Sorry, but you either have the patience of angel, or you've fallen for their holding pattern strategy hook, line, and sinker.
Everyone else understands that the game ain't 6-12 months old any longer. It's been three years and still nothing! What more evidence do we need?
No, the truth is that Hasbro has downsized the D&D team to only support what they need for their greater brand plans.
If WotC had meant to support more settings all they needed to do was to hire more developers - we know they can do it because they did so for EVERY previous edition.
It's possible you are content with waiting five years or so, but I find it preposterous to give them the benefit of the doubt all this time.
In any other edition; for any other game, the conclusion would have been clear for a while now: if there ever was a plan to support other settings, it would have been considered a total and utter failure.
Of course, since I believe Hasbro is putting the brand before the rpg community (at least the vocal minority not satisfied with the Realms), there is no failure, since they already from the beginning decided to skip settings as a concept, instead moving to incorporate the Realms into the D&D brand, as opposed to being one out of many setting choices.
I think their strategy has paid off. Not just because of apologist comments (not saying you belong to this group, only that the desire to find no fault with WotC is strong here at the forums), but because people are presumably content with the recycled old edition offerings for their chosen setting.
Tldr I guess all I want to say is how I loathe the idea that WotC should get away with saying they're planning setting support when they have achieved exactly jack skit during three full years. Imagine the skit-storm if WotC at launch had said "...and Greyhawk support is coming in only four years time, in the 2018-2019 time-frame"!
It boggles my mind that all they apparently needed to do was to... keep talking while doing nothing.
Sent from my C6603 using
EN World mobile app
So, I'm always hesitant to enter these sort of internet debates. Because in the end, we'll both end up speculating about why they are doing what they are doing. Educated speculating I'll grant. But there are simply things we don't know. And then we'll run in circles. I don't generally find that enjoyable (I probably don't belong on an internet messageboard, I know). That's all by way of saying that I'll probably jump to 'agree to disagree' pretty quickly. But I'll give this one go round.
Things I think we agree on:
-- WotC has provided very little support for non FR settings beyond a few book mentions, some suggestions in adventures, and the Strahd adventure (which some find inadequate given the whole of the Ravenloft setting)
-- WotC has done fine by this strategy. In other words, they are happy with the money they are making.
-- You and I both would enjoy seeing more support for other settings.
Things I think we likely disagree on:
We disagree on the reason they are doing fine. I don't think it's that people are patient and have 'drunk the kool aid'. I think that the market of people who want campaign setting support is relatively small (and even smaller broken into each setting) and that most of those people are willing to buy the other products because they find them useful. For example, I don't run an FR campaign. Haven't for a long time. But I pull a lot of material out of the various other books I've bought.
We also probably disagree on why they aren't doing that setting support (though maybe not). Sure, they could hire developers to do it. But they have very intentionally pursued a strategy of limited releases. They have indicated this is because they found that pumping out too many products works poorly in the long run. And there's been plenty of argument suggesting that 2nd edition suffered from splintering their audience with their multiple setting support.
I know you aren't suggesting they send out a full product line. Maybe just a book or two. But why would they? I suspect their market research tells them they will make only X amount of profit doing so and would risk a least some splintering. It would also muddy their focus on their main product. They want all this stuff to tie together.
This is where we probably agree. It IS a brand strategy. They want to be able to market the heck out of a storyline for a couple months and not be concerned about confusing or splintering their market. But I'm not upset with them about that. I want this edition of D&D to do well long term. They seem to have an effective strategy.
Final point of disagreement (maybe this is where you think I'm an apologist?): I do not think the designers are being deceptive. I sincerely think that they want to support other settings. I really believe that they have been trying to find a way to do it that fits within their overall strategy, and I think that WotC is fully willing to let them do so if they can do it in a way that makes business sense. I really do think that it's taking a long time in part because figuring that out has been hard and in part because they've got stuff planned on the scale of years. And, finally, I really do think that they are going to provide substantial setting support in the years ahead. And while that is a long time from the start of an edition (no disagreement there), it also means that-- if I'm right-- they really aren't planning on a new edition after 5 years. Which makes me super happy. They are hopefully in 5e for the long haul.
Would I rather that I not have to wait years more to see, say, Greyhawk support? Sure. Hell, I'd love to have a book for each setting to read and steal from and to pop into my campaigns. I love reading that stuff. I'd even really enjoy a fully fleshed out 5e FR book (which they are clearly not going to do any time soon). And yes it does make me a little sad that we won't see all this in the immediate future.
So why am I not all that unhappy about it? Because, overall, I'm happy with D&D. With 5e. I'd like the stuff, but I don't need it. And I am enjoying the products they are releasing. It's not that I accept all their explanations and delays and am eager to defend every decision they make. It's that they are serving enough of my D&D wants to keep me happy.
And, probably, I fall more in their target market.
At any rate, does all that help explain my point of view better?
AD
