#135: RPGing for Y2K Kids

[RPGnet Columns]

http://www.rpg.net/columns/soap/soap135.phtml

Summary:

The next generation of RPs: online and book-free?

Go to the column (http://www.rpg.net/columns/soap/soap135.phtml) for more information.

[Bento]

That article would describe my kids pretty well. My oldest (11) likes to hang out online with her friends, where they all have avatars they dress up and play games together. They chat and leave messages on each other's boards. Besides the PC, she also likes to play Pokemon and Animal Crossing on her DS. She likes to RP, but her focus is on tweaking her characters and collecting stuff. Throw her a storyline? "Nah - too restrictive. I just want to shop and complete my collection of decour for my house."

My youngest (7) also likes RPing with characters he makes up, but this is all in real-life. He's a LARPer, pretending he's "Kid Reaper" or "Ninja Panda" and such. He just woke up and asked me to pick which Neopet he should be today, the Abominable Snowball or the Geb. Unfortunately most other kids he knows don't want to play make-believe. I'll play with him though, and last night we spent a half hour creating a new make believe world, and then playing in it. We were roaming the house looking for magical crystals as a Digimon trainer and his friend the Warforged.

Both of my kids have the potential of tabletop RPing, but I've never believed in pushing my interests on my kids. If they are genuinely interested, they'll approach me about it. They have some "play dates" with other kids, but mostly stay around the house with us. Kids just don't roam the neighborhoods like they did when I was their age. We played all sorts of games in the street and between houses - war, baseball, spies, etc. When I first heard of D&D I was roaming a nearby subdivision and one of the kids said "hey, Mike just got this new game where you kill stuff. You want to go over and check it out?"

Oh well, different times, different pleasures.

[Old Geezer]

Different times, different pleasures indeed.

With all due respect to Sandy for his well-written column... IMEO, it ain't happening.

You AREN'T going to get kids into RPGs. There is no "next big thing".

Mah Jongg was huge in America in the 1920s. People still play it, but nothing like the numbers they used to. No pop singer today would make a song about Mah Jongg.

Contract bridge... much the same. Yes, people still play, but "neighborhood card parties" are now a rarity, not a typical activity.

Model railroading has never been more lucrative for the companies involved. But a Lionel train set under the tree is no longer the "must have" Christmas present for a ten-year-old boy.

RPGs hit their high water mark 25 years ago. We are a niche hobby. Period.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

[cfc]

I think equating computer games with RPGs is a common mistake. I've never seen an ACTUAL RPG that exists on-line -- just pale shadows that co-opt common rules conventions while completely missing THE POINT. Until they develop computers powerful enough and AIs smart enough that every single player or small group of players in a MMORPG can have their own intelligent, creative, dedicated GM, on-line RPGs simply won't exist. MUSH's and board games have existed for many, many years, but those are their own beasts. If a kid's not into RPG's, it's not because they're a member of the "MUSH generation" or whatever -- it's just because they're not into RPG's.

You make some good points why you shouldn't target your newbie RPGs at 12 year olds -- so target them at teenagers and college students, instead, who generally have a lot more freedom. You know, kinda like WotC did with their new game "My First RPG", aka D&D 4th Ed.

[Pandora Caitiff]

I think equating computer games with RPGs is a common mistake. I've never seen an ACTUAL RPG that exists on-line -- just pale shadows that co-opt common rules conventions while completely missing THE POINT. Until they develop computers powerful enough and AIs smart enough that every single player or small group of players in a MMORPG can have their own intelligent, creative, dedicated GM, on-line RPGs simply won't exist. MUSH's and board games have existed for many, many years, but those are their own beasts.

I think you may have missed the point yourself.

The online games discussed are not "computer games" as you know them, they are shared storytelling using a computer to communicate with the other players. They are doing exactly what we do, but they do not need a GM or rules to arbitrate, they maintain structure by commons sense, consensus and peer pressure.

[Dal Thrax]

There are studies somewhere that the nerve sheathing in the brain required to enjoy reading doesn't really develop until 10-12. Gaming is a 25+ hobby because gaming is expensive. Books are in the $25-$40 range now. Some of the stuff I was buying in middle school in 91-91 was $12. Those children with access to gamer parents who will buy them books, still game. On the other hand money is tight for a lot of folks right now. Not sure many 11 year old have $40 of disposable income on a regular basis.

Edit: And I'm sure that it doesn't help that most of my collection resulted in the difference between $5 and $3 for a school lunch and that most kids today use some form of electronic payment for lunches, cutting down the amount of cash on hand for games.

You might be able to do something with cheaper books and pdf but 1) reading pdf on a computer screen is an eye burning experience and 2) if you're printing a FREE pdf on a injet, it would be cheaper to just go and buy the book.

[Sovem]

I have to agree with cfc. This article is a good explanation of why RPGs won't fly with that demographic... but that doesn't have anything to do with the "RPG Industry." There's a lot of talk these days about the movie and music industries needing to adapt to modern times--but their products are still music and movies.
When we talk about RPGs, we're talking about a very specific kind of shared storytelling experience. Comparing RPGs to chat room make-believe and MMOs is quite unfair. Chat room "roleplaying" is just a general "use your imagination to become someone else," and MMOs are just "kill stuff and level up." Both of those may have the same elements that roleplaying has, but that's not to say they're in the same category.

[Strange Visitor]

quite unfair. Chat room "roleplaying" is just a general "use your imagination to become someone else," and MMOs are just "kill stuff and level up." Both of those may have the same elements that roleplaying has, but that's not to say they're in the same category.

I think you're thoroughly underestimating the detail level present in chatroom RP (which is fairly similar to what MUSH RP was); its got a lot more in common than roleplay intensive forms of RPG than I think you're giving it credit for.

[Distort]

I fall into the Y2k category, I started RPing about five years ago on a free-form website. I'd had some exposure to D&D in junior high, I picked it up because it looked cool. I buy/read a lot of RPG books because they good ideas I can hack. It's worth noting that there isn't just a 7-14 neopet crowd, there's definitely 15-19 year olds.

I think one of the major problems is that these online roleplayers have little to no originality. I've realized that when making a character, you look for a lot of role models. When you say something like "I want to play a ninja", you're actually recalling everything you've ever seen about ninjas that you thought was cool and making it into a character. This seems difficult for Y2Kers. Rather than taking from umltiple sources, they tend to draw from just one. It isn't "I want to play superhero RPG", it's "I want to make a Spiderman RP." I've tried to circumvent this by writing my own roles (not pre-mades, more like parts in play) and handing them out to players. It's worked really well so far. A lot of anime tropes get used for non-anime characters, which I think backs my theory up. You play what you watch.

Another problem is that we're the pirate generation. Our economy is crap, we can't afford stuff, we pirate it or get it for free. Sure, there's kids with expendable budgets, but they go all out. They get motor vehicles, nice cars, video game systems. The poor kids go with things like books, making own food, pirated music, trying to afford car insurance. I didn't know anyone in high school (I got out of high school about a month ago.) We RP in free RPs because we can't really afford much else. Besides, there's risk in buying RPG books. How do I know I'm not going to shell out $30-50 and get nothing in return.

Lastly, MMOs are at a crossroad. No one has really been sure wether they want to be games or P&P style RPGs. So far they've been odd hybrids of both. There are some companies pulling one way, some companies are pulling the other. I haven't played anything more advanced than City of Heroes because my computer sucks. I wish I could supply more info. There's onje thing about the new D&D criticism that I don't get though: A lot of non-mmoers like the new system. If ain't broke, why fix it? And if it is broke, why are you complaining? Make your own damn system.

[Saint Michael]

The only reason I roleplay online is because there's no way for me to play table-top here. So I play online. It's very much like interactive fan fic, and it's better than nothing.

[Old Geezer]

If ain't broke, why fix it? And if it is broke, why are you complaining? Make your own damn system.

I like the cut of your jib, kid. ;)

"There is no rule so great, powerful, or important that it cannot be ignored if the referee deems it necessary." -- Gary Gygax, 1972

[smascrns]

Steve, you’re right, no questions about it. Roleplaying goes where other adventure entertainment goes. And by adventure entertainment I mean card games, board games, minis wargames, computer games. The future of role playing is in becoming an add-on to those other types of games.

I think there’s a company that will do it, sooner or later. Sooner than later, I would say. WotC. With D&D. Consider the current 4th ed. People have been linking it to MMORPG. Maybe, I can’t know because I never played these. On the other hand, for me DD4 screams card games, either stand alone like Magic, or board based like Runebound. The Powers in DD4 can be turned into cards within the blink of an eye.

Now, just consider this scenario: A set of games based on common materials, mostly cards, but also minis, dice, etc. And a common setting. One game is a CCG. Another is a board game. A third one is a wargame. All sharing the same mechanical conventions and all sharing similar materials. Add to that a roleplaying game. What you get is a platform for playing, a flexible platform that can be adjusted to the tastes, finances, time, of the player. Add to that platform computers and all they can offer and the potential is enormous.

Some companies tried to bridge rpgs with other games, granted. Atlas Games’ Rune; Wharhammer battle and Wharhammer rpg; L5R. Yet, none succeeded because none really considered the usage of a common platform, adjusted for different types of games. They ended with products that couldn’t mix well if at all.

In such a scenario rpgs become an add on. Not about rules, but about how to use, say Magic, to roleplay. Or a Runebound look-a-like set in Magic’s world and rules. Ditto for Dungeontwister. Ditto for Chainmail. Or a combination of things from all or part of those games.

This gives a lot of freedom to players. A key PC is missing because the player can't make it to the game session today? No problem, we will play a sideline quest in boardgame drive, limiting the impact it can have on the campaign. The Magic fight is going really hot? Why not get into character mode and roleplay it? And so on.

All there needs to be is a stable common platform. I can see only a company able to deliver it at the present stage. And I'm not even a fan of its games.

[Grimm6]

I'm just getting back into pen and paper "adventure" games after almost two decades. I had played some games when I was younger, and frankly ended up turned off by it. A lot of it had to do with the immaturity of my friends and I, and our inability to engage in a truly cooperative adventure. Rather than working together to take part in an interesting story, sessions became adversarial events usually resulting in TPKs at the hands of overzealous GMs. It's entirely possible that my friends and I were exceptionally immature or competitive, but frankly, I don't think so. I'm more inclined to think that RPGs, by their cooperative nature, are better enjoyed by a more mature crowd (25 and up, as sort of suggested above?). They play best when the participants exercise restraint, empathy, and an ability to move beyond their own ego in a way that is not often demonstrated (at least as far as I can see) in high schoolers and younger.

Don't take this as some elitist bash on younger kids. I'm not saying they shouldn't or can't play these games. If there are younger players that can enjoy the games, then great. Good for them. And I got the whole "We Are the World, the kids are the future, teach them well" angle. But I certainly think older people get more out of the role playing game experience. My point is that maybe role playing games shouldn't be made for younger kids. Certainly I wouldn't want to see the industry as a whole trend in that direction.

[JSpektr]

Not sure many 11 year old have $40 of disposable income on a regular basis.


Have you ever bought a console game? Do you know how much they cost?

The kids we're talking about have dozens of them. They spend more on games for their XBox or PS3 than you do on RPGs. Price isn't a barrier because RPGs are too expensive.

It's a barrier because most kids get a lot more out of a WoW expansion or Halo II than they do the Players Handbook.

If you want to capture the current generation, you need something rules lite and easy to get into, that gives them something they can't get out of a computer. Then if you're smart, you provide something akin to Map Tools on your company's site, so all the people you sold the game to can play it online.

Hell, start the game as an online chat room with GM and lite rules, and sell the "in person" edition of the game as an expansion. You'll get a lot farther doing that than you would trying to convince kids to do something that doesn't fit the way their generation thinks or games.

[tweaker]

RPGs were more simple when I was a kid. I could quickly skim through the book and play. Today, the books are huge and intimidating, and I say that as someone who has played RPGs for the last 20 years.

Also, computer games are a lot easier to get into. And I can play them any time. RPGs have to evolve or die. I agree with the author.

[Strange Visitor]

RPGs were more simple when I was a kid. I could quickly skim through the book and play. Today, the books are huge and intimidating, and I say that as someone who has played RPGs for the last 20 years.



I have to politely suggest that if you think modern games are more complex than many games from the 80's that you had a selective exposure to same. I'll direct you to almost the entirety of the FGU lines as just an example, but they were far from alone.

[Old Geezer]

I'm more inclined to think that RPGs, by their cooperative nature, are better enjoyed by a more mature crowd (25 and up, as sort of suggested above?). They play best when the participants exercise restraint, empathy, and an ability to move beyond their own ego in a way that is not often demonstrated (at least as far as I can see) in high schoolers and younger.

Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax originally developed OD&D for adult wargamers. Those of us under 18 were there because invited, and because we could 'play like adults'.


It's a barrier because most kids get a lot more out of a WoW expansion or Halo II than they do the Players Handbook.

If you want to capture the current generation, you need something rules lite and easy to get into, that gives them something they can't get out of a computer.


Also, computer games are a lot easier to get into. And I can play them any time.

I downloaded the free World of Warcraft demo some time ago.

The BIGGEST challenge online games present to the tabletop game hobby? You can be experiencing MEANINGFUL content -- that is, playing the main part of the game -- as little as ten minutes after the first time you boot up the game.

Now, downloading and installing the son of a bitch took a lot of time, but it was passive time, not time where I had to focus on "learning the game".

That's hard to compete with; a game where it takes several hours of preparation to play, versus a game where you simply play. Preparation here not only includes reading the rules, but preparing the world, the adventures, the NPCs, etc.

We always thought the preparation was the fun part, but not everybody does. I don't know if there is a way to make it more appealing.

But I reiterate what I said before; the glory days of RPGs are gone. We will never again see 1978 - 1982, when sales of D&D alone were more than what industry experts* say sales for the entire industry is now.

















* Paul Chapman of Steve Jackson Games, for one.

[HyrumOWC]

There are studies somewhere that the nerve sheathing in the brain required to enjoy reading doesn't really develop until 10-12. Gaming is a 25+ hobby because gaming is expensive. Books are in the $25-$40 range now. Some of the stuff I was buying in middle school in 91-91 was $12. Those children with access to gamer parents who will buy them books, still game. On the other hand money is tight for a lot of folks right now. Not sure many 11 year old have $40 of disposable income on a regular basis.

You're not figuring into your equation the rise in inflation. According to the US gov't, a $12 book in 1991 would cost almost $20 today. Figure that the book has better art, better production values, and might even be in color, and you're making out alright these days. :)

Hyrum.

[Harmast]

I'm more inclined to think that RPGs, by their cooperative nature, are better enjoyed by a more mature crowd (25 and up, as sort of suggested above?). They play best when the participants exercise restraint, empathy, and an ability to move beyond their own ego in a way that is not often demonstrated (at least as far as I can see) in high schoolers and younger.

OG can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always been under the impression that the typical gamer at the creation was in his 20s or 30s. My best memories of gaming in the late 70s/early 80s was in groups where I was the baby. As I've been pointing out a lot lately (because I think it's an important insight) RPGs stayed with me because they were the social activity I transitioned into adulthood with. That is, they were the first place adults treated me like a peer and not a kid.

The worst thing to happen to the hobby was for it to become a teenage fad in the 80s. Not only for the reason most commonly cited: it created unrealistic expectations of how much money could be made in it but for a much more damaging reason in my opinion. It made it into a kids thing. Adults who play them must be losers because it's for kids.

To take OG's other games above: mah-jong and contract bridge. Most adults don't play them, but they don't think adults who do are odd.

So to me the future of the hobby is in groups of adults who reach out in various ways to teenagers other than their kids and provide that play where you sort out being part of an adult peer group.

As for the industry...for its future look to other niche hobbies and lifestyles: the SCA/boffer LARPs, the goth scene, etc. Lots of cottage industries doing professional work out of devotion to a scene/hobby and not to get rich. A handful actually making a living at it. That's most of our industry now but we don't want to admit that's the best we can expect.

[Shane Cubis]

For mine, the problems you're talking about here are the same problems currently being faced by, for example, the Australian Diplomacy hobby. The stalwarts of the group are aging, moving on, dropping out of the hobby...

...and no-one's making an effort to recruit new blood.

If you want to have new, young players of role-playing games, you can't expect them to buy the 4E core rules gift set and a set of dice on a whim, then invite their mates round to learn the game. Maybe that's how you did it back in the day, but it's supremely unlikely to happen now (for a variety of reasons, some mentioned above).

When I was (briefly) a casual primary school teacher, I set up a whole day of activities based around role-playing. It culminated in a simple dungeon, a slightly modified Fighting Fantasy rules system, each table of six kids containing a co-GM and five adventurers...and me at the front of the classroom, reading flavour text, drawing maps on the blackboard, using my co-GMs as callers for each party.

It was glorious chaos, and you better believe some of those kids wanted blank character sheets and a copy of my rules at the end of the day.

In short, if you wanna see a new generation of tabletop role-players, you gotta recruit them. Cos those that arise spontaneously are going to head straight for the compucomp.

[Kellri]

Here's a lesson to those developing the Next Big RPG

And what's the lesson here?? Don't develop an RPG? Bastardize every meaningful thing about them in order to appeal to pre-teens? Would Altunes make the same argument for horse-racing after cars came along? (Kids need speed! They don't have the time for grooming or shovelling fodder.)

When I was (briefly) a casual primary school teacher, I set up a whole day of activities based around role-playing... It was glorious chaos, and you better believe some of those kids wanted blank character sheets and a copy of my rules at the end of the day.

I'm a 6th-grade teacher in an international Korean school in Vietnam. We've played a lot, both in class and on Saturdays in a club setting using basic D&D. I've had around 20 requests from the kids for copies of the rules....I gave them Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC, and some have started playing at home in their own groups. Heck, I've even had parents thank me for inspiring their kid to learn English.

Here's my advice. Two things made rpgs popular - passion and persistence. If you're not passionate about writing an rpg and don't want to put in the time to market it...just shut up and quit trying to pawn off your sour grape analysis as advice. If you are passionate - you already know enough to ignore the poison punditry and persist with quality game design.

[Grimkrieg]

Here's my advice. Two things made rpgs popular - passion and persistence. If you're not passionate about writing an rpg and don't want to put in the time to market it...just shut up and quit trying to pawn off your sour grape analysis as advice. If you are passionate - you already know enough to ignore the poison punditry and persist with quality game design.

I agree. As soon as you start chasing cool you have already lost the race.

However, I also agree with the part of the original column about innovating and networking; I just don't think I needed the doom and gloom that preceeded it :)

[torbenm]

LARPs and computer RPGs seem to have a sizeable audience in the teenage age group, but I think for quite different reasons.

Computer games can be played alone and at any time, so you don't need to schedule meetings with other people. And the stories are simple and rather black-and-white ("Collect 20 orange salamander tongues. Don't worry about being the aggressor or them becoming extinct or any other moral issues"), and the methods for overcoming the problems are straightforward (keep hitting until they keel over), so it doesn't require very deep thought. In short, they are fairly accessible at the mental level.

LARPs are different. They do require scheduling and they do have somewhat more complex stories. But they are treated by the parents more like scouting or sports activities: Outdoor physical activity in sizeable groups and supervised by a group of responsible adults. For the parents, buying latex sword and capes is not much different from buying baseball bats and caps (except that the children can get really hurt by a baseball bat).

Tabletop RPGs are different. They are typically organised by a small group of peers in a private home, so the responsible adult part is missing, or if present apt to arouse suspicion, since it is typically a single adult in a private home. And children these days are more dependent than earlier on their parents bringing them to activities, so few can organize such events without parent assistance.

Reading 200 pages of rulebook is, IMO, not a major obstacle to kids who have ploughed through all the Harry Potter books and more. Nor is the price. As others have mentioned, console or PC games cost even more, and sports (or LARP) gear is not cheap either.

So, what is needed is a structured environment for play: Events that are organised by reputable groups of adults in public places (such as culture centres) and where parents pay fees to have their children go. The latter may seem counter-intuitive, but something that costs nothing can arouse suspicion and make parents more likely to have their children skip sessions (since they don't "lose" money by doing so). Also, a club-like environment can help recruitment of game masters, just like sports clubs or scout groups recruit leaders and trainers from their own members when these get older. In other word, making it more like LARPs in terms of organisation.

The alternative is to make them more like computer games, which is basically what Sandy suggests.

[Harmast]

So, what is needed is a structured environment for play: Events that are organised by reputable groups of adults in public places (such as culture centres) and where parents pay fees to have their children go. The latter may seem counter-intuitive, but something that costs nothing can arouse suspicion and make parents more likely to have their children skip sessions (since they don't "lose" money by doing so). Also, a club-like environment can help recruitment of game masters, just like sports clubs or scout groups recruit leaders and trainers from their own members when these get older. In other word, making it more like LARPs in terms of organisation.

I really think the time to revive clubs is nigh. While I didn't learn gaming from a club I was involved, as a kid, in one that probably did a lot to allay my parent's concerns. They also provide other benefits.

[Kellri]

I really think the time to revive clubs is nigh. While I didn't learn gaming from a club I was involved, as a kid, in one that probably did a lot to allay my parent's concerns.

I agree. When I was playing D&D in my basement with neighbor kids, our parents really felt a little uneasy - esp. with all the devil-worship talk at the time (early 80s). When I joined a club at 18, I felt like I'd finally found what I was looking. Normal people of all ages playing together. The older gamers were my mentors, teaching me things about strategy, literature, history and math that I would never have payed much attention to otherwise.

No clubs means no mentoring and not much possibility for player growth. Nobody in a chat room is going to tell you when you've stepped over the line, or take you aside and praise you for something either. No clubs also means games get designed for sale to one person as opposed to play by a group. World of Warcraft looks exciting only if you've never experienced a big-club game with friends.

[Distort]

I think the best thing any RPing company could do to attract new players, especially young ones, is to set up online roleplaying forums and publish some free, system-less material. Y2Kers are going to go somewhere to roleplay, they might as well being going to you. And let's face it, you don't need books to roleplay. They're helpful but far from a necessity. If you give away free material, you might manage to convince a few people that they're nice to have.

I disagree with Torbenm. It's very hard to find a good party in an MMO or to set up a group of people to Play Call of Duty. But Microsoft and Good MMOs don't just sit there and complain about it. They help their players form parties and groups and socialize. Which is what RPGs should be doing.
Some things RPG companies could learn from this:

1. Put your game online. Letting your game be based on physical location is going to limit your players. That's a really bad idea when you're selling a social game. If people can't find players for their game, they're going to stop buying your product.

2. Make it easy to find players online. It's hard to find a party in an MMO, so the successful ones provide tools to make it easier. Message boards can go a long way towards helping your player find...your players.

3. Organize. City of Heroes is widly known to have the best player search in the industry. It tells you when a player is online, where they are, what class they play. Do the same for your games. Say how often a player is online, what game they play and as many personal preferences as you can get. You want to make sure a party gets the perfect player for them.

4. Be active. When you log onto X-box, it shows who on your friends list is online and what they're playing. This is infitely helpful to players and have formed countless groups. Do the same for you game. The minute players log onto your website show them when their friends are on and what they've been up to. Invoke the "Hey, can I play that?" effect.

I wouldn't say that Harry Potter is a good pitch for roleplaying games. First of all, most Harry Potter readers aren't your average Joes, they're a little to the academic side. If you did research, honors students would probably be more likely to have read the book then non-honors students. Plus, it's a fad that's quickly dying out.

Secondly, the kind of people who read Harry Potter aren't like to play games. These are two separate crowds that rarely intersect. I don't know too many people who have X-boxs and read Harry Potter and I don't know too many people who read Harry Potter and play X-box.

Thirdly, wether you like it or not, J.K. Rowling is one of the best writers of our time. Her ability to take Fantastic Settings and make them seem real is uncanny. Chances are your RPG writers just aren't this good. Fourthly, HP is directly aimed at kids. In how many RPGs can you play Middle/High Schooler. Not many.

Like I said, most people don't own consoles or expensive gamer PCs. And sports gear is a lot cheaper than RPG books.

I don't think a club is the answer. Harry Potter and video games are popular because they allow you to escape the world and your parents. Chances are you don't want them there with you for RPGs either.

[Old Geezer]

Thirdly, wether you like it or not, J.K. Rowling is one of the best writers of our time. Her ability to take Fantastic Settings and make them seem real is uncanny. Chances are your RPG writers just aren't this good.

Um.

I will grant you it sells well.

As a writer, though, she is barely mediocre.

And a Google search will give you plenty of people who can explain why better than I. Harold Bloom, for one.

[BluSponge]

I think this article really hits the nail on the head and I couldn't agree more. I run a game for teens at the local library and most of them (many of them young women) are already familiar with the freeform RPing experience. They seem to come from three groups: complete newbies, D&D experience, and freeform RPing experience. The last two are closely tied. Granted, my experience is anecdotal, but I've had 20+ kids come through the program at its various stages, of all genders and ethnicities, so I'll take it as a pretty good snapshot.

With all due respect to Sandy for his well-written column... IMEO, it ain't happening.

You AREN'T going to get kids into RPGs. There is no "next big thing".

Disagree completely. I've seen it happen. I do it every other Monday. And these are kids ages 11-16, and for the vast majority this is their first real experience with RPGs. Now, I can't say how many of them will continue to play once they leave the program, but a lot of them have bought their own dice which implies SOME level of investment (and unnecessary as I have complete sets of dice for those who need them).

When we talk about RPGs, we're talking about a very specific kind of shared storytelling experience. Comparing RPGs to chat room make-believe and MMOs is quite unfair. Chat room "roleplaying" is just a general "use your imagination to become someone else," and MMOs are just "kill stuff and level up." Both of those may have the same elements that roleplaying has, but that's not to say they're in the same category.

I think that's simplifying things a lot. It's kinda like saying kids who play board games have no interest in card games. At one point, D&D was "kill stuff and level up." I seriously doubt there was a considerable amount of deep rping in a group of 12+ people with one assigned to be the "caller" and one the "mapper." RPGs have changed and evolved to meet the tastes of the audience over time.

Now, I agree with Old Geezer in that the "next big thing" probably won't be an RPG. MMOs ARE the "next big thing," and who knows what will come after that. But then none of us really know what the next big thing is or we'd all be working on it and it would fail miserably. These things always come out of left field.

That said, I think some folks are underestimating the market for a highly modular, internet-savvy, low entry point roleplaying "game" that targets this audience. It would need to be something that could be played over chat and even text messaging nearly seamlessly, as well as in person. The rules would have to be modular but built on a very light framework. And they would have to be flexible enough to easily apply to just about any genre or setting, though it might be able to present an inherent setting (like DnD does). A significant portion would have to be married to the online experience and be kid and parent friendly. And it would probably need to be able to be played without a traditional "game master."

After all, an RPG is simply a collection of mini-games (puzzles, riddles, tactics and combat) linked together by a sort of "let's pretend" veneer. I don't see why kids today wouldn't be interested.

Tom

[BluSponge]

And what's the lesson here?? Don't develop an RPG? Bastardize every meaningful thing about them in order to appeal to pre-teens? Would Altunes make the same argument for horse-racing after cars came along? (Kids need speed! They don't have the time for grooming or shovelling fodder.)

So....ahhhh...where did drag racing, NASCAR and that sort of thing come from? Granted, we still have horse racing, but that didn't exclude the creation of new sports, did it? But then, It's kind of like the old adage about the folks who made buggy whips.

Here's my advice. Two things made rpgs popular - passion and persistence. If you're not passionate about writing an rpg and don't want to put in the time to market it...just shut up and quit trying to pawn off your sour grape analysis as advice. If you are passionate - you already know enough to ignore the poison punditry and persist with quality game design.

I don't know that passion or persistence are what made RPGs a success. It was a new take on traditional forms of entertainment that caught the public eye at the right place and the right time. I will agree that both are what keep people involved in the professional aspect of the hobby today.

Tom

[Harmast]

1. Put your game online. Letting your game be based on physical location is going to limit your players. That's a really bad idea when you're selling a social game. If people can't find players for their game, they're going to stop buying your product.

The way to save a game intended to be played around a table with other people is to get rid of the table?

WotC briefly ran some ads, poorly done admittedly, on the theme of "if you're going to pretend to be an elf at least invite some friends over". That, in a nutshell, is what WoW et al can't provide tabletop does. Humans are social animals. RPGs are social activities. Point that out.

I don't think a club is the answer. Harry Potter and video games are popular because they allow you to escape the world and your parents. Chances are you don't want them there with you for RPGs either.

Okay, I'm going to quote myself because clearly the idea isn't getting across:

So to me the future of the hobby is in groups of adults who reach out in various ways to teenagers other than their kids and provide that play where you sort out being part of an adult peer group.

Emphasis in the original.

Clubs don't let you play with your parents. They let you play with other adults. Maybe things have chaged in the past 20-30 years but when I was 14-18 one of the best things about my gaming group was it was mostly adults who saw me no different from other adults, at least in the context. Teenagers want to be treated like adults...its one thing most complain to their parents that their parents aren't doing.

Where clubs benefit with parents is in letting these same teenagers join mostly adult groups. A 41 year old single man having two teenagers and three other adults over to his house is iffy to most parents (my father always went the first 2-3 times) and probably more so today than 30 years ago.

But the benefit to teenagers, beyond gaming, is allowing them an adult space. I believe that is one of the biggest ways to keep teenagers in the hobby.

[Kellri]

Clubs don't let you play with your parents. They let you play with other adults. Maybe things have chaged in the past 20-30 years but when I was 14-18 one of the best things about my gaming group was it was mostly adults who saw me no different from other adults, at least in the context.

Excellent point. You must INVEST part of yourself and your reputation in a club, whereas online you are often allowed to DIVEST, and act like some kind of uber-jerk to strangers. This kind of behavior can be dealt with in a club, often to the benefit of the kid acting like a jerk. Smart kids can also really blossom in a gaming club, where the rewards are tangible and growth is encouraged. Encouraging more online chat and MMORPGs to cater to what you think modern kids want is akin to scrapping Little League in favor of a fantasy baseball league. It misses the whole point.