Is the AD&D 1E Revival here to stay?

[Rel]

You are missing the point. The point is that they are keeping many many old games in print for one simple reason, it is making them money. If it is working for them on those old games, there is every reason to believe that it would work for them on other old games.

Except they don't have every older version of those games on the shelves and in print.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Bah! It all comes down to: Determine the chance of success. If it is greater than zero & less than 100%, roll some die that's compatible with the chance of success. If the devil is in the details, that'll still be the case whether you try to force everything onto a d20 or not.

:chuckle: Yeah, I know. Like I said, I think the concept of universal and "consistent" mechancis are overrated. That's usually what people are talking about when they mention consistency, though, so I just accept their definition and meet them, there. Otherwise you end up quibbling over semantics.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The easy way to make money on OD&D with POD would be to do for OD&D & the supplements what was done for BECMI with the Rules Cyclopedia.
And after all, I am not asking them to stock OD&D or OAD&D on the store shelves, just sell it POD.

I wouldn't complain; I could use an extra (and new!) copy of some of my books, for certain.

(The idea of Rules Cyclopedia-type compilation is interesting. I'd be afraid they'd tinker, though.)

 

[Storm Raven]

You are missing the point. The point is that they are keeping many many old games in print for one simple reason, it is making them money. If it is working for them on those old games, there is every reason to believe that it would work for them on other old games.

And yet, they discontinue a lot of games too. It would seem that once sales dip below a certain point, it doesn't make sense for a company to keep a product on the market, so they don't. This isn't some big conspiracy. If WotC thought they caould make money by selling old versions of D&D, they probably would (one could argue that, as a publicly traded company and a duty to their stockholders to maximize profits, they would almost be required to). But they don't. From this we can come to a couple of different conclusions:

1. WotC has determined that offering old versions of D&D for sale is not profitable.
2. WotC is staffed by people who hate older versions of D&D with an irrational passion.
3. WotC is run by people too incompetent to know how to make money.

I don't think the correct answer is (2) or (3).

Also, while you can purchase older games, many times those older games have had their rules modified. The game "Life" for example, now has substantially different rules from the version I had when I was a kid. However, there are not two versions of "Life" on the market. There is not "Classic Life" and "Updated Life". There is only one version sold. For players of D&D, the situation is fairly similar.

 

[Psion]

You are missing the point.

No, I am making mine.

The point is that they are keeping many many old games in print for one simple reason, it is making them money. If it is working for them on those old games, there is every reason to believe that it would work for them on other old games.

I have every reason to believe that if they aren't supporting the game, it wouldn't make them money.

There's another thing you have to understand. There are fixed costs associated with every product WotC prints. If they can't sell enough copies to overcome that fixed cost, it's not worth printing. The aforementioned negative impact of splitting the market also has an effect on the product line's bottom line.

There are people who work for producers whose only job is to make a educated guess on whether they will overcome the break-even point, and software that helps them determine this. While most likely less than perfect, if I were a VP in charge of WotC, if it came between a trained professional analyst neutral to the product and a fan who simply wishes that it were true, I know whose guesswork I would be trusting when it came to determining if I should invest in printing a product.

If there is one thing I trust corporations to do, it is to do what they believe will make them more money.

 

[Crimhthan_The_Great]

Except they don't have every older version of those games on the shelves and in print.

That is true, but in most of those cases the one for sale is the original one, that I bought back in the 60's or 70's and bought a new copy of in the 90's or since.

 

[Crimhthan_The_Great]

And yet, they discontinue a lot of games too. It would seem that once sales dip below a certain point, it doesn't make sense for a company to keep a product on the market, so they don't. This isn't some big conspiracy. If WotC thought they caould make money by selling old versions of D&D, they probably would (one could argue that, as a publicly traded company and a duty to their stockholders to maximize profits, they would almost be required to). But they don't. From this we can come to a couple of different conclusions:

1. WotC has determined that offering old versions of D&D for sale is not profitable.
2. WotC is staffed by people who hate older versions of D&D with an irrational passion.
3. WotC is run by people too incompetent to know how to make money.

I don't think the correct answer is (2) or (3).

Also, while you can purchase older games, many times those older games have had their rules modified. The game "Life" for example, now has substantially different rules from the version I had when I was a kid. However, there are not two versions of "Life" on the market. There is not "Classic Life" and "Updated Life". There is only one version sold. For players of D&D, the situation is fairly similar.

The correct answer is also not (1) either. They have not determined anything, they have just made a decision and there is no evidence available to any of us that it has anything to do with profitablity and with POD technology it doesnt take much to generate profits on existing products that you no longer have to pay royalties to the author (both Gygax and Arneson are sans royalties at this point).

 

[RFisher]

The reason you see a lot of 1st edition people coming out of the woodwork. Is because there were a lot of 1st edition people still running things over the year. Plus with the hoopla over the release of 3rd Edition a lot of people who were role-players started playing again. And when the they dug into their own stuff most of that was 1st edition edition.

So now there is a demand for 1st edition product. The internet allowed that demand be heard. The OGL allowed 1st edition work-alike to be created (OSRIC & C&C). So now publishers are finding they can makes some money serving the market.

I think in the long term the 1st Edition Market will around for the next several years shrinking and growing as gamers get disenchanted with more complex system or disenchanted with 1st edition.

But what about people like me? When 3e came out, I thought it was the D&D I'd always wanted. I had stopped playing (A)D&D c. 1990 & never thought I'd play that obsolete game again. I'd long since moved on to more "modern" systems. I became a passionate advocate for 3e.

Yet, I found I wasn't enjoying gaming as much as I used to. Here's the game I dreamed about. Here's the game I tried to build from the late 1980s until 2000. But it's frustrating me.

Then, after a lot of exploring & experimenting, one of the things I discovered was a new appreciation for those games I'd long ago dismissed as obsolete. I mean, I wasn't too surprised to find that I prefered another game to 3e, but I was surprised to find that I was considering AD&D or classic D&D again.

I think you might be surprised by the number of "old schoolers" who fall more in between the scenarios we've described.

Not that I really expect the "1e revival" to ever rival WotC's position in the market. I don't expect any mass disenchantment among the 1e audience, though.

 

[RFisher]

Otherwise you end up quibbling over semantics.

Yes, yes I do. (^_^)

 

[Crimhthan_The_Great]

No, I am making mine.
I have every reason to believe that if they aren't supporting the game, it wouldn't make them money.

There's another thing you have to understand. There are fixed costs associated with every product WotC prints. If they can't sell enough copies to overcome that fixed cost, it's not worth printing. The aforementioned negative impact of splitting the market also has an effect on the product line's bottom line.

There are people who work for producers whose only job is to make a educated guess on whether they will overcome the break-even point, and software that helps them determine this. While most likely less than perfect, if I were a VP in charge of WotC, if it came between a trained professional analyst neutral to the product and a fan who simply wishes that it were true, I know whose guesswork I would be trusting when it came to determining if I should invest in printing a product.

If there is one thing I trust corporations to do, it is to do what they believe will make them more money.

The fixed cost is very mininal when you go to POD technology. Because of POD this arguement is no longer a valid one. With existing product you have a one time setup cost for it to go POD and that is the end of the fixed cost.

As far as trusting corporations lets start with Enron and go on from there if you really want to go there. When it comes to corporations and trusting them to make wise decisions that is a censored game.