the lazies of society. People who are just lazy in life. They're poor, have a crummy job, and have crummy personalities. They don't have many friends. The ones they do have are either weirdos or other anti-socialites. D&D is just too social for them. It's too much work. They play D&D for escapism or to feel in control. The bossy DM who will wreck other DM's games to get back to his. Players who want to be the DM, and will wreck a game. When given a chance to DM, they're to lazy to do any of the work. WoW does the work for them. They don't need to interreact with anyone. They can lie to other players about how successful they are (when they're not). Teenagers and 30 yo losers I think make up the biggest demographics for WoW. After that it's gamers and D&D players who have standars and can't find a good group, or just can't find a group. -V (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: wanted to add (Anonymous) 2005-12-22 03:20 am UTC (link)
	It's a harsh subject title meant to get the message across. Not meant to troll or upset. Just wanted to add that. I really do think "losers" of society are attracted to WoW as easily as teens are. It may mean a lost of players for D&D. But I doubt not too much money. I doubt this type bought much, perfering to mooch off others, using some selfish excuse. - V (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: WoW is for teens and losers (read first my explaination pls) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-22 06:16 pm UTC

Re: WoW is for teens and losers (read first my explaination pls) - (Anonymous), 2005-12-23 05:27 am UTC

Re: WoW is for teens and losers (read first my explaination pls) - auss24, 2005-12-23 12:16 pm UTC

losers who ruin the fun - (Anonymous), 2005-12-23 11:02 pm UTC

	doccross 2005-12-22 03:13 am UTC (link)
	Assuming that WoW is indeed soaking up the TRPGers that don't play D&D, does that mean that the TRPGers who DO play D&D will begin to jump ship when D&D Online opens up? I'm thinking they will. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	mhacdebhandia 2005-12-22 04:09 am UTC (link)
	Not if they want a D&D experience. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - rsdancey, 2005-12-22 05:23 am UTC

(no subject) - blakesrealm, 2005-12-22 02:35 pm UTC

(no subject) - the_never, 2005-12-22 09:53 am UTC

	metallian 2005-12-22 04:48 am UTC (link)
	Interestingly, my experience with WoW only served to reinforce that MMORPG's do not offer what I want from my gaming. It's kinda fun and all, but I was expecting a lot more personalization, customization, interaction, ability to set my own goals, etc. (Reply to this)

---