but just give Mr. Greenwood back the Realms so it can be delt with appropriately........
so what if we'd loose the dwarven pantheon and most if not all the seldarine.....
3 books and the miniature product line...
WOTC isn't WOTC anymore, Dave, it's Hasbro. Furthermore, if Hasbro doesn't see the Dungeons and Dragons product line make a substancial profit, then that product will be canceled. Anyhow let's not pretend everything is alright, especially after 4 D&D products were suddenly canceled. These are bad signs, my friend, and worse signs are yet to come.
3 books and the miniature product line...
I see it less as a sign of bad times, and more a need for restructuring and trimming of the fat.I have a feeling the minis were losing them money, with no positive restructuring scheme in sight. So they were cut. The three books were being talked about as just reprints, and many were talking about what they wouldn't buy. You have enough of your customer base that refuses to buy your product, you need to look at what you are doing and make changes. Apparently, WotC knows this.
WotC releases too few books a month, is accused of being only interested in making money and not caring about D&D.
...
You can please all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot please all the people all the time.
WotC releases too many books a month, is accused of being only interested in making money and not caring about D&D.
WotC releases too few books a month, is accused of being only interested in making money and not caring about D&D.
...
You can please all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot please all the people all the time.
Yeah, except that's not what's happening.
When they were making a book a month many of them were sub-par, and while their main goal may not have been a money grab, it looked like it.
Now they have canceled a lot of products. The only ones left now are board games and other non-direct D&D products. The only new straight up D&D product are the fortune cards, which are clearly a money grab. They are an attempt to force the CCG model onto D&D. Nearly everyone I've seen discuss them does not think they are a viable option.
There is a clear reason many of us are upset and wondering about WotC, D&D, and the future. Mocking us with generalizations does nothing but make you look bad. Try using facts...
Yeah, except that's not what's happening.
When they were making a book a month many of them were sub-par, and while their main goal may not have been a money grab, it looked like it.
Now they have canceled a lot of products. The only ones left now are board games and other non-direct D&D products. The only new straight up D&D product are the fortune cards, which are clearly a money grab. They are an attempt to force the CCG model onto D&D. Nearly everyone I've seen discuss them does not think they are a viable option.
There is a clear reason many of us are upset and wondering about WotC, D&D, and the future. Mocking us with generalizations does nothing but make you look bad. Try using facts...
Except that there are several "straight up D&D" products coming out. Heroes of Shadow, Shadowfell: Gloomwrought and Beyond, and Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale. Those are all books or boxed sets with books. But you know, keep using your "facts" with your blinders on.
Moving on...
To the OP, I really hope Hasbro does nothing of the sort. And I think Hasbro does care, their ideas just don't sync with what want. That doesn't mean they don't care, it just means you don't like what they are doing. Those are two different things.
Yeah, except that's not what's happening.
When they were making a book a month many of them were sub-par, and while their main goal may not have been a money grab, it looked like it.
Now they have canceled a lot of products. The only ones left now are board games and other non-direct D&D products. The only new straight up D&D product are the fortune cards, which are clearly a money grab. They are an attempt to force the CCG model onto D&D. Nearly everyone I've seen discuss them does not think they are a viable option.
There is a clear reason many of us are upset and wondering about WotC, D&D, and the future. Mocking us with generalizations does nothing but make you look bad. Try using facts...
Heroes of Shadow, the Shadowfell Boxed Set, Monster Vault: Nentir Vale, and all the other announced books save for Class Compendium, Mordenkainen's Emporium, and the Heroes Builder's Book are still going to be released. The Fortune Cards are an accessory to a game, not a game in and of itself.
Maybe the reason why you and the people you're talking to are so upset is because you don't have all the facts. Scratch that. You have the facts, but consistently bang the "WotC is bad" drum whatever the season. You said back in September on your blog that maybe you should look for a new hobby. I agree.
Yeah, except that's not what's happening.
When they were making a book a month many of them were sub-par, and while their main goal may not have been a money grab, it looked like it.
Now they have canceled a lot of products. The only ones left now are board games and other non-direct D&D products. The only new straight up D&D product are the fortune cards, which are clearly a money grab. They are an attempt to force the CCG model onto D&D. Nearly everyone I've seen discuss them does not think they are a viable option.
There is a clear reason many of us are upset and wondering about WotC, D&D, and the future. Mocking us with generalizations does nothing but make you look bad. Try using facts...
Except that there are several "straight up D&D" products coming out. Heroes of Shadow, Shadowfell: Gloomwrought and Beyond, and Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale. Those are all books or boxed sets with books. But you know, keep using your "facts" with your blinders on.
Moving on...
To the OP, I really hope Hasbro does nothing of the sort. And I think Hasbro does care, their ideas just don't sync with what want. That doesn't mean they don't care, it just means you don't like what they are doing. Those are two different things.
those are all things that were "in the works" before the cancellations... Nothing new that is a rule book or rule "boxed set" is in the works. Anything that was worked on after a certain point is being crammed into these products. Thus the "Vampire" from Ravenloft being shoved into the HoS book.
At the moment I've seen 1 person that likes the idea of Fortune Cards out of many many more that don't. I've seen about an even split on HoS. You can say that its not a good representative of the WotC fanbase, but without any other source its all we can go on. The fact that they canceled so many products is a sign that "something" wasn't going right.
The fact that Fortune Cards are about as close as you can get to flat out admitting a money grab, is very telling, and leads many to believe that WotC is only about the money...
Yea, I like what WotC has done with the D&D franchise. The "fortune cards" suck. But 4e as a whole rocks. I would rather that WotC keep it, otherwise D&D might start to look something like Pathfinder... that would be a travesty.
WOTC isn't WOTC anymore, Dave, it's Hasbro. Furthermore, if Hasbro doesn't see the Dungeons and Dragons product line make a substancial profit, then that product will be canceled. Anyhow let's not pretend everything is alright, especially after 4 D&D products were suddenly canceled. These are bad signs, my friend, and worse signs are yet to come.
3 books and the miniature product line...
I see it less as a sign of bad times, and more a need for restructuring and trimming of the fat.I have a feeling the minis were losing them money, with no positive restructuring scheme in sight. So they were cut. The three books were being talked about as just reprints, and many were talking about what they wouldn't buy. You have enough of your customer base that refuses to buy your product, you need to look at what you are doing and make changes. Apparently, WotC knows this.
WotC releases too many books a month, is accused of being only interested in making money and not caring about D&D.
WotC releases too few books a month, is accused of being only interested in making money and not caring about D&D.
...
You can please all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot please all the people all the time.
I am in agreeance here... WotC isn't doing that bad a job. I think right now nerves are a bit frayed by book / product line cancellations and a lot of people are panicking and / or just pissed off that they're favorite stuff is being done away with. I know that I personally am rather pissed that Heroscape got hung out to dry.
However... I am a huge fan of the Essentials books and a lover of the new class format. I have to completely disagree with Rampant about the "basic attack classes" being boring. I typically DM, but six of the players that I normally DM for are all playing those "basic attack classes" and are having a ball. How fun a character is to play isn't really based on whether your character is using the "Cleave" power or a Basic Attack with the "Cleave" stance turned on... or if it is, then you probably aren't roleplaying enough.
WOTC isn't WOTC anymore, Dave, it's Hasbro. Furthermore, if Hasbro doesn't see the Dungeons and Dragons product line make a substancial profit, then that product will be canceled. Anyhow let's not pretend everything is alright, especially after 4 D&D products were suddenly canceled. These are bad signs, my friend, and worse signs are yet to come.
3 books and the miniature product line...
I haven't been keeping track of the new products. Which 3 books have been canceled?
Yeah, except that's not what's happening.
When they were making a book a month many of them were sub-par, and while their main goal may not have been a money grab, it looked like it.
Now they have canceled a lot of products. The only ones left now are board games and other non-direct D&D products. The only new straight up D&D product are the fortune cards, which are clearly a money grab. They are an attempt to force the CCG model onto D&D. Nearly everyone I've seen discuss them does not think they are a viable option.
There is a clear reason many of us are upset and wondering about WotC, D&D, and the future. Mocking us with generalizations does nothing but make you look bad. Try using facts...
Except that there are several "straight up D&D" products coming out. Heroes of Shadow, Shadowfell: Gloomwrought and Beyond, and Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale. Those are all books or boxed sets with books. But you know, keep using your "facts" with your blinders on.
Moving on...
To the OP, I really hope Hasbro does nothing of the sort. And I think Hasbro does care, their ideas just don't sync with what want. That doesn't mean they don't care, it just means you don't like what they are doing. Those are two different things.
those are all things that were "in the works" before the cancellations... Nothing new that is a rule book or rule "boxed set" is in the works. Anything that was worked on after a certain point is being crammed into these products. Thus the "Vampire" from Ravenloft being shoved into the HoS book.
At the moment I've seen 1 person that likes the idea of Fortune Cards out of many many more that don't. I've seen about an even split on HoS. You can say that its not a good representative of the WotC fanbase, but without any other source its all we can go on. The fact that they canceled so many products is a sign that "something" wasn't going right.
The fact that Fortune Cards are about as close as you can get to flat out admitting a money grab, is very telling, and leads many to believe that WotC is only about the money...
So you acknowledge that there are books being made, but say that there aren't books being made?
So, because we only have the Q1 catalog available right now, that means that Q2, Q3, and Q4 are going to be empty? Currently there are still plenty of books scheduled for those timeframes. That includes the Neverwinter Campaign Setting, Ravenloft game (which may or may not have the Vampire since it is a stand-alone game), and a few others. A few unannounced products are also coming, such as Heroes of the Feywild and the Advanced Dungeon Master's Guide, but little is known about these.
I guess I don't understand, WotC says they aren't going to release books which are almost 100% reprinted material, and that means that they don't care?
Now, I am not an expert on business, as I am sure the rest of you are, but I do have some amount of common sense.
Here are some things I think most of us (never all) can agree on:
1) Dungeons and Dragons is the most widely known RPG. It has the kind of name power that Kleenex, Xerox, and other such brands have.
2) Hasbro is a successful company with a long history of producing games. They thus have both a good understanding of games as well as the money to do things.
3) Other RPG companies would love to have the D&D name.
4) If the D&D line was not profitable for Hasbro, and they felt it wouldn't be profitable in the future, they would seek to sell the line.
Now, you (and you know who you are) might not personally like the things being done with D&D. But that doesn't mean that Hasbro is a bad company, or that WotC doesn't care about D&D, or anything like that. It just means you don't like the new things. If D&D was actually unprofitable in the long term view, Hasbro would sell the line. But I don't think that it is unprofitable. It is the most popular and widely known RPG with a long and rich history. We are currently in the worst ecomomic depression since the Great One, and thus people are cutting back on luxury spending. As a result, WotC is trying new strategies to revitalize the market, just like any company. Some of these might work, and others won't. For every person who hates something new, another will love it. Look at Magic Cards. When they came out I thought they were silly, just another passing fad. Boy was I right!
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Here it is......
I really wanted to buy Mordenkainen's Emporium, along with many other role-players. I don't care about fortune cards and I probably won't buy them. A lot of the campaign setting books I admit were subpar: (Examples) Manuel of the planes, Underdark, and a few others.
The 2nd edition and 3.5 edition versions of these books were done so much better than the 4th edition version of these books.
Alter_boy, Mordenkainen's Emporium, happens to be one of the books that got canceled. There is a question/answer thread that explains which products got canceled. However, I'll need some time to find the link.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Here it is......
I think what he was saying in his post is that it won't be released, along with the Hero Builder's Handbook and the Class Compendium. What he was saying is that everything planned besides those three books is still intended to be released.
Here are some things I think most of us (never all) can agree on:
1) Dungeons and Dragons is the most widely known RPG. It has the kind of name power that Kleenex, Xerox, and other such brands have.
2) Hasbro is a successful company with a long history of producing games. They thus have both a good understanding of games as well as the money to do things.
3) Other RPG companies would love to have the D&D name.
4) If the D&D line was not profitable for Hasbro, and they felt it wouldn't be profitable in the future, they would seek to sell the line.
Now, you (and you know who you are) might not personally like the things being done with D&D. But that doesn't mean that Hasbro is a bad company, or that WotC doesn't care about D&D, or anything like that. It just means you don't like the new things. If D&D was actually unprofitable in the long term view, Hasbro would sell the line. But I don't think that it is unprofitable. It is the most popular and widely known RPG with a long and rich history. We are currently in the worst ecomomic depression since the Great One, and thus people are cutting back on luxury spending. As a result, WotC is trying new strategies to revitalize the market, just like any company. Some of these might work, and others won't. For every person who hates something new, another will love it. Look at Magic Cards. When they came out I thought they were silly, just another passing fad. Boy was I right!
Yes, D&D's name recognition is enormous and that is likely the main reason Hasbro will hang-on to it until the profit margin is too low. Just because they haven't sold yet, doesn't mean they have not reached that point yet. Also, just because Hasbro is a "game" company doesn't mean they should know how to handle D&D. Afterall, D&D is no ordinary game and the D&D community can not be assumed to be the same as folks who play Magic the Gathering or Monopoly. No other Hasbro product requires such a prolific publishing division or such a demanding on-line presence. While WotC can handle most of the publishing side of things, they seem to have no idea how to communicate with their fans or how to produce digital offerings. These are the two biggest problems Hasbro needs to fix, because WotC has repeatedly demonstrated they do not know how. So if it's Hasbro who really doesn't know how to fix these problems, then yes they should get it over with and license the product to someone who can. Otherwise, they should just sell it already, before they reduce its value any further.
What a load of total and utter complete bologna. Thanks, I'll stick with WotC. They have been doing a great job as far as I am concerned. If you would like a different company to handle the brand, why don't you go play/buy Pathfinder or Castles and Crusades. Both are D&D spin off games (one based off 3e, the other of 2e). You can see how other companies would have handled the D&D brand for yourself.
I do admit, I don't care for the fact Wizards owns Eberron and Keith Baker can't have much to say on it outside of official material. I kinda wish he could have it.
Actually, originally, when WotC bought TSR, it was a 'friendly' sort of takeover. TSR was in trouble, Wizards had a lot of sympathetic folks in it. Than WotC got in trouble and was snapped up by Hasbro.
Hasbro has a history of 'retiring' badly under-performing properties for a time, 'until demand recovers.' That is, until fans are desperate enough to buy crap in the vain hope their favorite will get some continued support. Kinda the theory on which we're buying Gamma World, now, actually... Sure, it's edited for crap and has freak'n booster packs, but if it sells well, maybe Gamma World will get the support it deserves - even though it never has in 6 prior editions....
Anyway, even when a fan buys out a property like this, the results aren't always great. Steve Long and a band of merry investors bought out Hero System... it took some time, but Hero isn't quite what it used to be...
Hasbro has a history of 'retiring' badly under-performing properties for a time, 'until demand recovers.'
I think that's the real danger here: If we don't like what WotC puts out and refuse to buy it, the result will most likely not be the sale of D&D to a company that cares, it will be a simple disspearance of D&D from the market entirely.
If Hasbro shelves D&D, I'm afraid it will be gone forever, at least in any recognisable form. Expect alot of D&D branded stuff: board games, CCGs, book, computer games, movies (shudder).
Honestly I think if it dies here it dies forever.
It's sad, but it won't make me support whatever garbage they want to produce.
Hasbro has a history of 'retiring' badly under-performing properties for a time, 'until demand recovers.'
I think that's the real danger here: If we don't like what WotC puts out and refuse to buy it, the result will most likely not be the sale of D&D to a company that cares, it will be a simple disspearance of D&D from the market entirely.
If Hasbro shelves D&D, I'm afraid it will be gone forever, at least in any recognisable form. Expect alot of D&D branded stuff: board games, CCGs, book, computer games, movies (shudder).
Honestly I think if it dies here it dies forever.
It's sad, but it won't make me support whatever garbage they want to produce.
I am an adoring fanatic of the Fourth edition of Dungeons & Dragons, but the success of Paizo and all the other host of publishers with their retro-clones and OGL stuff demonstrates that D&D does not need Hasbro or the Wizards.
Polls at Enworld (admittedly not definitive or scientific) show that half of D&D players actively play other versions of D&D. These are not just smelly old fatbeards. In my hometown, one fellow has recruited an entire club of 1976 OD&D among high school and community college students. In Montreal, my 11 year old cousin discovered 3rd edition in a used book store and commenced teachign it to his other middle school friends; he then discovered another group at the local library.
When Hasbro shelves our own beloved Fourth edition, I for one will join the on-line community of fatbeards and produce my very own free pdf version of a 4e retro-clone.
A few years back, when Hasbro acquired WotC the two parties sat down and had a talk. WotC tried to explain exactly what D&D was. The folks on the Hasbro side didn't understand. They understood what a board game was and they knew how to market those.
Now WotC wanted to prove to Hasbro just how awesome D&D was. In order to help make D&D more grokable to Hasbro they released 4E. 4E was still like D&D but it became a bit more board game like (minis, a grid, more clearly defined actions). 4E made a lot of folks mad and they left.
Unfortunately, Hasbro still didn't understand D&D, so WotC released Essentials, saying "See we've made it even more accessible". Making even more people mad. "We'll even release board games(and Gamma World)." This confused people. At the same time they still tried to cater to those still playing D&D people that wanted branded minis, more examples of this new version, modules, retooling of pre-existing worlds, online content, etc. For some reason WotC decided to do all this while the economy was tanking/trying to recover.
Hasbro doesn't care, because they still don't understand D&D.
WotC is too tired from all the hoop jumping.
The Players are bitter and confused because of all the hoop jumping.
Despite what has been released, adding content (even content designed to make things easier) makes the issues exponentially more complicated. An entry point is not "Buy these 6 products." The jump from self-contained board game to "Buy these 6 products" is huge. Count me confused.
1) Dungeons and Dragons is the most widely known RPG. It has the kind of name power that Kleenex, Xerox, and other such brands have.
However only in a small and uninteresting market. Just read Hasbro's financial reports. D&D is mentioned twice (one is basically that it exists at all and the other that they didn't buy back the video game rights) as opposed to Hasbro's other brands (including WotC brands like MtG) which are mentioned all throughout the report (at the important places e.g. what was contributing to the good figures ). Even worse, the investor fact sheet (meant to highlight anything most sexy about Hasbro for potential investors doesn't even mention D&D at all (MtG is once again mentioned)).
Also note that Hasbro just had a very disappointing quarter and if your good performers are not up to target, your low performers usually get even more pressure than usual.
I don't think Wizards have ever really "got" what DnD is. The two (or four, if you count 3.5 and Essentials) editions they have developed are the most poorly supported versions of the game and for opposite reasons.
3rd Edition was Heath Robinson-esque in it's vast, sprawling, clockwork design. 4E has few moving parts, all of which are sealed away beneath it's cosmetic cover.
Understanding that DnD was a platform for players to make their own game (rather than the cookie cutter system of 4E) and employing a significantly stronger dose of editorial control would have improved their lot greatly.
This kind of future was exactly what some of us feared would happen back in 1997 when TSR died. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements. There is constant edition creep: from 3 to 3.5 to 4 to Essentials in ten years. Backsliding on promises doesn't engender good faith, either: "Shadow is an Insider exclusive," "A complete suite of GM tools," "this book is coming out..."
Compare that to 2nd Edition which ran from 1987 to 2000 alone (or 1995, if you would consider Player's Option as a separate edition.) This was also the edition that topped out at around fifteen official campaign settings, plus historical settings. They completed development of all its core races and classes and even extended this to supplemental classes (The Complete Necromancer, etc.) thus setting a model of growth that is still being followed throughout the industry today. Even, though, it perhaps shouldn't be. Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books. Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
Wizards have made some great innovations over the last decade; the OGL and the current production values being amongst them. But the overall content and direction has faltered, and DnD will live and die by both of these.
Of course, I don't expect anyone to listen to me; they didn't back then. But this was really one thing I wanted to be proved wrong on.
. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements.
Bologna. That is a subjective value judgement, and one which many people don't agree with. While I don't love 3e, I think 4e is hands down the best edition of D&D to date. I think it is of very high quality. Indeed, I think its quality is a good deal higher than anything found back in the 2e days. In fact, my only two issues with 4e (anymore) are its crappy adventure modules, and the new addition of fortune cards.
. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements.
Bologna. That is a subjective value judgement, and one which many people don't agree with. While I don't love 3e, I think 4e is hands down the best edition of D&D to date. I think it is of very high quality. Indeed, I think its quality is a good deal higher than anything found back in the 2e days. In fact, my only two issues with 4e (anymore) are its crappy adventure modules, and the new addition of fortune cards.
While I tend to agree that the mechanics of 4th ed is probably one of the best iterations, if by quality content we're talking about fluff, I absolutely have to agree with xaeromancer.
I mean look at the campaign guides released for 4th ed. Forgotten Realms is aweful (they killed it for me, when my group plays FR we go back in time to 1374) and very light on actual information. Two pages per region with practically no other content then "this used to be here but no longer". Eberron 4th ed is akin to Eberron-lite, and while I enjoy the Dark Sun campaign book, it is also very light on history and fluff (the rest is pretty good though I have to admit).
People that want to see 4e/WOTC/Hasboro fail see it failing.
Those who do not, see it as a success.
No idea which is actually right, just an observation.
The only way one can call the Eberron Campaign Guide "Eberron Lite" is if they compare it to all the Eberron information released in 3e.
Not to nitpick, but do we have another choice? I mean the campaign guide (and player guide) are the only books printed for 4th ed for these settings, so I'm comparing what was given to us in 3/3.5 and what was in 4th. Less books totalling less information, less overall fluff and stories for our settings in this iteration.
I grant you the point on Eberron, I was tagging it "lite" because of the amount of information more than the quality. For FR though, the fluff is just aweful low quality (not talking about the changes they decided, like the spellplague, that never bothered me) and I wonder how a newbie to FR can create a campaign with only 4th ed books. 3rd Ed was way better for FR and had a decent campaign guide and regional books that detailed further areas. (Even if the golden age was 1e/2e)
. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements.
Bologna. That is a subjective value judgement, and one which many people don't agree with. While I don't love 3e, I think 4e is hands down the best edition of D&D to date. I think it is of very high quality. Indeed, I think its quality is a good deal higher than anything found back in the 2e days. In fact, my only two issues with 4e (anymore) are its crappy adventure modules, and the new addition of fortune cards.
Indeed, while 2e had a plethora of suplements, it had quite the dearth of quality mechanics - 'crunch' we're calling it now, I guess. So you had your choice of 15 deelply-developed settings in which to play the game - it was still a clunky, antiquated, system. 3.x was still horridly imbalanced, but at least it was less than a decade behind the industry... 4e is fantastic compared to it's predecessors, in part because they set such a low bar.
I think the point about the support D&D got from both WotC and Hasbro is valid, though. D&D was, by far, TSR's 'crown jewel,' they're biggest, most popular, most important property. In WotC's hands it played second fiddle to MtG, and, at Hasbro, D&D is nothing, just a niche product they acquired by accident when they bought WotC to get Pokemon.
When Hasbro shelves our own beloved Fourth edition, I for one will join the on-line community of fatbeards and produce my very own free pdf version of a 4e retro-clone.
A note: just because a company shelves a product does not mean it won't sue the balls off anybody who infringes on their rights to it.
When Hasbro shelves our own beloved Fourth edition, I for one will join the on-line community of fatbeards and produce my very own free pdf version of a 4e retro-clone.
A note: just because a company shelves a product does not mean it won't sue the balls off anybody who infringes on their rights to it.
Exactly, which means if they shelve it, for all intents and purposes D&D would be dead. So they would have killed it off because of their own incompetence...
If they shelve it, they are being accused of killing d&d, if they continue to print products that are a strong reminescence of what is already put out they are being accused of money-grabbing... why not put it on slow until the next iteration comes out?
When Hasbro shelves our own beloved Fourth edition, I for one will join the on-line community of fatbeards and produce my very own free pdf version of a 4e retro-clone.
A note: just because a company shelves a product does not mean it won't sue the balls off anybody who infringes on their rights to it.
Exactly, which means if they shelve it, for all intents and purposes D&D would be dead. So they would have killed it off because of their own incompetence...
Or because there are not enough people who want to play it. (A reason which may or may not have anything to do with how good the game is.)
"WotC tried to explain exactly what D&D was."
I don't think Wizards have ever really "got" what DnD is. The two (or four, if you count 3.5 and Essentials) editions they have developed are the most poorly supported versions of the game and for opposite reasons.
I don't recall any edition before 4e have such up to date errata and faqs.
3rd Edition was Heath Robinson-esque in it's vast, sprawling, clockwork design. 4E has few moving parts, all of which are sealed away beneath it's cosmetic cover.
I'm not sure you've actually played 4th edition.
Understanding that DnD was a platform for players to make their own game (rather than the cookie cutter system of 4E) and employing a significantly stronger dose of editorial control would have improved their lot greatly.
4e is better at this than ANY edition of D&D up to this point.
This kind of future was exactly what some of us feared would happen back in 1997 when TSR died. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements.
Wait, you feared what exactly when TSR died? That D&D would go under? It's not clear.
You have a point about Dragon and Dungeon mags, lately. I continue to hope that this is a restructuring hiccup. But the content up till the end of the essentials publications have been both useful and flavorful, while remaining quite open to interpretation.
There is constant edition creep: from 3 to 3.5 to 4 to Essentials in ten years.
Rules Edition History
1977 Dungeons and Dragons
1978 Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
1981 Revised Basic Edition, Expert D&D
1983 Revised Expert D&D, D&D Companion
1985 Master Rules
1986 Immortal Rules
1989 2nd Edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
1991 Rules Cyclopedia (Collecting 1st ed Basic through Master), Revised Immortal
1995 Revised 2nd Edition, Players Options
2000 3rd edition
2003 3.5 edition
2008 4th edition
2010 4th ed Essentials
I think I proved my point.
Backsliding on promises doesn't engender good faith, either: "Shadow is an Insider exclusive,"
They never promised that. Assassin was exclusive, but at no point did they say it would always be exclusive. It still is BTW.
Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books.
Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
Confirmed for never having played 4th edtion.
Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books. Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
You've read the PHB's, right?
Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books. Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
You've read the PHB's, right?
Obviously not.
Exactly, which means if they shelve it, for all intents and purposes D&D would be dead. So they would have killed it off because of their own incompetence...
No, I think we will see the 'Paizoization' of the D&D brand.
If D&D is shelved, someone, almost certainly Pathfinder/Paizo, becomes the dominant roleplaying system, much like Whitewolf did in the 90's.
Someone else creates a 4E clone which doesn't do half as well but still makes money for a company that has a more realistic sales goals then Hasbro/Wotc (I admit the GSL will be problamatic). Many people will see this game as the spiritual successor to 4E the way Pathfinder is seen as the true successor to 3.5.
Regardless what the 4e clone is called, many people will refer to it, just like Pathfinder is refered to on the Paizo boards sometimes, as D&D. And only a few persnickety little snobs care.
Then, years from now, D&D 5e is released by Hasbro or whomenver has the liscense, but nobody cares and it fails. Gamer loyalty at this point has been transfered to Pathfinder or its successor and the most popular 4e clone on the market(especially if 4e fans feel abandoned). People at this point refer to the two branches of D&D. But everyone knows 'D&D' is still played.
And considering how badly WotC Hasbro has managed it, it's what they deserve.
No, I think we will see the 'Paizoization' of the D&D brand.
If D&D is shelved, someone, almost certainly Pathfinder/Paizo, becomes the dominant roleplaying system, much like Whitewolf did in the 90's.
Someone else creates a 4E clone which doesn't do half as well but still makes money for a company that has a more realistic sales goals then Hasbro/Wotc (I admit the GSL will be problamatic). Many people will see this game as the spiritual successor to 4E the way Pathfinder is seen as the true successor to 3.5.
Regardless what the 4e clone is called, many people will refer to it, just like Pathfinder is refered to on the Paizo boards sometimes, as D&D. And only a few persnickety little snobs care.
Then, years from now, D&D 5e is released by Hasbro or whomenver has the liscense, but nobody cares and it fails. Gamer loyalty at this point has been transfered to Pathfinder or its successor and the most popular 4e clone on the market(especially if 4e fans feel abandoned). People at this point refer to the two branches of D&D. But everyone knows 'D&D' is still played.
And considering how badly WotC Hasbro has managed it, it's what they deserve.
Pathfinder is 3.5, it's not a successor. It's a tweak on the SRD.
Also, I want to point out that as soon as a new edition of D&D (3.0) came out after a long hiatus it was back on top again. Instantly.
In order to help make D&D more grokable to Hasbro they released 4E. 4E was still like D&D but it became a bit more board game like (minis, a grid, more clearly defined actions).
3E had all of those. 3E had minis, it used a grid for combat, and it used clearly defined actions.
4E made a lot of folks mad and they left.
So did 3E, and every other edition.
Pathfinder is 3.5, it's not a successor. It's a tweak on the SRD.
Also, I want to point out that as soon as a new edition of D&D (3.0) came out after a long hiatus it was back on top again. Instantly.
Pathfinder is different enough from 3.5 that anyone that has looked at it, particularly with the APG and the direction they are taking it would not call it 3.5, in spite of it's use of the OGL. Anyone who says otherwise I've noted, tend to be ignorant of the system or are trying to discredit it for the sake of discrediting it. You can argue whether it is balanced or a whole lot of things, but it is not 3.5.
Like it or not, Paizo has accomplished something by putting out a quality product. I think it is too early to see if they have made permanent changes to the market. If they have they have killed the reputation of D&D as an 'automatically' quality brand.
In 2000, when 3.0 came out, no one was serving the section of the RP community that played D&D very well. 3.0 was also an innovative system that people said 'oh wow' to the flexible and creative aspects of the updated system. (Also, White Wolf stayed strong for a few more years until they retired the World of Darkness.)
Now people are not saying 'oh wow' to 4E because it was a system that has divided the base. It was a system that went too far in the name of balance and took it for granted that even the fans who lingered with 3.5 would eventually come around. It was, bluntly, a system based on arrogance and greed.
If 5E, instead of entering a market where it faces little competition like 3.0 did, is facing committed Pathfinder and 4e clone fans who no longer care about the name D&D or where the D&D brand is even discredited, it will have to be an outstanding system. I think it will probably fail.
All the Best,
Nani?
Pathfinder is 3.5, it's not a successor. It's a tweak on the SRD.
Also, I want to point out that as soon as a new edition of D&D (3.0) came out after a long hiatus it was back on top again. Instantly.
Pathfinder is different enough from 3.5 that anyone that has looked at it, particularly with the APG and the direction they are taking it would not call it 3.5, in spite of it's use of the OGL. Anyone who says otherwise I've noted, tend to be ignorant of the system or are trying to discredit it for the sake of discrediting it. You can argue whether it is balanced or a whole lot of things, but it is not 3.5.
Like it or not, Paizo has accomplished something by putting out a quality product. I think it is too early to see if they have made permanent changes to the market. If they have they have killed the reputation of D&D as an 'automatically' quality brand.
In 2000, when 3.0 came out, no one was serving the section of the RP community that played D&D very well. 3.0 was also an innovative system that people said 'oh wow' to the flexible and creative aspects of the updated system. (Also, White Wolf stayed strong for a few more years until they retired the World of Darkness.)
Now people are not saying 'oh wow' to 4E because it was a system that has divided the base. It was a system that went too far in the name of balance and took it for granted that even the fans who lingered with 3.5 would eventually come around. It was, bluntly, a system based on arrogance and greed.
If 5E, instead of entering a market where it faces little competition like 3.0 did, is facing committed Pathfinder and 4e clone fans who no longer care about the name D&D or where the D&D brand is even discredited, it will have to be an outstanding system. I think it will probably fail.
All the Best,
Nani?
Very well put.
It should be also noted that so much of what old school players considered "D&D" was put into the SRD--or pre-existed in the public domain--that the holders of the D&D license (currently Hasbro) have very little intellectual property left that anyone considers sexy. Ilithids? They were creepy, but always dressed like campy purple-clad knock-offs of Ming the Merciless anyway, and Paizo have replaced then with Lovecraft's"denizens of Leng" who are far creepier and public domain.
All that's really left as unique iconic D&D is the beholder, and while everybody's favorite eye tyrant is vastly entertaining, and makes for some cool miniatures, it's easy enough to do without him, and fans of old school games can still use any edition's write-up and any miniature they might happen to have even if nothing were published under the D&D banner ever again.
If D&D is shelved, someone, almost certainly Pathfinder/Paizo, becomes the dominant roleplaying system, much like Whitewolf did in the 90's.
Point of clarification: White Wolf was never the "dominant roleplaying system". Even at its height, WWGS never claimed to have more than 35% of the market and never claimed to outsell D&D. In the 1990's D&D was in a death spiral, and WWGS did not outperform them.
Which is not to detract from your larger point. Paizo appears to have matched D&D's sales with Pathfinder. That's unheralded in the industry. If D&D is shelved, Paizo is uniquely poised to take over as the dominant player in the RPG business.
Someone else creates a 4E clone
Using the d20 OGL, that would not be all that difficult to do.
Then, years from now, D&D 5e is released by Hasbro or whomenver has the liscense, but nobody cares and it fails.
I think that depends on the quality of the games. Three years from now, Pathfinder will be as overbloated as 3e was at the end of its run. So prognosticating that far into the future, probably isn't all that useful.
It should be also noted that so much of what old school players considered "D&D" was put into the SRD--or pre-existed in the public domain--that the holders of the D&D license (currently Hasbro) have very little intellectual property left that anyone considers sexy.
Also true.
According to d20srd.org's FAQ:
Q: Why are some monsters missing from this site?
A: The following monsters are considered "Product Identity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:
- beholder
- gauth
- carrion crawler
- displacer beast
- githyanki
- githzerai
- kuo-toa
- mind flayer
- slaad
- umber hulk
- yuan-ti
I'm glad Paizo is around and they have great products. I believe competition can be a motivator for a company to improve. I'm glad Wizards can't take away the OGL. Hail to Ryan Dancey.
At least for now.....
"WotC tried to explain exactly what D&D was."
I don't think Wizards have ever really "got" what DnD is. The two (or four, if you count 3.5 and Essentials) editions they have developed are the most poorly supported versions of the game and for opposite reasons.
I don't recall any edition before 4e have such up to date errata and faqs.
I don't recall any edition before 4e having to have such up to date errata and faqs. Well, 2nd Edition did need them, but never got them. But it's the actual content and direction that is lacking. Hammering down nails is one thing, setting sail without a map and provisions is another.
3rd Edition was Heath Robinson-esque in it's vast, sprawling, clockwork design. 4E has few moving parts, all of which are sealed away beneath it's cosmetic cover.
I'm not sure you've actually played 4th edition.
I'm not sure you've played anything else. My our gaming group is divided roughly in half between those who are new to D&D and those who started with 2nd edition D&D. And it has taken the veteran players longer to get a handle on the game than the others, both mechanically and where the best opportunities for role-playing are.
Understanding that DnD was a platform for players to make their own game (rather than the cookie cutter system of 4E) and employing a significantly stronger dose of editorial control would have improved their lot greatly.
4e is better at this than ANY edition of D&D up to this point.
Really? There is next to nothing in the DMG on world building and your characters suffer horribly if you try to mix in anything from outside of their build. There is a lot of talk these days about "Character Optimisation" and that has absolutely nothing to do with role-playing; war-gaming and dungeon-crawling, yes, but nothing to do with creating a rounded character.
This kind of future was exactly what some of us feared would happen back in 1997 when TSR died. There is very little quality content within the 4th Edition books or, unfortunately, even in the Dragon and Dungeon supplements.
Wait, you feared what exactly when TSR died? That D&D would go under? It's not clear.
You have a point about Dragon and Dungeon mags, lately. I continue to hope that this is a restructuring hiccup. But the content up till the end of the essentials publications have been both useful and flavorful, while remaining quite open to interpretation.
I'm talking about the decline in quality and the simplification: the "kind of future" that is set forth in the cancellations on the release schedule. D&D won't go under, there is simply too much momentum behind it now.
Dragon and Dungeon have been on the decline for a long time. I define "lately" as shortly after they began focussing on D&D in particular and not RPGs (and miniatures and computer games) in general. I, too, hope this "restructuring hiccup" ends soon; as an Insider subscriber I'm essentially (no pun intended) paying for a Dragon and Dungeon subscription and support of Character Builder (which is a whole other issue- along with the Adventure Tools.) If you think that the 4E content is "useful and flavourful," then try revisiting the Planescape material. It makes the current planar sources books seem muted and desaturated in comparison.
There is constant edition creep: from 3 to 3.5 to 4 to Essentials in ten years.
Rules Edition History
1977 Dungeons and Dragons
1978 Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
1981 Revised Basic Edition, Expert D&D
1983 Revised Expert D&D, D&D Companion
1985 Master Rules
1986 Immortal Rules
1989 2nd Edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
1991 Rules Cyclopedia (Collecting 1st ed Basic through Master), Revised Immortal
1995 Revised 2nd Edition, Players Options
2000 3rd edition
2003 3.5 edition
2008 4th edition
2010 4th ed Essentials
I think I proved my point.
Yes, thank you. You've actually pointed out something I've missed: there have been 4 revisions of the rules (3-Essentials) in roughly the same period as 1st Edition AD&D's entire lifespan ('78-'89.) And that over half of AD&D's existence was under the first two editions. If your point is that "revision equals to support" then I'm afraid you're mistaken, the two are entirely different things. It's like equating demolition and development.
Backsliding on promises doesn't engender good faith, either: "Shadow is an Insider exclusive,"
They never promised that. Assassin was exclusive, but at no point did they say it would always be exclusive. It still is BTW.
Technicalities. It's still a show of bad faith as the Assassin and the Shadow source were amongst the only only useful content in Dragon and Dungeon that year.
Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books.
Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
Confirmed for never having played 4th edtion.
Yes, I've never played or run fourth edition. I've never had to use a computer programme, a web page and half a dozen books to find a level appropriate item that would be (vaguely) useful and fit a character's background only to find that the "content" in the book is exactly the same as the brief description in Character Builder. I'm glad that's never happened. Please excuse the sarcasm, but your presumption on my experience isn't the best point you've made.
My point is that you can't run a game (beyond the adventure in the back) with just the 3 core books.
Thanks for taking the time to read my rather lengthy original post and addressing each point. I'm glad that there are people who are still enjoying D&D, I wish I were one. Frankly, my experience of D&D over 4E has gone from "building a world / telling a story" to "enjoying a few beers with friends," it's far more about the company than the game.
Of course, the game still worked perfectly with the three core books. Something 4th Edition can't claim, since all the magic items are in Adventurer's Vault.
You've read the PHB's, right?
Obviously not.
Of course! What an embarrassing dependence on Character Builder I've developed.
Silly me, looking in the back of the Dungeon Master Guide, where they've been for the last 30 years...
It should be also noted that so much of what old school players considered "D&D" was put into the SRD--or pre-existed in the public domain--that the holders of the D&D license (currently Hasbro) have very little intellectual property left that anyone considers sexy.
Also true.
According to d20srd.org's FAQ:
Q: Why are some monsters missing from this site?A: The following monsters are considered "Product Identity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:
- beholder
- gauth
- carrion crawler
- displacer beast
- githyanki
- githzerai
- kuo-toa
- mind flayer
- slaad
- umber hulk
- yuan-ti
With the exception of displacer beasts, and umber hulks I wouldn't even notice the loss of these critters.
Meh. I love beholders, mind flayers, umber hulks, displacer beasts, and yuan-ti. With the exception of the beholder (and its various kin), which really is unique, I don't think it would be too tough to make a creature that fills the same niche as each of these creatures without infringing on intellectual property.
beholder/gaunt: I'll miss these big multi-ocular aberrations most of all.
carrion crawler: Is this significantly different than a giant centipede with paralyzing venom?
displacer beast: A feline creature with illusory powers. Can anybody say "lamia variant"?
gith: Psionic humans... in spaaaaace!
kua-toa: Fishfolk. The locathah are already in the SRD and fill the same essential niche.
mind flayer: Psionic slavers. Yeah, sad to see the squidheads go, but the aboleths are OGL and fit mostly the same niche.
slaad: Chaotic extraplanar creatures. The only thing we lose is the toad-like appearance, which will improve the concept overall.
umber hulk: Brutish creature with a confusing gaze. Do we really need the four-eyes and the mandibles? The umber coloring? no? Then we're good.
yuan-ti: Okay. These guys I'll miss. Snake-people are just a very cool concept and they had a great society.
So, a moment of silence for the beholders and yuan-ti.
It should be also noted that so much of what old school players considered "D&D" was put into the SRD--or pre-existed in the public domain--that the holders of the D&D license (currently Hasbro) have very little intellectual property left that anyone considers sexy.
Also true.
According to d20srd.org's FAQ:
Q: Why are some monsters missing from this site?A: The following monsters are considered "Product Identity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:
- beholder
- gauth
- carrion crawler
- displacer beast
- githyanki
- githzerai
- kuo-toa
- mind flayer
- slaad
- umber hulk
- yuan-ti
With the exception of displacer beasts, and umber hulks I wouldn't even notice the loss of these critters.
And from them I actually doubt that WotC would ever be able to protect any but the most obscure.
kuo-toa? WotC would try to claim the rights to Lovecraft-style fishmen?
yuan-ti? WotC would try to claim the rights to generic snake people?
Beholders/gauth? I would normally think WotC capable of defending, but how is it that beholder-like critters have already been used so often in other games by now
carrion crawler? Here's our generic giant centipede that's totally not a carrion crawler
One thing I do have to say that pathfinder has utterly destroyed WOTC at, is adventure quality. Frankly pathfinder modules and Adventure Paths are top grade better than anything WOTC has produced in 4th ed. I wish they could work together but I don't see that happening.
Yea, I would kill for some really well written 4e Adventure paths. Like, a GREAT 30 level Eberron and Dark Sun adventure path, say. Something full of both combat and role-playing, well written skill challenges that actually work as something more than telling your players to roll their skills X number of times, and a ton of character.
now they are in a good direction, i wish they dident cancel the minis but lets face it they are not the only ones producing them its a market they cannot control. also they used the hidden in the box collectible method for them. most people buy a mini they want for the character/monster they want to use. rather then drop 20 bucks to probably end up buying something they dont want or will ever use.
essentials sold, people keep saying it flopped/was a waste/sucked D&D, WOtC and hasbro moved product and they had something new and shiny for the holiday season AND IT WORKED like it or hate it. it worked
fortune cards are a money grab/ a new toy/ trying to put the CCG model into D&D/ something so the game isent same old same old all wrapped into one. what kind of business DOSENT release things for money anyway?
DDI was in a rut from late august to last month but guess what, they unveiled a new VTT and worked on the online CB.
you say its sucks because your unsatisfied and thats your right, D&D is still making a profit and they are in the midst of changes, they aren't going to sell this anytime soon, more people play D&D now then at any point in its 36 year history.
love em hate em, they are doing it fine and dont expect D&D to be sold to anyone
I think that depends on the quality of the games. Three years from now, Pathfinder will be as overbloated as 3e was at the end of its run. So prognosticating that far into the future, probably isn't all that useful.
Yeah, but in 3-4 years, if their sales stay like as good as they are, they will clean it up and do a Pathfinder 2nd edition...
- beholder/gauth ~ decapus (new monster in Bestiary 2, levitating 10-tentacled octopus with beholder-like grinning jaws instead of a beak and same cavern-dwelling eco-niche as the beholder)
- carrion crawler ~ giant centipede & tenebrous worm (the second actually being a giant caterpillar with poisonous bristles)
- displacer beast ~ coeurl (Wizards may claim "product identity" but the displacer beast is really a long-standing rip-off of AE Van Vogt's coeurl, an alien beast that looked like a black panther with tentacles on its shoulders. Paizo actually licensed the coeurl from the estate for one of their adventure paths.)
- githyanki ~ as mentioned, psionics with a skin condition in space? Not much product identity beyond the name. Paizo will likely have a replacement once they do psionics.
- githzerai ~ see previous listing
- kuo-toa ~ it's Lovecraft's deep ones, those horible fish-frog folk, and locathath fill the same eco-niche
- mind flayer ~ Lovecraft's denizen of Leng
- slaad ~ Bestiary 2 introduces the proteans, who are serpent-themed rather than amphibian-themed. This is an improvement. The spawn of chaos shouldn't look like the unholy mating of Kermit the Frog and Toad of Toad Hall. And bards will not be able to mock them by singing, "Slaadi went a courtin' and he did ride, mm-hmm..."
- umber hulk ~ no replacement I can see, but it was always a pretty lame monster anyway.
- yuan-ti ~ serpentfolk, who are even the stars of the current adventure path.
After seeing what has been added to this years product catalogue, I must say that it is time to relax.
At least for now.....
Reading this, I double-checked the catalogue:
- Two Gamma World additions (not my cup of tea)
- 21 Novels (not here for the stories)
- Fortune Cards (NAMGT)
- Two board games (not here for the board games)
- Dungeon Master's Screen (errata'd screen? Yes please)
- One player's supplement (HoS: Still not a fan of Post-E sub-classes, so very little for me, personally, to enjoy here...)
- Three DM supplements (Will observe each upon their own merits; will need a good mix of crunch and fluff but with two of them boxed, I'll have to wait for reviews)
- Super Adventure (given their track record of good adventures so far?)
- One tileset (to each their own; not my cup of tea)
That's a total of one "Yes, please", three "Maybe, we'll see's", and 28 "Sorry, not interested's." Mind you, that's my personal opinion of the products. For others, I can see at least 6+ Yes's out of the box, along with several more maybe's... but I'm not seeing this jumping out at anyone.
After seeing what has been added to this years product catalogue, I must say that it is time to relax.
At least for now.....
Reading this, I double-checked the catalogue:
- Two Gamma World additions (not my cup of tea)
- 21 Novels (not here for the stories)
- Fortune Cards (NAMGT)
- Two board games (not here for the board games)
- Dungeon Master's Screen (errata'd screen? Yes please)
- One player's supplement (HoS: Still not a fan of Post-E sub-classes, so very little for me, personally, to enjoy here...)
- Three DM supplements (Will observe each upon their own merits; will need a good mix of crunch and fluff but with two of them boxed, I'll have to wait for reviews)
- Super Adventure (given their track record of good adventures so far?)
- One tileset (to each their own; not my cup of tea)
That's a total of one "Yes, please", three "Maybe, we'll see's", and 28 "Sorry, not interested's." Mind you, that's my personal opinion of the products. For others, I can see at least 6+ Yes's out of the box, along with several more maybe's... but I'm not seeing this jumping out at anyone.
I'm about the same, well if I had people to play with and a means of income.
Here's my list of what I'd buy:
- Dungeon Master's Screen (maybe if I had a regular group and played often)
- Heroes of Shadow (I'll wait for the reviews, but if its mostly Essentials I'm not touching it)
- DM supplements - campaign setting, Monster Box, Area setting (probably not, maybe the monster box)
So maybe three products... Not looking good for WotC...
I'm picturing the Hasbro board of directors sitting in a big meeting. The chairman gets everyone's attention and says, "I just read a post on the WotC forums. This guy wants us to sell the D&D brand."
Now, I am not an expert on business, as I am sure the rest of you are, but I do have some amount of common sense.
Here are some things I think most of us (never all) can agree on:
1) Dungeons and Dragons is the most widely known RPG. It has the kind of name power that Kleenex, Xerox, and other such brands have.
2) Hasbro is a successful company with a long history of producing games. They thus have both a good understanding of games as well as the money to do things.
3) Other RPG companies would love to have the D&D name.
4) If the D&D line was not profitable for Hasbro, and they felt it wouldn't be profitable in the future, they would seek to sell the line.
Now, you (and you know who you are) might not personally like the things being done with D&D. But that doesn't mean that Hasbro is a bad company, or that WotC doesn't care about D&D, or anything like that. It just means you don't like the new things. If D&D was actually unprofitable in the long term view, Hasbro would sell the line. But I don't think that it is unprofitable. It is the most popular and widely known RPG with a long and rich history. We are currently in the worst ecomomic depression since the Great One, and thus people are cutting back on luxury spending. As a result, WotC is trying new strategies to revitalize the market, just like any company. Some of these might work, and others won't. For every person who hates something new, another will love it. Look at Magic Cards. When they came out I thought they were silly, just another passing fad. Boy was I right!
If DnD wasn't profitable, more then likely Hasbro would mothball it until such time the product could make money again. They would only sell it off if the company as a whole was in trouble.
DnD is profitable. It's not going to happen. They canceled three books not because sales are bad, but they are going to bring them to us a different way. They have invested in the VT, which if DnD was doing bad, Hasbro would have said NO.
WoTC is owned by Hasbro, and Hasbro approves what gets made. Things change as the focus changes, but in the end Hasbro has the say. It maybe even that Hasbro asked them to try delivering content in a new way, and those three books got picked.
I think that depends on the quality of the games. Three years from now, Pathfinder will be as overbloated as 3e was at the end of its run. So prognosticating that far into the future, probably isn't all that useful.
Yeah, but in 3-4 years, if their sales stay like as good as they are, they will clean it up and do a Pathfinder 2nd edition...
How much are they going to be able to change the rules? Pathfinder pretty much made it's claim by sticking with the 3.5 rule set as claiming it was better, and that it had a built in audience. I agree with the built in audience. I'm not going to argue if one set of rules is better then another.
So, how much change to the rules can they do to Pathfinder to make it "new" and still keep that audience?
Yeah, but in 3-4 years, if their sales stay like as good as they are, they will clean it up and do a Pathfinder 2nd edition...
Exactly. And then PF will have to deal with grognards who feel betrayed that PF 2d edition isn't really Pathfinder, and people insisting PF 2e is the wave of the future. Edition wars are as inevitable as game bloat.
I saw it happen with every edition of D&D, I saw it happen when White Wolf went to the New World of Darkness.
But Pathfinder seems to have a pretty good plan for a slow release of new rules. Two or three books a year should keep them going through 2014, assuming sales stay constant. Then we'll see how much they feel comfortable changing.
DnD is profitable. It's not going to happen. They canceled three books not because sales are bad, but they are going to bring them to us a different way. They have invested in the VT, which if DnD was doing bad, Hasbro would have said NO.
Profitable yes, but did profits go down? Was it just because of the economic crisis? Changing the format of HoS and cancelling the books might mean that that Essentials wasn't that profitable.
Even the people at WoTC who work on DnD say that the game always makes money, it's just not a big performer, like say magic. It's a niche market they say, and in this day and age, RPGs are a shrinking market, with things like card games and video games.
It doens't really matter how profitable DnD is, just so long as it's profitable. It's not a product they expect better sales over the year before.
I know that may hurt to hear for people that love the game. But it's the reality.
WOtC and hasbro moved product and they had something new and shiny for the holiday season AND IT WORKED like it or hate it. it worked
Actually Hasbro just had a holiday season behind expectations and while D&D as a whole is too unimportant to Hasbro to cause (or even meaninfuly contribute) to such a dent, if it had worked like they liked we would certainly have a different product schedule right now.
Turning things like Hero Compendium or whatever it's called into parts of DDI shows that they fear physical books sitting on the shelves, which would be strange is Essentials had been selling that well.
Also what they just said about a potential Arcane Power 2 also shows that Martial Power 2 didn't as well as expected either, otherwise they would not think twice about releasing it either.
It doens't really matter how profitable DnD is, just so long as it's profitable.
Actually that is only enough if the company doesn't have a lot of other options. If there are enough different brands vying for the organizations ressources just being profitable eventually doesn't cut it anymore.
After seeing what has been added to this years product catalogue, I must say that it is time to relax.
At least for now.....
Reading this, I double-checked the catalogue:
- Two Gamma World additions (not my cup of tea)
- 21 Novels (not here for the stories)
- Fortune Cards (NAMGT)
- Two board games (not here for the board games)
- Dungeon Master's Screen (errata'd screen? Yes please)
- One player's supplement (HoS: Still not a fan of Post-E sub-classes, so very little for me, personally, to enjoy here...)
- Three DM supplements (Will observe each upon their own merits; will need a good mix of crunch and fluff but with two of them boxed, I'll have to wait for reviews)
- Super Adventure (given their track record of good adventures so far?)
- One tileset (to each their own; not my cup of tea)
That's a total of one "Yes, please", three "Maybe, we'll see's", and 28 "Sorry, not interested's." Mind you, that's my personal opinion of the products. For others, I can see at least 6+ Yes's out of the box, along with several more maybe's... but I'm not seeing this jumping out at anyone.
I'm about the same, well if I had people to play with and a means of income.
Here's my list of what I'd buy:
- Dungeon Master's Screen (maybe if I had a regular group and played often)
- Heroes of Shadow (I'll wait for the reviews, but if its mostly Essentials I'm not touching it)
- DM supplements - campaign setting, Monster Box, Area setting (probably not, maybe the monster box)
So maybe three products... Not looking good for WotC...
See, currently I have nothing I want to buy this year. I will wait for the HEroes of Shadow before saying yea or nay, but so far it is automatically in the nay pile. Which means 2011 is my year to get a job and get caught up with previous books I have not had the cash to pick up yet.
Yeah, but in 3-4 years, if their sales stay like as good as they are, they will clean it up and do a Pathfinder 2nd edition...
Exactly. And then PF will have to deal with grognards who feel betrayed that PF 2d edition isn't really Pathfinder, and people insisting PF 2e is the wave of the future. Edition wars are as inevitable as game bloat.
I saw it happen with every edition of D&D, I saw it happen when White Wolf went to the New World of Darkness.
But Pathfinder seems to have a pretty good plan for a slow release of new rules. Two or three books a year should keep them going through 2014, assuming sales stay constant. Then we'll see how much they feel comfortable changing.
Up until a few days ago, I thought PF would do a good job of avoiding class bloat and limit the damage to pathfinder 2nd edition. After all, they did a good job of avoiding many misteps. With the Ultimate Combat guide I am less then impressed.
Personally I think they have until 2016-7 or so, based on their use of adventure paths and a greater empathis on Pathfinder Society (DCI equivilent) play until they jump that hurdle. But when it comes the people in charge are the people who have jumped many edition hurdles. They are epic level gronards themselves.
One thing I do have to say that pathfinder has utterly destroyed WOTC at, is adventure quality. Frankly pathfinder modules and Adventure Paths are top grade better than anything WOTC has produced in 4th ed. I wish they could work together but I don't see that happening.
Yea, I would kill for some really well written 4e Adventure paths. Like, a GREAT 30 level Eberron and Dark Sun adventure path, say. Something full of both combat and role-playing, well written skill challenges that actually work as something more than telling your players to roll their skills X number of times, and a ton of character.
That's kind of a tall order you've got there. You're going to want to get a small group of designers who know encounter design, monster design and story-telling well enough to create a campaign that has its own unique flavor while still appealing to many groups, that's fantastic but still relatable, that builds upon itself but doesn't lock out newcomers with its history, provides unique encounters that still draw upon the resources a DM is likely to have, offers memorable NPCs that don't dominate, and provides hard rules while still leaving room for the party and DM to find their own solutions, and a whole bunch of other contrasting ideals. Epic level adventures in particular are harder to write for, because many campaigns are usually building towards something, which means it's harder to fit in a diversion or sidequest that works better at heroic through paragon tiers. Especially if you want to write your adventure path in some way that individual chapters can still be plopped in to unrelated campaigns.
I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's a grand undertaking to create something so big and intriguing that it can carry a party through a year or more of adventuring. I do wish that WotC would release some feedback or designer thoughts regarding Scales of War so future designers can learn from it. You can look at the CharOp forums for a fairly good idea of how well classes and abilities function in combat, but there's no real metric for enjoyment of an adventure (in part because it depends immensely on the DM and the party), so it's harder to get a good idea as to what makes a good adventure.
Exactly, which means if they shelve it, for all intents and purposes D&D would be dead. So they would have killed it off because of their own incompetence...
No, I think we will see the 'Paizoization' of the D&D brand.
If D&D is shelved, someone, almost certainly Pathfinder/Paizo, becomes the dominant roleplaying system, much like Whitewolf did in the 90's.
Someone else creates a 4E clone which doesn't do half as well but still makes money for a company that has a more realistic sales goals then Hasbro/Wotc (I admit the GSL will be problamatic). Many people will see this game as the spiritual successor to 4E the way Pathfinder is seen as the true successor to 3.5.
Regardless what the 4e clone is called, many people will refer to it, just like Pathfinder is refered to on the Paizo boards sometimes, as D&D. And only a few persnickety little snobs care.
Then, years from now, D&D 5e is released by Hasbro or whomenver has the liscense, but nobody cares and it fails. Gamer loyalty at this point has been transfered to Pathfinder or its successor and the most popular 4e clone on the market(especially if 4e fans feel abandoned). People at this point refer to the two branches of D&D. But everyone knows 'D&D' is still played.
And considering how badly WotC Hasbro has managed it, it's what they deserve.
This will most certainly happen, as sure as the sun sets in the west and as sure as the empires of man each give way to another. Paizo will go from strength to strength and a new "Paizo" will take up the mantle of 4th edition after Hasbro moves on. I look forward to a retro-clone 4e published by devoted gamers in cheap pdfs. I certainly will not shell out for 5e: I would rather further invest in retro4.
Exactly, which means if they shelve it, for all intents and purposes D&D would be dead. So they would have killed it off because of their own incompetence...
No, I think we will see the 'Paizoization' of the D&D brand.
If D&D is shelved, someone, almost certainly Pathfinder/Paizo, becomes the dominant roleplaying system, much like Whitewolf did in the 90's.
Someone else creates a 4E clone which doesn't do half as well but still makes money for a company that has a more realistic sales goals then Hasbro/Wotc (I admit the GSL will be problamatic). Many people will see this game as the spiritual successor to 4E the way Pathfinder is seen as the true successor to 3.5.
Regardless what the 4e clone is called, many people will refer to it, just like Pathfinder is refered to on the Paizo boards sometimes, as D&D. And only a few persnickety little snobs care.
Then, years from now, D&D 5e is released by Hasbro or whomenver has the liscense, but nobody cares and it fails. Gamer loyalty at this point has been transfered to Pathfinder or its successor and the most popular 4e clone on the market(especially if 4e fans feel abandoned). People at this point refer to the two branches of D&D. But everyone knows 'D&D' is still played.
And considering how badly WotC Hasbro has managed it, it's what they deserve.
This will most certainly happen, as sure as the sun sets in the west and as sure as the empires of man each give way to another. Paizo will go from strength to strength and a new "Paizo" will take up the mantle of 4th edition after Hasbro moves on. I look forward to a retro-clone 4e published by devoted gamers in cheap pdfs. I certainly will not shell out for 5e: I would rather further invest in retro4.
so then I should start on my 4E clone then, is that what your saying?
So I should start on my 4E clone then, is that what you're saying?
Yes, please! And have it ready for Christmas 2012 probably.
One thing I do have to say that pathfinder has utterly destroyed WOTC at, is adventure quality. Frankly pathfinder modules and Adventure Paths are top grade better than anything WOTC has produced in 4th ed. I wish they could work together but I don't see that happening.
Yea, I would kill for some really well written 4e Adventure paths. Like, a GREAT 30 level Eberron and Dark Sun adventure path, say. Something full of both combat and role-playing, well written skill challenges that actually work as something more than telling your players to roll their skills X number of times, and a ton of character.
You forgot to add intrigue and non-linear plots to your list. Plus, forget about the skill challenges. They always seemed arbitrary to me.
After seeing what has been added to this years product catalogue, I must say that it is time to relax.
At least for now.....
Reading this, I double-checked the catalogue:
- Two Gamma World additions (not my cup of tea)
- 21 Novels (not here for the stories)
- Fortune Cards (NAMGT)
- Two board games (not here for the board games)
- Dungeon Master's Screen (errata'd screen? Yes please)
- One player's supplement (HoS: Still not a fan of Post-E sub-classes, so very little for me, personally, to enjoy here...)
- Three DM supplements (Will observe each upon their own merits; will need a good mix of crunch and fluff but with two of them boxed, I'll have to wait for reviews)
- Super Adventure (given their track record of good adventures so far?)
- One tileset (to each their own; not my cup of tea)
That's a total of one "Yes, please", three "Maybe, we'll see's", and 28 "Sorry, not interested's." Mind you, that's my personal opinion of the products. For others, I can see at least 6+ Yes's out of the box, along with several more maybe's... but I'm not seeing this jumping out at anyone.
It is also telling that there is virtually no excited buzz about those future products in the forums. A couple of years back it was filled with excited speculation about the classes of the next PHB. Not so anymore...
And really, WotC should create a new department for producing Gamma World, boardgames, cards and whatnot. I don't want them to take the resources of the D&D RPG department.
It is also telling that there is virtually no excited buzz about those future products in the forums. A couple of years back it was filled with excited speculation about the classes of the next PHB. Not so anymore...
Funny. All I remember were the "They'd better make Gnome Barbarians and Brass Dragons, or it's not D&D!" threads.
And really, WotC should create a new department for producing Gamma World, boardgames, cards and whatnot. I don't want them to take the resources of the D&D RPG department.
But they already have the infrastructure for it. DDM is gone, hello boardgames with minatures inside them! Good-bye non-random power cards, hello random fortune cards! Heck, most of the people who had worked on DDM or WotC's boardgames are the same people doing the equivalent product.
Because, TSR offered any sort of digital accommodation for D&D. Because, other companies releasing RPGs offer SO much in the way of digital support (not just in terms of PDFs, but in terms of things like character builders, monster builders, and the like). Because, other gaming companies are doing SUCH a better job managing their RPG products.
What a load of total and utter complete bologna. Thanks, I'll stick with WotC. They have been doing a great job as far as I am concerned. If you would like a different company to handle the brand, why don't you go play/buy Pathfinder or Castles and Crusades. Both are D&D spin off games (one based off 3e, the other of 2e). You can see how other companies would have handled the D&D brand for yourself.
You mean setting it in stone so it never gets any creative innovation nor managed to fix any real issues?
I add my voice to the plea for Hasbro to just sell D&D to Paizo, or at least open up the GSL and allow publishers to create their own interesting stuff.
Publishers can already create their own interesting stuff, with or without the GSL (that's right, the GSL is an option not a mandate).
If D&D got sold to Paizo, Red Brick, or Green Ronin Publishing: All three companies are probably going to take a fairly cautious, conservative approach when designing 5th edition. I doubt that Paizo will merge D&D 5th ed. with Pathfinder 2nd ed.; instead, I think that Paizo will let them co-exist as separate product lines, with the D&D product line catering to D&D 4th ed. fans and with the Pathfinder product line catering to D&D 3rd ed. fans.
If D&D got sold to Square Enix: D&D will become heavily Japanized, even if it is completely unintentional. I doubt Square Enix will merge the D&D and Final Fantasy franchises, but there's a pretty good chance there are going to be many cross-references in the two worlds if Square Enix owns both of them. And I have a strong feeling a lot of books and supplements are going to be Japan-only.
If D&D got sold to Fantasy Flight Games: D&D 5th edition is going to have a distinctly Fantasy Flight feel to it. I've personally never played a game produced or designed by Fantasy Flight, but from what I've seen on YouTube and read on the Internet, their games have this "signature" on them that I can't explain in words.
If D&D got sold to nVidia: They are going to rebrand D&D 4th edition as D&D 5th edition. Then D&D 6th edition is going to come out with a new design, and then D&D 6th edition is going to get rebranded as D&D 7th edition.
If D&D got sold to Pearson: They are going to put a half-assed effort into designing 5th edition, and then charge ridiculous prices that make WotC's worst deals seem like incredible bargains. The Player's Handbook is going to cost $99.99, the Dungeon Master's Guide is going to cost $109.99, and the Monster Manual is going to cost $89.99. And they will all be in paperback with very bland page designs.
If D&D got sold to MTV: Dungeon Shore, anyone?
If D&D got sold to Bethesda Softworks: It would be actually kind of cool if this happened. I think they'll try to keep the D&D and Elder Scrolls worlds seperate, but I think that there is also going to be a lot of mutual influence both in terms of lore and gameplay mechanics. Much like the Square Enix scenario, video game rights issues with Atari will need to be hammered out.
If D&D stays with Wizards of the Coast: Anything can happen. There is a lot of speculation in this thread that Hasbro will kill off D&D, though personally, I doubt they will do that, since I think there is more to lose than to gain from doing so.
In a nutshell, any future for D&D with a company other than Pearson is far more desirable than a future with Pearson!
If D&D got sold to Square Enix: D&D will become heavily Japanized, even if it is completely unintentional. I doubt Square Enix will merge the D&D and Final Fantasy franchises, but there's a pretty good chance there are going to be many cross-references in the two worlds if Square Enix owns both of them. And I have a strong feeling a lot of books and supplements are going to be Japan-only.
I don't it'll be Japanized or have Japan only anything. It's a western company; and so they'll just most likely let it be, cannabilize some direct IP, and maybe we'd have an FF with Beholders in it or something. But I doubt they'd actually do anything to it. After all, doesn't SE own the Tomb Raider franchise right now? (I don't actually remember, I just know that they own a few western things haven't done anything to them or with them. )
I add my voice to the plea for Hasbro to just sell D&D to Paizo, or at least open up the GSL and allow publishers to create their own interesting stuff.
Publishers can already create their own interesting stuff, with or without the GSL (that's right, the GSL is an option not a mandate).
Not trying to de-rail or anything, but how would you go about that?
Let's see what the different scenarios are...
If D&D got sold to Paizo, Red Brick, or Green Ronin Publishing: All three companies are probably going to take a fairly cautious, conservative approach when designing 5th edition. I doubt that Paizo will merge D&D 5th ed. with Pathfinder 2nd ed.; instead, I think that Paizo will let them co-exist as separate product lines, with the D&D product line catering to D&D 4th ed. fans and with the Pathfinder product line catering to D&D 3rd ed. fans.
If D&D got sold to Square Enix: D&D will become heavily Japanized, even if it is completely unintentional. I doubt Square Enix will merge the D&D and Final Fantasy franchises, but there's a pretty good chance there are going to be many cross-references in the two worlds if Square Enix owns both of them. And I have a strong feeling a lot of books and supplements are going to be Japan-only.
If D&D got sold to Fantasy Flight Games: D&D 5th edition is going to have a distinctly Fantasy Flight feel to it. I've personally never played a game produced or designed by Fantasy Flight, but from what I've seen on YouTube and read on the Internet, their games have this "signature" on them that I can't explain in words.
If D&D got sold to nVidia: They are going to rebrand D&D 4th edition as D&D 5th edition. Then D&D 6th edition is going to come out with a new design, and then D&D 6th edition is going to get rebranded as D&D 7th edition.
If D&D got sold to Pearson: They are going to put a half-assed effort into designing 5th edition, and then charge ridiculous prices that make WotC's worst deals seem like incredible bargains. The Player's Handbook is going to cost $99.99, the Dungeon Master's Guide is going to cost $109.99, and the Monster Manual is going to cost $89.99. And they will all be in paperback with very bland page designs.
If D&D got sold to MTV: Dungeon Shore, anyone?
If D&D got sold to Bethesda Softworks: It would be actually kind of cool if this happened. I think they'll try to keep the D&D and Elder Scrolls worlds seperate, but I think that there is also going to be a lot of mutual influence both in terms of lore and gameplay mechanics. Much like the Square Enix scenario, video game rights issues with Atari will need to be hammered out.
If D&D stays with Wizards of the Coast: Anything can happen. There is a lot of speculation in this thread that Hasbro will kill off D&D, though personally, I doubt they will do that, since I think there is more to lose than to gain from doing so.
In a nutshell, any future for D&D with a company other than Pearson is far more desirable than a future with Pearson!
Nice guesses.
You mean setting it in stone so it never gets any creative innovation nor managed to fix any real issues?
Well, I can't blame some people for wanting this.
I can! I mean the lack of creativity is horrible - and settling for borked because its traditional is well on my sick Dave on them list
The good thing, of course, is that 4e includes major improvements, thus adding value to the game. So the people who are buying the new books are getting something for their money.
I may not like a number of the implication of the elements used in essentials or the direction they imply but its an attempt to apply creativity to perceptual issues some people have ...ie WOTC is still willing to use far more experimental adaption and creativity with their product instead of wedding themselves in an absolutist must not change mind set which means they get my support flat out.
NO, WotC is NOT doing a great job with DnD.
I certainly tried 4E and played in a 2 year long campaign, and yes, there is a lot about 4E to like. BUT, and that's a BIG BUT, after giving it an honest try, there is a lot about it I don't like.
I am not alone.
When WotC took over Dragon Magazine and Dungeon Magazine from Paizo, that marked the beginning of the decline. It has taken several years, but DnD has lost a lot of momentum. WotC has been their own worst enemy.
WotC is an epic failure in the marketing department:
Marketing of Star Wars was a failure
Marketing of Heroscape was a complete failure
Marketing of DnD is failing too, Essentials is a poor idea, poorly handled.
The 2011 product catalog is anemic
Someone has dropped the ball. Honestly, how could you fail at marketing DnD or Star Wars ? WotC has done it.
I hate to see my favorite game die (again). Perhaps it's inevitable that history must repeat.
If I was in charge at Hasbro, heads would roll.
There's no way to market it, 4e from a buisness standpoint was a massive error in judgement. WOTC's not alone on this, seems to be the in-thing to do these days, make this mistake...
The mistake was that WOTC took an established fanbase, disregarded it in favor of an assumed potential fanbase thought to be larger. WOTC decided to disregard established D&D customers and attempt to embrace a perceived "Mass market".
Predictably, all it really did was fragment their exsting customer base, and no new "Mass market" influx occurred. They're not the only ones to do this, a big-name software publisher recently did this, and half of their initial shipment sat on shelves unpurchased.
You *cannot* fragment your existing customer base gambling on some unknown unproven market. All you end up with is a smaller market. In this case, it's because people think an RPG is a video game with dialogue in it. They think the concepts behind D&D are "Archaic! Outdated!".
So marketing wouldn't have made a difference, it sealed it's fate long before it hit shelves. It alienated a good portion of their existing market, and it was never going to pull in some massive influx of new customers. Honestly, poke around the web, these people don't want to read rule-books, play with dice, do math. You can bind it in solid gold and they're still going to be playing Call of Duty.
If WOTC wants D&D to do well, they need to return to a proven formula, and look to find a way to break down the resistance video games have inflicted upon it. Getting away from really silly concepts like "Healing surges!" is probably a good place to start.
from what i understand, essentials is doing rather well- and attendance to things like encounters is increasing. So they haven't really failed so much on the Essentials front (though i would personally love to see sales numbers...) especially as it seems quite a few people have picked up the red-box /essentials and gotten back into current-DND from editions past. could you perhaps explain *how* the marketing has failed?
Let's see...
I own nearly every AD&D and D&D product from the first generation, almost all of them from the second generation, almost all of them from the third generation, I bought a ton of the downloadable content. I own every Dragonlance product printed. I've collected almost all of the original D&D and Dragonlance comics. I own FR, Ravenloft, Gamma World (Multiple editions), and Planescape. I bought the Dragon CD set. I bought the video games, I bought the anniversery box set, enough dice to kill an elephant.
You know what I've spent since 4e came out? $0. That's what I'll continue to spend. Marketing's been pretty useless on me.
I went to Border's yesterday to see what I could pick up in their going out of buisness sale, thinking maybe Pathfinder's or 3.x might be on the shelves. Apparently that entire rack of shelving that was dedicated to D&D 10 years ago now fits on a single shelf. Went to Barne's & Nobles today, same exact thing, so it isn't that it was picked over.
It's that 4e isn't selling. Marketing's not working, and I don't think it's going to. They lost a lifelong customer and it looks like all that got in return was a 75% shrinkage in shelf space out of it.
Of course it doesn't help that one of the 'core' classes sells their soul for power, which is kind of like what they accused D&D of in the first place, you know selling your soul to the devil...
There's no way to market it, 4e from a buisness standpoint was a massive error in judgement. WOTC's not alone on this, seems to be the in-thing to do these days, make this mistake...
The mistake was that WOTC took an established fanbase, disregarded it in favor of an assumed potential fanbase thought to be larger. WOTC decided to disregard established D&D customers and attempt to embrace a perceived "Mass market".
Predictably, all it really did was fragment their exsting customer base, and no new "Mass market" influx occurred. They're not the only ones to do this, a big-name software publisher recently did this, and half of their initial shipment sat on shelves unpurchased.
WotC has NEVER said that. They made design choices that they thought would appeal to their existing customer base and would draw in new players. They may have misjudged the obstinance of some, but there were no eviction slips mailed out to 3ed DMs. WotC wanted to please everyone.
You *cannot* fragment your existing customer base gambling on some unknown unproven market.
You mean like new players? Every market has to attract new players. A lot of things in D&D made it harder to attract new players, the lifeblood of the next generation. Eventually, the existing customer base will fade away to age, economics, and lost interest, and that unknown unproven market is all you've got.
All you end up with is a smaller market. In this case, it's because people think an RPG is a video game with dialogue in it. They think the concepts behind D&D are "Archaic! Outdated!".
And for those who feel that way but have turned to RPGs because of 4th Edition? Wouldn't have done it by not innovating.
So marketing wouldn't have made a difference, it sealed it's fate long before it hit shelves. It alienated a good portion of their existing market, and it was never going to pull in some massive influx of new customers.
It may have have alienated some, but it has brought in many people? More than lost? Maybe, maybe not, but the market is larger for it.
Honestly, poke around the web, these people don't want to read rule-books, play with dice, do math. You can bind it in solid gold and they're still going to be playing Call of Duty.
If WOTC wants D&D to do well, they need to return to a proven formula, and look to find a way to break down the resistance video games have inflicted upon it. Getting away from really silly concepts like "Healing surges!" is probably a good place to start.
When the proven formula has failed to win over people uninterested in RPGs, why not try a new tack? The RPG market is not large enough that circling the wagon will bring in new players and address problems.
I went to Border's yesterday to see what I could pick up in their going out of buisness sale, thinking maybe Pathfinder's or 3.x might be on the shelves. Apparently that entire rack of shelving that was dedicated to D&D 10 years ago now fits on a single shelf. Went to Barne's & Nobles today, same exact thing, so it isn't that it was picked over.
I guess I should point out that both Borders and B&N are flooded in debt and near collapse, and don't have the space to devote to RPGs when they could have bestsellers. Go to a store that is serious about RPGs and see if the shelf space has shrunk.
It's that 4e is selling. Marketing is working, and it's going to work for people who are open to it. They lost a lifelong customer and it looks like all that got in return were several other people who would not be purchasing from them if not for 4ed.
All you end up with is a smaller market. In this case, it's because people think an RPG is a video game with dialogue in it. They think the concepts behind D&D are "Archaic! Outdated!".
And for those who feel that way but have turned to RPGs because of 4th Edition? Wouldn't have done it by not innovating.
I would not have bought anything D&D if 4th edition were any more like 3rd edition or it's previous editions. Their innovation got them a new player, and, provided that they continue to support the original class design of 4th edition instead of favoring the (in my opinion) horrible nostalgia trip of Essentials class design, I will continue to buy their products.
I went to Border's yesterday to see what I could pick up in their going out of buisness sale, thinking maybe Pathfinder's or 3.x might be on the shelves. Apparently that entire rack of shelving that was dedicated to D&D 10 years ago now fits on a single shelf. Went to Barne's & Nobles today, same exact thing, so it isn't that it was picked over.
I guess I should point out that both Borders and B&N are flooded in debt and near collapse, and don't have the space to devote to RPGs when they could have bestsellers. Go to a store that is serious about RPGs and see if the shelf space has shrunk.
It's that 4e is selling. Marketing is working, and it's going to work for people who are open to it. They lost a lifelong customer and it looks like all that got in return were several other people who would not be purchasing from them if not for 4ed.
Our local shop for Geekery has more space devoted to 4th edition/Essentials Product than any other Game system. I trust that Gabi's knows what to stock. ;)
so, they lost you, and gained me- a bargain i would say (i jest, i jest), at the same time, i've managed to get quite a few friends into the game. Including some hardcore videogame shooter fans, heck, i love a good call of duty match. Because when you get right down to it, people generally like a variety of entertainment. Oftentimes, shooter fans can appreciate a good story too, and even rp pretty well- as they understand very well the "act differently based on context" thing. (and for those who haven't played them, shooter games often have great stories (call fo duty and halo specifically) if they aren't deep, they're certainly epic and well-told).
4e represented steps in the right direction, and i would say that the reason big-name bookstores have reduced stock in their rpg sections (my barnes and nobles has one shelf too) has more to do with the rising popularity of actual books/manga as a form of entertainment, along with the emergence of online sellers that have more favorable prices on already pricey books than the falling popularity of PNP rpgs.
4e, and especially essentials is taking advantage of the rising trend in mainstream culture: "Geek is chic" as i've said before, and while it isn't a ridiculous influx of new players, i think it's done quite a bit to appeal to the 3.5 holdouts and people who haven't played since way before 3.5. As well as new players just starting out. It's novelty is often enough to get people to atleast play it once or twice.
so much of contemporary fantasy has it's roots in DND, that in most cases- it's downright venerated amongst fantasy circles. Particularly video-game fantasy circles-
in this, i agree with Kraul- it's the innovation and balance that really captured me, and even though i may disagree with him about the actual effects of essentials and warranted panic level. It's the initial 4E design paradigms i'd rather play with (though certain things i like, dual sourceing gives a class more options for instance) given a preference- i do despise the lack of customization in essentials classes (though players willingly using them is fine- we still have access to the other stuff) heck, in quite a few cases- i seem to be playing the devil's advocate in truth, particularly when i argue about the necessity of varying power systems. 4E design is amazing in my book.
i joined DND 4.e as my first DND, and i own just about all the books to come out (excluding all the adventures though i do have some, i homebrew my own campaigns)
so, they lost you, and gained me- a bargain i would say (i jest, i jest), at the same time, i've managed to get quite a few friends into the game. Including some hardcore videogame shooter fans, heck, i love a good call of duty match. Because when you get right down to it, people generally like a variety of entertainment. Oftentimes, shooter fans can appreciate a good story too, and even rp pretty well- as they understand very well the "act differently based on context" thing. (and for those who haven't played them, shooter games often have great stories (call fo duty and halo specifically) if they aren't deep, they're certainly epic and well-told).
4e represented steps in the right direction, and i would say that the reason big-name bookstores have reduced stock in their rpg sections (my barnes and nobles has one shelf too) has more to do with the rising popularity of actual books/manga as a form of entertainment, along with the emergence of online sellers that have more favorable prices on already pricey books than the falling popularity of PNP rpgs.
4e, and especially essentials is taking advantage of the rising trend in mainstream culture: "Geek is chic" as i've said before, and while it isn't a ridiculous influx of new players, i think it's done quite a bit to appeal to the 3.5 holdouts and people who haven't played since way before 3.5. As well as new players just starting out. It's novelty is often enough to get people to atleast play it once or twice.
so much of contemporary fantasy has it's roots in DND, that in most cases- it's downright venerated amongst fantasy circles. Particularly video-game fantasy circles-
in this, i agree with Kraul- it's the innovation and balance that really captured me, and even though i may disagree with him about the actual effects of essentials and warranted panic level. It's the initial 4E design paradigms i'd rather play with (though certain things i like, dual sourceing gives a class more options for instance) given a preference- i do despise the lack of customization in essentials classes (though players willingly using them is fine- we still have access to the other stuff) heck, in quite a few cases- i seem to be playing the devil's advocate in truth, particularly when i argue about the necessity of varying power systems. 4E design is amazing in my book.
Who is Kraul?
Kind of off topic, but I disagree that healing surges are silly. If anything, they finally make hp make some sort of sense.
Full loyalty to the original definition is what made HP make sense... (hit points that do not measure real wounds except maybe the last few points)... its why we have fast recovery and martial invigoration.
Mechanically Healing surges are very useful somewhat independently of that they allow appropriate limitations and benefits based on the subject of the healing. So in that sense it is allowing more sense in healing arena so I guess you are right. They mean no more ?it takes tons more resources to recover the tougher of combatant and healthier you are - and no more infinite energy drinks. No more its more appropriate to heal the heavily wounded mage with light healing and the lightly wounded fighter with cure heavy wounds????
Adrenaline surges and deep built in energy reserves as well as a measure of heroic luck which snaps back integrated with second winds allowing those heroic rebound once per fight without outside aide - very fun and very cinematic and anything connecting to hit points is gonna be abstract.
Man does TD not ever have anything constructive to say.
Frequently. Just not to you. If the man had said "my car broke down; and w/o a job I cannot fix it." I would not have an issue with that. I've been there. Buy I can't drive 40 miles round trip to play a game is sheer lazyness. It's like driving cross town for most people.
It's not laziness when gas is $3.50+ a gallon now. Especially if people commute to work during the week. Some people don't have a lot of disposable income.
Man does TD not ever have anything constructive to say.
Frequently. Just not to you. If the man had said "my car broke down; and w/o a job I cannot fix it." I would not have an issue with that. I've been there. Buy I can't drive 40 miles round trip to play a game is sheer lazyness. It's like driving cross town for most people.
It's not laziness when gas is $3.50+ a gallon now. Especially if people commute to work during the week. Some people don't have a lot of disposable income.
This is my problem. Not to mention a few weeks ago I took my car in to the shop and I need some major work done on the brakes, while I'm comfortable driving locally, until my brakes are fixed I'm not going anywhere. The cost of gas for me is high. Out here gas costs $3.00, I get about 25 miles to the gallon. You do the math. It's like paying $15.00 a session to play D&D... At the moment I'm saving up money to pay for my brakes... I'd be glad to join people in playing online...
Edit: Not to mention I'm unemployed and my unemployment is barely covering my bills...
Man does TD not ever have anything constructive to say.
Frequently. Just not to you. If the man had said "my car broke down; and w/o a job I cannot fix it." I would not have an issue with that. I've been there. Buy I can't drive 40 miles round trip to play a game is sheer lazyness. It's like driving cross town for most people.
Telling someone to grow a pair isn't constructive.
Also, you're assuming he has a car. That may not be the case. If he has bus/Bike only transportation 20-30 miles is a lot.
Hell. Right now, I take a commuter train 30 KM each way to run Encounters, and that's in the middle of a workweek. So don't tell me you can't play D&D.
(Actually, I drive about 40 miles round trip once per week for my games, though that's mostly because slightly under half our group lives in Carson City and slightly over half lives in Reno. And some of our Reno players have little, little kids. Thus it seems fairer to make us drive up there than vice versa. Other than that, we'd be playing at my house)
In my days you walked 15 miles to your D&D games, carrying 30 lbs of books and a dice bag. In the snow. Uphill both ways.
I just had a flash back of playing rifts in highschool.
I live in a fairly rural area of Florida and have to drive into either Orlando or Tampa for a sit down game. This is why I'm really wanting to get the Virtual Table Top...
....You do know there are free table top apps that exist already, so you don't have to wait on the VTT right?
I live in a fairly rural area of Florida and have to drive into either Orlando or Tampa for a sit down game. This is why I'm really wanting to get the Virtual Table Top...
....You do know there are free table top apps that exist already, so you don't have to wait on the VTT right?
Yes, but none of them have the D&D name on them and the potential to automate 100%