Dungeons and Dragons embarks on an epic quest to finally make money
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
And it was awesome. Reminds me of the old days of MUDs where you could murderhobo your way from Sesame Street on to Xanth and then from Camelot to the literal Zodiac. I miss that spirit of building a common cultural mythology that corporate “monetization” has strangled.
Some links:
Troika! itself: https://www.troikarpg.com/
A review/example of Troikafeld that you can probably use to reconstruct the original Troikafeld game: https://www.prismaticwasteland.com/blog/troikafeld-a-review-...
If you're willing to play online, I believe there are a few discord groups where you can find people specifically interested in particular games.
That said, the movie takes place in the Forgotten Realms setting. No idea how faithful it is to that.
There really is in that the explicit default setting for D&D/5e is the Forgotten Realms, though other settings are supported.
There also really is in that all of the official D&D settings are part of a single connected multiverse (with interactions between them in the canon.)
> D&D isn’t a game, and doesn’t have a single canonical universe.
Yes it is, and yes, it has a single canonical multiverse. (It can also be used outside of canonical settings, and frequently is.)
> It’s a game engine with a bunch of assets for making a game and universe.
There are published TTRPG systems that take that approach in the core (GURPS, HERO system, FATE, FUDGE, …the list is actually quite long.) D&D, however, isn’t one of them in its current edition. Some versions have had a genre-tied core without an explicit default setting [0], but the current version isn’t one of them.
[0] At least, on the level that the Forgotten Realms is for 5e. I think every version since AD&D/1e has had an official description of the multiverse, including the canonical inner and outer planes (the latter being the domains of the gods, etc.), so in that sense have had a “default setting” on the grandest level.
And many of the universes don't really follow any of that so strictly either.
It's kinda like agile.
And from my perspective, it's just as often done wrong, but I'm an old gamer who dislikes munchkining. :-)
Did you happen to watch Vox Machina? Because that was an RPG show that I very much enjoyed.
FWIW, I love boardgames (especially those with 10s of pages of manual) and hate console games ;)
Website is a bit out of date with the podcast having started, still reads as prerelease marketing but you get the idea: https://worldsbeyondnumber.com/
For anyone who wants to check it out without the commitment of looking it up in your podcast app, episodes are on the web here: https://worlds-beyond-number.simplecast.com/episodes
TBH, the 2023 film isn't that much better than the 2000 film. The special FX are better but the dialogue and acting is just as campy in the second film as it was in the first. It's just that our tastes have changed. The 2000 film reflects the way D&D was played 2 decades ago, i.e., more as high fantasy; the 2023 film reflects that D&D today is played more as action comedy.
EDIT: see, for example, Stranger Things, in which D&D is played a straight high fantasy. The 2000 has comedic relief (D&D isn't Warhammer), but it's first and foremost a high fantasy. The new film is an action comedy with a few serious moments, like Vox Machina or any of the dozens of D&D gaming podcasts.
My 00s group was more of action-comedy. "The Gamers: Dorkness Rising" (2008 low-budget movie), was more in the spirit of how we did things.
---------
There's always a play between drama vs comedy. It depends on the group, personalities, and even emotions on the day-to-day. Generally speaking, do what the group wants and try to keep a feel of the overall atmosphere everyone's vibing with.
Which I think actually goes to show why WOTC trying to be grabby with the property was a horrible idea. The general concept of it is easy to imitate in a way that would owe nothing to WOTC. You can even replicate the feel substantially while keeping none of the setting.
The "settings" are called Greyhawk, or Balckmoor, or Forgotten Realms (In the case of this movie: its in the Forgotten Realms). Or Pathfinder, if we're going 3rd party. But the idea was that anyone could craft their own world using the D&D rules as a baseline. (Or alternatively, use a pre-made world if you're not feeling too creative).
> The mechanics are also not D&D.
I don't think the D&D Movie from year 2000 followed the mechanics either.
----------
My understanding is that in the 80s, a bunch of anime-writers managed to play a translated version of D&D, and that served as the basis of anime high fantasy anime for a good bit. Record of Lodoss War is the most obvious, but Slayers looks to be part of that trend.
Both Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest are allegedly part of the D&D trend as well... at least when they started. Its a bit more obvious in Dragon Quest (today, Final Fantasy has changed dramatically from its roots).
https://archive.org/details/record-of-lodoss-war-comptiq-mag...
I dont think slayers engaged with DND at the same level.
While I agree on this point, The Slayers seems to be comparable to say... the 2000 Dungeons and Dragons movie (or this 2023 version).
No one is seriously going to suggest that "Honor Among Thieves" is how you actually play DnD in practice. The "gamey" bits, like choosing spells at the beginning of the day, will give way to more freeform storytelling.
I just like spreading the link to the original replays.
What part of D&D is reflected in the show? It's not the setting. It's not the monsters (except for stuff present everywhere like dragons). It's not the spells (except for stuff present everywhere like fireballs). It's not the classes. It's not the power scaling.
And Trolls that regenerate except when hit by fire or acid. And giant Golems made out of various magic metals.
And evil priests/clerics who follow under Gods of chaos (Rezo the Red Priest)
> It's not the spells (except for stuff present everywhere like fireballs). It's not the classes.
The Priestess/Cleric Sylphiel does healing spells. Lina, the sorcerer cannot heal as per the rules of DnD. Gourry is strictly a fighter with a magic weapon.
Lina not only has access to the DnD spell fireball, but also regularly casts Levetate (which is locked to the sorcerer class)
Clerics like Sylphiel have healing, scrying, flame "arrow" (likely a custom spell based off of Flame Strike + Japanese Miko-archer archetype?).
> It's not the power scaling.
Magical artifacts like the Philosophers stone that have literal connections with the gods is exactly the kind of adventure that DnD was designed to be about.
--------
The year is 1990. There are very few tabletops that have been translated to Japanese. And we here have a novel about trolls, dragons, magic weapons, sorcerors vs clerics and different spell lists for them that line up with DnD spell lists. The party of Lina, Goury, and Amelia/Sylphiel line up with the original DnD 1st edition (1974) Wizard, Fighter, Cleric (Rogue wasn't invented yet). This also happens to be the edition that was translated into Japanese in 1985.
Most of these concepts (trolls, western dragons, fireball spells, philosopher stone) are Western lore and have no history in Japanese folklore.
The similarities are uncanny. It's clearly not just inspired by 'some tabletop system's , but by DnD itself. Yeah, there's custom spells like Dragon Slave or whatever. But custom spells and custom magic items were part of DnD from the start.
Your underestimation of Japanese knowledge of English/European fantasy is verging on offensive.
Sure, D&D inspired Slayers, but so did other stuff. It's no obvious system-specific replay like Lodoss War.
There was always comdey action in D&D. Just like there was always horror genere in d&d and survival.
Is it? I may be isolated but the small group I game with (newer players) definitely play it straight, gritty serious vibe.
But the podcasters and streamers lean heavily to action comedy, and I think that's what's in the popular culture as far as the game goes.
Given that, I can't blame the movie for not playing it straight.
Compared to the best non-D&D TTRPGs for that mode, sure.
> Older editions like 2e are good at it, but 3.5,4,5e are all really bad.
If I was going to run straight, gritty, serious out of the core books with no house rules but only rules options in the core, 5e would by far be my choice, whereas 2e would probably be the last choice (though, if I broadened it to all official first-party sourcebooks, 2e might move up to second place, with some of the historical sourcebooks and, IIRC, some options in the late 2e era DM’s Option and Player’s Option rulebooks.)
(In 5e, the combination of the longer-time options for short/long rest plus not underusing exhaustion is a big push, mechanically, toward gritty play.)
I mean, I’d prefer to just use GURPS for that, but its easier to find players (even for that style) for D&D.
Having played D&D for over 40 years, I wouldn’t agree that that’s how dominant playstyles have changed between 2000 and now. It might have been something WotC wanted to try to shift the brand image toward at the time of the 2000 film (its not a coincidence that the film and the first edition of the rules done at WotC after acquiring TSR were released in the same year), though.
As someone who played in the 80s & early 90s, my experience was that it was much more of a low fantasy game than the contemporary way it is played. If the Stranger Things crew were playing a high fantasy game, that may not be as realistic to the time period.
https://kotaku.com/dungeons-and-dragons-dnd-fifth-edition-on...
I'm curious. What is this group more interested in? Exotic vacations?
Trying to monetize something like that with movies and restrictive content licenses, given the kinds of people who are drawn to it especially in the 2020s, seems like a fundamentally doomed effort.
You can sell new campaigns and sourcebooks, rulebooks for new editions, dice, software subscriptions for VTTs and platforms like D&D Beyond, and branded merchandise like posters, t-shirts, Funko Pop dolls, etc. That seems like a good enough situation to me, but I expect that there are few enough dedicated players, and fewer still who are likely to be repeat customers, that a large corporation like Hasbro might it feel like it's an unsatisfactory revenue source. Personally I think they would do much better by just trying to sell more D&D related stuff, but there are apparently some real knuckleheads working at Hasbro who have no idea how to market to this audience.
Interesting article: Why is There No New D&D Fiction Being Published? (https://thewertzone.blogspot.com/2020/06/leaving-money-on-ta...)
They've explicitly said to monetize they have to find better ways to exploit players on the same level as DMs.
I generally enjoy books and accessories for playing the game. I would consider paying extra for things like first edition books or limited run artwork. I am particularly drawn to anything rich in lore.
I've spent easily twice that amount on third-party D&D related activities. Dice sets. Hiring artist to create visual representations of my personal characters. Buying Table Top Simulator. Going to D&D events. Bribing a DM with food/beer.
That being said, the majority of the value I get from D&D are fan made given and shared for free. Custom campaigns my friends have ran. Stories about campaigns we tell each other. Bouncing around ideas for settings or NPCs. Artwork that gets passed around the internet. Min-Max and theory crafting builds that are posted in places like reddit. Without this I would have very minimal interest in D&D.
Harry Potter merch, wands go to a devoted fanbase, but most of the really expensive items go to 30 somethings with lots of money to blow.
WotC put in minimum effort in printing a plastic wand of orcus in a sweatshop, barely puts anything cool with it, and wonders why it doesn't sell.
ChatGPT solved the problem overnight and I'm happily playing a Ravenloft ADND 2e adventure "The Awakening" with it. It has been a couple of nights and I progress slowly, but the experience has been very good so far. I can bargain with it; I can ask it to drop in a companion from nowhere. It understands everything I said; It follows my set of DM rules; It keeps a journal for me. I'm very happy to pay 20 bucks about it although I think maybe 3.5 is good enough.
It's a good question though. I know the gist of the story so I assume I'm still in the hook. The game went slowly as I don't have much time for it.
2. Current GPT based DMs allow the player to do basically anything they want. Human DMs offer more control over the game, and will follow closer to tradition and unwritten roles than GPT allows. There's also a fun part of the game for the player in which they convince the DM to allow an action they wouldn't otherwise.
3. D&D's low tech nature is a draw for a lot of players. Some books, some paper, pencils, dice, a table. Simple stuff. I think many players would push back on screens and other high tech.