At Least 4 Months For Conversion Documents

Those waiting for official conversion documents from earlier editions of D&D to 5th edition are going to have to wait a bit longer. WotC's Mike Mearls says that "the person who needs to do the final approvals on them is serving on a jury that will take another 4 or so months. Sorry!" So it looks like we're talking July/August at the earliest. Thanks to Adrian for the scoop.

 

[Kramodlog]

So your argument is that - and tell me if I haven't got this right - WotC shouldn't announce anything until it has a solid release date - maybe when its a month or two from release?

I'm back tracking from previous comments when I said that they need to be more open about their release schedule. Under normal circumstances, it is what they should do. I under estimated the impact of the small crew they have. Right now they are creating expectations, but have trouble delivering. The comments about the OGL and PDFs are good examples.

 

[thalmin]

It is to be noted that WotC is being held to a much higher level of accuracy about release dates than any of the other gaming companies. The much criticized DMG delay was only a couple of weeks, and we were told of the delay about a month out. This for a release date (actual day of the month) that had been announced to retailers several months in advance. For both we had an exact day for the release. With most other companies, we get at best "next month" or "2nd quarter" or maybe "2015", with the actual date maybe announced 1 week in advance. With many companies, we (the retailers) find out on Monday what we will be able to sell on Friday. For some, we know on Tuesday that we will see it on Wednesday. And even some of these get delayed. ("Curt, that game you received this morning? Don't sell it yet. The manufacturer just called to tell us they left out the rule books." Actually happened with several products from different companies, just not always rule books)

 

[Trickster Spirit]

I'm back tracking from previous comments when I said that they need to be more open about their release schedule. Under normal circumstances, it is what they should do. I under estimated the impact of the small crew they have. Right now they are creating expectations, but have trouble delivering. The comments about the OGL and PDFs are good examples.

And I think that's an entirely reasonable opinion to have - the only caveat I would say is that they haven't actually talked about an OGL or PDFs in months. The last discussion example of someone from WotC discussing either would be Chris Perkins discussing both back in November, and even then he made clear there was no timeline to announce yet.

Maybe I'm just weird, but when I don't hear a timeline get mentioned, my reaction is to go, "Hmm, that's nice", then ignore everything I just heard until more concrete info is announced.

If someone mentioned OGL or PDFs after November though I'd be interested in seeing the quotes though!

 

[Wicht]

It is to be noted that WotC is being held to a much higher level of accuracy about release dates than any of the other gaming companies. The much criticized DMG delay was only a couple of weeks, and we were told of the delay about a month out. This for a release date (actual day of the month) that had been announced to retailers several months in advance. For both we had an exact day for the release. With most other companies, we get at best "next month" or "2nd quarter" or maybe "2015", with the actual date maybe announced 1 week in advance. With many companies, we (the retailers) find out on Monday what we will be able to sell on Friday. For some, we know on Tuesday that we will see it on Wednesday. And even some of these get delayed. ("Curt, that game you received this morning? Don't sell it yet. The manufacturer just called to tell us they left out the rule books." Actually happened with several products from different companies, just not always rule books)

The savvy consumer has come to realize in this day and age of outsourcing production that there are always hick-ups on the production end, especially when that production is being done in China. Various factors such as Chinese New Years, incompetence, shipping delays, customs, and the like are a constant concern. Two differences between that, and what is going on here. 1) The communication works best when the publisher is very upfront about what is going on, with a high level of detail. Police Precinct 2nd edition right now is at several months behind schedule, but the company maintains a constant thread on BGG explaining what is going on and what the new dates are expected to be. They get a lot of slack because everyone knows exactly what the issues are. 2) The delays are better received when they are, as in your example, problems on the manufacturer's end. If a publisher sends books off to get made and then the company printing the books takes a month off for Chinese New Years, there's not much that can be done about it by the publisher. If on the other hand, the delay is on the writing, art and layout end, then there tends to be more grumbling.

Its not a WotC thing, its a dichotomy between in-house and out-of-house delays, and how honest the fans perceive the reasons for the delay to be.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

The savvy consumer has come to realize in this day and age of outsourcing production that there are always hick-ups on the production end, especially when that production is being done in China. Various factors such as Chinese New Years, incompetence, shipping delays, customs, and the like are a constant concern. Two differences between that, and what is going on here. 1) The communication works best when the publisher is very upfront about what is going on, with a high level of detail. Police Precinct 2nd edition right now is at several months behind schedule, but the company maintains a constant thread on BGG explaining what is going on and what the new dates are expected to be. They get a lot of slack because everyone knows exactly what the issues are. 2) The delays are better received when they are, as in your example, problems on the manufacturer's end. If a publisher sends books off to get made and then the company printing the books takes a month off for Chinese New Years, there's not much that can be done about it by the publisher. If on the other hand, the delay is on the writing, art and layout end, then there tends to be more grumbling.

Its not a WotC thing, its a dichotomy between in-house and out-of-house delays, and how honest the fans perceive the reasons for the delay to be.

Police Precinct was a Kickstartered product, though - its backers are absolutely entitled to know what's happened to their money. D&D products, on the other hand, are funded solely by WotC. They've not taken anybody's money yet and are under no obligations to share information with anyone but retailers about internal delays or cancelations, whether those are caused by outside forces or the writing, art and layout end of things.

If WotC learns anything from this experience (and I'm not saying they necessarily should, as I largely view bitching on the forums as inconsequential) it's that they shouldn't even vaguely tease products or free releases to the fans ahead of release. Like goldomark has suggested, full radio silence is probably better than staying 95% radio silent.

 

[Wicht]

Police Precinct was a Kickstartered product, though - its backers are absolutely entitled to know what's happened to their money. D&D products, on the other hand, are funded solely by WotC. They've not taken anybody's money yet and are under no obligations to share information with anyone but retailers about internal delays or cancelations, whether those are caused by outside forces or the writing, art and layout end of things.

Sure, but that's beside the point. I was responding to the idea that WotC gets more grief than other companies, and I don't really think that's the case.

I think it is more fair to say that Companies who obfuscate, or who suffer in-house difficulties get more grief than companies which are pretty upfront about delays and time-tables, or who suffer out-of-house difficulties.

There are plenty of non-kickstarter games or companies which are pretty upfront with their timetables. I was just using Common Man Games as an example because, 1) it was the first that came to mind, and 2) if I used an RPG company it would be more likely to make certain people get all defensive.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

Sure, but that's beside the point. I was responding to the idea that WotC gets more grief than other companies, and I don't really think that's the case.

I think it is more fair to say that Companies who obfuscate, or who suffer in-house difficulties get more grief than companies which are pretty upfront about delays and time-tables, or who suffer out-of-house difficulties.

There are plenty of non-kickstarter games or companies which are pretty upfront with their timetables. I was just using Common Man Games as an example because, 1) it was the first that came to mind, and 2) if I used an RPG company it would be more likely to make certain people get all defensive.

I agree, companies facing out-of-house difficulties are definitely more sympathetic than those with in-house difficulties as are companies who are upfront and open about developments. In-house difficulties are why some companies pursue a policy of "radio silence", however - keeping basically everything that's not actual advertising to a bare minimum. There's the old saw about "any publicity is good publicity", but really if they hadn't mentioned conversion documents at all (including canned "We don't have any announcements to make about conversion documents at this time, sorry!" responses to fan inquiries), the documents would still be released at the same time they always would have, only none of us would have ever had this conversation.

I think the two different approaches are just mutually exclusive. You can't maintain radio silence about negative news but share info about good news, because when something negative interferes with earlier good news, you're stuck. When the answer to 95% of fans' cries is "We're a small team with a small budget that can't take on all that much at once, and that includes compensating for unanticipated hiccups", they're better off to just keep quiet about everything until it's time to actually advertise products soon to be on store shelves.

 

[TrainedMunkey]

It might be rather "old school" of me, but what happened to having a release schedule and sticking to it. Being held accountable by your superiors if you don't make the release.

The problem being that your fans lose faith in your product.

Obviously Hasbro bought WoTC for the various licenses, mainly Magic, but it saddens an old Grognard to see D&D not be the focus of a company and not get the attention it deserves.

 

[Kramodlog]

And I think that's an entirely reasonable opinion to have - the only caveat I would say is that they haven't actually talked about an OGL or PDFs in months. The last discussion example of someone from WotC discussing either would be Chris Perkins discussing both back in November, and even then he made clear there was no timeline to announce yet.

Maybe I'm just weird, but when I don't hear a timeline get mentioned, my reaction is to go, "Hmm, that's nice", then ignore everything I just heard until more concrete info is announced.

If someone mentioned OGL or PDFs after November though I'd be interested in seeing the quotes though!

They still mentioned them and, maybe your above that, but it created expectations.

I wonder what sort of impact mentioning the OGL had a on micropublishers.

 

[Wicht]

I think the two different approaches are just mutually exclusive. You can't maintain radio silence about negative news but share info about good news, because when something negative interferes with earlier good news, you're stuck. When the answer to 95% of fans' cries is "We're a small team with a small budget that can't take on all that much at once, and that includes compensating for unanticipated hiccups", they're better off to just keep quiet about everything until it's time to actually advertise products soon to be on store shelves.

So what to conclude?

#1) The best policy is to have a schedule, make it public, stick to it as close to possible, but be open and candid about difficulties.
#2) The second best policy is to have a schedule, but refuse to hardly ever talk about it or make it public
#3) The worst policy is to have a schedule, make it public but refuse to explain why you are not keeping it

I'm not sure I completely agree with #2 being much better than #3 as that means your company drops off the radar somewhat as people aren't anticipating anything from you. But even by this analysis, WotC is pursuing a suboptimal policy of disclosure at the moment.