Hasbro CEO: "D&D is Really on a Tear"

Sorry, that laugh was a result of clumsy fingers on my phone.

 

[Agamon]

The lamentations are just as valid as the cheerleading. Segregating them serves no purpose except to close the mind to variety and different views.

Disagreements are just as excellent as agreements. Seeing a flood of super fun happy comments can be just as exhausting and tiresome as ultra poop gloomy ones. The mix keeps it lively.

Just my take of course.

Don't get me wrong. Multiple threads interjected with posts saying "Ohmigosh, WotC is so very, very terrific!" would be just as bad. But if that's a problem, it's not nearly on the same scale...

 

[ZeshinX]

Don't get me wrong. Multiple threads interjected with posts saying "Ohmigosh, WotC is so very, very terrific!" would be just as bad. But if that's a problem, it's not nearly on the same scale...

No argument there (about scale). It just tends to be easier to not mention/not notice what is good, being done well, etc. since if things are working/going well/done well, they tend not to be noticed or commented on, since that generally means it's "as it should be". If something is perceived as not working/broken/missing/done poorly....well you can bet people will cry out.

I try to keep my comments as balanced as I can, to avoid being the "ultra poop gloomy" type of commenter. I think 5e is a marvelous rule set, but WotC seems a tad uncertain what to do with it. I'd fall into the "not supporting" camp, but not in terms of amount of product they have/haven't released. It's just too early to clobber them over the head with ranting about how we don't have tons of options books, campaign setting tomes, etc. That takes time (years). My interpretation of "lack of support from WotC" is that up until now, with each edition, TSR/WotC has been quite communicative regarding their plans, especially regarding product calendars. Not so much with 5e. Of course, this is entirely subject to the interpretation of the individual reading WotC's media bytes. I find their communications to be...well, to put it in game terms, a whole lotta fluff, not much crunch.

I'm also influenced by Paizo and Pathfinder. In my view, THAT'S how you support a game, and WotC seems to be trying to get there via a rather...well, think of an inebriated fly trying to make its way anywhere, and that's kinda the way I see WotC with 5e right now.

Patience and time. I suspect that's all it's going to take really. Wouldn't hurt for them to hire a few more designers though.

 

[HonorBoundSamurai632]

And a conservative release schedule being *wise* is entirely the point. There is a LOT of time to release books, as we haven't even reached the end of Year One yet.

Here was the release schedule for 4E:

In June '08 they released Player's Handbook 1, Dungeon Master's Guide 1, and Monster Manual 1. Nine months later they released Player's Handbook 2. Two months after that, they release Monster Manual 2. So at the end of Year One for 4th edition... they had already blown through the release of 5 core books. DMG 2 was released in September '09. Player's Handbook 3 was released in March '10. And Monster Manual 3 was released in June of '10.

So in two years time in the life cycle of 4E... they had already blown through EIGHT different core rule books. In TWO YEARS. And this doesn't even include the five Powers books published in and around them all. You want to know why 4E's life cycle was so short? THAT'S the reason right there. There was nothing worthwhile left to publish except a soft reboot with Essentials.

Right now, we have no idea if 5E will see this same amount of support. My guess is when we look back on 5E from a decade or so in the future, it might end up getting up there. The only difference being those eight core books (or publications on par with those kinds of books) are going to be spread out over Years One through Five, rather than entirely crammed into Years One and Two. And yeah... that's annoying players who like a fast publication cycle because they now have nothing to read and instead are just stuck playing the game instead... but from everything we've heard from the Powers That Be... that's the new paradigm for this newest edition and we all just gotta accept it.

But I do find it funny hearing the myriad of people who keep spouting here on the boards that if WotC doesn't publish faster that the game is going to die on the vine... cause I think it was proven quite conclusively that doing it the other way during 4E didn't work either. And I would suspect that the men and women in the D&D department of Wizards also know this.

Then why did they come out with so many 3rd Edition books? It seemed like they were doing one book a month, (and towards the end, most of the books felt like they weren't even play-tested.) 4th Edition failed because it didn't have the support Hasbro/WotC were looking for. Some players/DM's really like 4th, and many players/DM's didn't. THAT is why it failed, not because of the release of content. Personally, I would like to see them go somewhat in the middle. Not have as many releases as 3rd or 4th, but maybe at least ONE book that isn't a story. Something like a MM2, an Oriental Adventures, Manual of the Planes, a campaign setting, etc., on top of the story books they are so fully behind. I personally am not saying I want 15 books released a year .... but something beyond just these bad storylines would be nice.

 

[Nebulous]

Risk, Scrabble, Trouble, Life, Candy Land, CLUE. Are you saying this is bad company?

Those games are pretty much rites of passage in the US.

He mentioned Ouija too.

 

[Umbran]

He mentioned Ouija too.

That one is a rite, but not so much of passage, as summoning

 

[jodyjohnson]

When I look at the history of D&D with Wizards of the Coast I see experimentation with release schedules building a results-based expectation level with core book and supplement sales.

3.0 was their first dip in the pool with a 2nd edition style release schedule (numbers from a member of the brand team quote sales around 500,000 PHB). Follow-up core books were Monster Manual 2, and Fiend Folio. Plus a wide range of class splats. The main lesson from TSR was to support only one setting heavily - FR. Greyhawk was the default setting but only received minor support and the rest were licensed or received only token support.

3.5 was the experiment with the quick revision release which ended with 2 PHB, 2 DMG, and 3 extra Monsters Manuals (III, IV, V). Plus enough supplemental books to fill a shelf. Numbers from a member of the brand team quote sales around 350,000 PHB. Forgotten Realms continued to get content and Eberron was the new setting and got a full line of setting books.

4th was the experiment with the parsed out content but quick release schedule. 3 PHB, 2 DMG, 3 Monster Manuals all within 2 years. We still got rehashes of the class splats plus most of the monster books. They still released enough supplements to fill a shelf it was just crammed into 4 years instead of 5. I don't know how many it sold overall, but I think it launched well. Comments about alienating half the base might suggest that anywhere between 175,000 and 250,000 gamers still played it (assuming half the base of 3.0 or 3.5 PHB buyers). And conversely 175,000 to 250,000 gamers (or more) found it anathema. [Erik Mona lists 250,000 PF CRB sold as of March 2014).

4e also had the experiment with Setting support as Campaign book, Player book, and a module. The Realms, Eberron, and Darksun got that treatment (DS was tweaked slightly - Guide, Monster book, module). They also experimented with the mini-setting with Underdark and Neverwinter.

Essentials was the experiment with the easily accessible size and more traditional class 'powers' scheme and non-core 3 format (Rule Compendium, 2 Heroes PHB, a DM Kit, and Monster box).

After the Paizo Pathfinder experimental playtest in 2008 with 50,000 players over a year, Wizards follows up in 2012 to develop 5e with a playtest of 175,000 players (which if the sales numbers are valid is roughly a third of the Wizards era D&D players) over 2 years.

They have full sales data on 3 full sets of class splats (3.0, 3.5, 4e) plus extensive data from DDI. They have data from the full setting support of Forgotten Realms (3.x) and Eberron (3.5), plus the 4e run of the campaign three-some.

I find it interesting then that they went with the slow release schedule experiment (probably not 1e era slow) with limited splat. It is a strategy they don't have sales data on. But Mearls indicated that is the strategy the surveys show fans want and their hypothesis that splat reduces the lifespan of an edition may turn out to be true if 5e can last.

Or perhaps with 6th edition they may find the one plan to rule them all.

 

[Umbran]

I find it interesting then that they went with the slow release schedule experiment (probably not 1e era slow) with limited splat. It is a strategy they don't have sales data on.

Yep. And that makes sense, if their desire is to get out of the patterns seen with previous strategies. I mean, if you want something *different* now, you don't use a strategy that is already known to not get you that. You try something new.

Or perhaps with 6th edition they may find the one plan to rule them all.

No such thing, in any business. Static business plans fail when the market changes. So, there will always be tinkering with how things are delivered.

 

[Halivar]

I'm also influenced by Paizo and Pathfinder. In my view, THAT'S how you support a game

Chop out every hardcover book outside the Core and Bestiary, and I'm with you. As it is, the PFSRD is a complete glut of content printed just because.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Then why did they come out with so many 3rd Edition books? It seemed like they were doing one book a month, (and towards the end, most of the books felt like they weren't even play-tested.) 4th Edition failed because it didn't have the support Hasbro/WotC were looking for. Some players/DM's really like 4th, and many players/DM's didn't. THAT is why it failed, not because of the release of content. Personally, I would like to see them go somewhat in the middle. Not have as many releases as 3rd or 4th, but maybe at least ONE book that isn't a story. Something like a MM2, an Oriental Adventures, Manual of the Planes, a campaign setting, etc., on top of the story books they are so fully behind. I personally am not saying I want 15 books released a year .... but something beyond just these bad storylines would be nice.

They came out with so many 3E books for the same reason why they came out with so many 4E books-- because they could and people bought them. But the length of BOTH lines got shortened overall because all their biggest sellers were front-loaded on their schedule. If the number of books you sell for a line steadily decreases over the length of that line... the further you push apart publication of each individual book the money you bring in gets spread out over a longer length of time. You can either sell 100 books in Year One, 20 in Year Two, and 5 in Year Three... or 40, 30, 20, 10, 10, 10, and 5 over Years One through Seven. And boom, your line has last more than twice as long. Which for a lot of people the shortened schedule was the "explanation" they would give as to why 4E "failed".

"4E was only on the shelf for a couple years and then they started working on 5E! Thus failure!"

Which begs the question whether the edition would still have been seen as a "failure" had it been on the shelves twice as long before 5E got started? Even if they ended up selling the same amount of copies over the lifetime of either release schedule?

Now all this being said... do I think WotC could sell another book or two in and around what has already been scheduled and released and *not* cut much of the tail off at the end of 5E's lifespan? Yeah, I think they probably could. Maybe they'd lose a year if they did that, and would have to release 6E in Year Eight rather than Year Nine. Maybe at that point not a big deal?

But considering none of us have any idea what the current publish paradigm will result in, and how long the line can remain viable for WotC before they feel the need to start work on 6E... I refuse to accept people's claims that the paradigm is WRONG, and that WotC is making a MISTAKE. Now maybe it is. But at the same time, maybe it isn't. We don't know. And WotC doesn't know. All they do know is that they don't want to do the same kind of release schedule they did for the two editions previous. And thus... all any of us can do right now is just ride it out and see where it take us. And then, come 2021 when 6E gets released, everyone can feel free to come back here and scream "I told you so!"

 

[Grainger]

Risk, Scrabble, Trouble, Life, Candy Land, CLUE. Are you saying this is bad company?

Those games are pretty much rites of passage in the US.

I'm aware that they do very good business (here in the UK most of them dominate the board games market), but as a board gamer, I can tell you that as games, it sucks that they're still the top sellers. They range from (arguably) passable to truly terrible designs. Modern board games moved past them eons ago, and continue to come out with dozens of exciting, innovative designs every year, providing the same good aspects of these games (e.g. trading, acquisition, conflict) but making them into easier to play experiences with more depth, and much better components. The aforementioned "classics" may have stood the test of time, but largely because people aren't aware that much better designs exist (it's easier for Hasbro to market the same old titles that everyone already knows), and 90% of their billion copies sit unplayed gathering dust in cupboards except at Christmas where they're pulled out to give board games a bad name yet again.