Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Has the Biggest Playerbase, So Why is it the Hardest for 3rd Party to Market Too?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7424949" data-attributes="member: 6778044"><p>Obviously there are a lot of reasons. A few possibilities.</p><p></p><p>The amount of time people have to play vs. how many things are available.</p><p></p><p>Distribution - kickstarter/internet is one thing, being in every game shop and other outlets another.</p><p></p><p>3rd party products often cater to a specific play-style or approach. They are frequently more of a niche product.</p><p></p><p>D&D and 5e in particular are very friendly to homebrew content, much like OD&D and AD&D were.</p><p></p><p>A 3rd party product might not be approved by the DM, the players, or both.</p><p></p><p>The quality of WotC is a known quantity. This includes things like game balance, type of story, content of story (and content that won't be in their products), etc.</p><p></p><p>Expansion material has always had a much lower usage rate. Not just sales of adventures, but publications like Dragon and Dungeon magazine when they were both print magazines. The core books sell many times more copies than the WotC adventure paths. 3rd party sales will almost never be more than a percentage of WotC sales. So a WotC adventure path might sell x copies, and a 3rd party AP would sell a percentage of what they'd sell.</p><p></p><p>Note that to this last point, Pathfinder is an outlier. Although the reality is, there wasn't a point where you could compare (if you could get numbers), a WotC 3.5e adventure released in the same month of a Pathfinder adventure. It was more a question of whether they liked WotC older or newer game system better.</p><p></p><p>The WotC sales also reflect a fair amount of turnover. That is, me playing for 35+ years is less common than somebody that plays for 4 years at college and then moves on. New players need the core books, and every year there are more adventures available. So new players have more material to "catch up" on before considering 3rd party materials.</p><p></p><p>The business model is different. 3rd party releases don't need to sell millions of copies to be viable. WotC has much higher overhead, and must remain a valuable asset to an even larger company. So 3rd party releases don't have to spend as much on marketing, distribution, etc. As long as they are meeting their sales goals, they are a success, and can cater to a niche market if they want to. Want to make a campaign setting of entirely reptilian/dinosaurian races? Go for it, it only has to appeal to a small group.</p><p></p><p>I love the stuff we do in our campaign, and I'm happy to share, and might even publish some of it eventually. But I'm not attempting to cater to a mass market. In most cases, the appeal of the material produced really is much narrower than that of the WotC materials.</p><p></p><p>Now I can also envision a scenario where 3rd party stuff sells nearly as well as a WotC release. By licensing their settings to the original setting creators (who can also bring in some of the setting's most popular contributors). For example, instead of WotC producing an updated Forgotten Realms campaign setting, have Ed Greenwood and friends do it instead - and make it official. That is, WotC will only publish materials that work with the Greenwood published materials, and vice versa. A solid licensing agreement for Dark Sun, Eberron, Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, etc. would allow for a huge increase in 3rd party materials that would probably sell in large quantities. </p><p></p><p>This approach has already been taken by Sophisticated Games/Cubicle 7 an <em>Adventures in Middle Earth</em>. Note that it's not really seen as D&D supplements, but it's own game. Some settings could be produced in a similar manner, with heavily reworked rules, and others could simply be a supplement to the D&D rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ilbranteloth, post: 7424949, member: 6778044"] Obviously there are a lot of reasons. A few possibilities. The amount of time people have to play vs. how many things are available. Distribution - kickstarter/internet is one thing, being in every game shop and other outlets another. 3rd party products often cater to a specific play-style or approach. They are frequently more of a niche product. D&D and 5e in particular are very friendly to homebrew content, much like OD&D and AD&D were. A 3rd party product might not be approved by the DM, the players, or both. The quality of WotC is a known quantity. This includes things like game balance, type of story, content of story (and content that won't be in their products), etc. Expansion material has always had a much lower usage rate. Not just sales of adventures, but publications like Dragon and Dungeon magazine when they were both print magazines. The core books sell many times more copies than the WotC adventure paths. 3rd party sales will almost never be more than a percentage of WotC sales. So a WotC adventure path might sell x copies, and a 3rd party AP would sell a percentage of what they'd sell. Note that to this last point, Pathfinder is an outlier. Although the reality is, there wasn't a point where you could compare (if you could get numbers), a WotC 3.5e adventure released in the same month of a Pathfinder adventure. It was more a question of whether they liked WotC older or newer game system better. The WotC sales also reflect a fair amount of turnover. That is, me playing for 35+ years is less common than somebody that plays for 4 years at college and then moves on. New players need the core books, and every year there are more adventures available. So new players have more material to "catch up" on before considering 3rd party materials. The business model is different. 3rd party releases don't need to sell millions of copies to be viable. WotC has much higher overhead, and must remain a valuable asset to an even larger company. So 3rd party releases don't have to spend as much on marketing, distribution, etc. As long as they are meeting their sales goals, they are a success, and can cater to a niche market if they want to. Want to make a campaign setting of entirely reptilian/dinosaurian races? Go for it, it only has to appeal to a small group. I love the stuff we do in our campaign, and I'm happy to share, and might even publish some of it eventually. But I'm not attempting to cater to a mass market. In most cases, the appeal of the material produced really is much narrower than that of the WotC materials. Now I can also envision a scenario where 3rd party stuff sells nearly as well as a WotC release. By licensing their settings to the original setting creators (who can also bring in some of the setting's most popular contributors). For example, instead of WotC producing an updated Forgotten Realms campaign setting, have Ed Greenwood and friends do it instead - and make it official. That is, WotC will only publish materials that work with the Greenwood published materials, and vice versa. A solid licensing agreement for Dark Sun, Eberron, Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, etc. would allow for a huge increase in 3rd party materials that would probably sell in large quantities. This approach has already been taken by Sophisticated Games/Cubicle 7 an [I]Adventures in Middle Earth[/I]. Note that it's not really seen as D&D supplements, but it's own game. Some settings could be produced in a similar manner, with heavily reworked rules, and others could simply be a supplement to the D&D rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Has the Biggest Playerbase, So Why is it the Hardest for 3rd Party to Market Too?
Top