What would WotC need to do to win back the disenchanted?

[Philotomy Jurament]

If WotC spent any manpower/money on releasing new material for older editions that would be splitting the market . . . and it would be a bad business decision.

It might. Or it might not; a company addressing the demands of two related but separate markets isn't unheard of. If we were talking about a TSR D&D vs. 4e split, then I think we're talking about two related, but different games. That can be a contentious position to take, but consider this thread, where Mike Mearls said "OD&D and D&D 4 are such different games that they cater to very different needs." I agree with Mr. Mearls on that one. Game companies have sold more than one game at the same time, before, especially when the games are so different that they cater to very different needs. So maybe it wouldn't be such bad business, after all. Hard to say, for certain.

Licensing is a possibility…

Yeah. While I don't think any of these possibilities are likely (with the exception of out-of-print PDFs coming back, at some point), I think licensing is more likely than WotC directly releasing new material for out-of-print D&D.

So would I become a WotC customer, again, if they did any of this? I'd buy some more TSR D&D PDFs. As for new material for TSR D&D (whether from WotC or through a third-party company with a license), that depends on the quality of the new material and how well it fit my preferences and my game. I tap all sorts of sources for my D&D games, so I'd certainly give WotC a chance, too.

 

[scruffygrognard]

To come back into the fold, I'd need WotC to:
1] Re-release pdfs, particularly of older edition materials.
2] Ditch 4th edition and go back to D&D's roots to create a game that strongly resembles the D&D that I've played for the past 30 years. There is room for innovation and streamlining (I'm thinking of d20/OGL games like Star Wars: Saga Edition and Castles & Crusades) while still keeping the classic D&D tropes.

The following would sweeten the pot, but aren't requirements:
3] Make the DDI a repository of all D&D goodness, including the Dragon Archives, the AD&D 2nd edition Core Rules, all D&D pdfs, and so on.
4] Make the pdfs and both Dragon and Dungeons magazines available in print through a print-on-demand partnership with Lulu or a similar outfit.

 

[howandwhy99]

I'd like to be purchasing in-print D&D products again. But I think there is an absolutist belief system about "What roleplaying games are" that is so exclusionary it may keep designs far away from my own preferences.

My advice to Wizards of the Coast would be to deny any single viewpoints, to design and sell more RPGs than only 4E, and then to create both cutting edge story and pattern finding games.

With some education the latter could be done well enough to bring back into the WotC customer base many lapsed and no longer updating, D&D-specific players. Designs of this sort are eminently suited to computer-aided gaming with subscription-based payment models.

Here are two useful sites for inspiration in design:
Conway's Game of Life
(the applet specifically)
RANDOM.ORG - True Random Number Service
(but with dice notation ability of course)

I also suggest they write or pay an academic to author a history of roleplaying (not just RPGs) before someone else in the hobby does, if only to control the presentation and message of it. Both how roleplaying and roleplaying games came to be and how these are changing in contemporary forms are topics which have generated a great deal of discussion across many opposing circles within the hobby.

 

[JediSoth]

Like many others, I would like to see the PDFs brought back, especially those of the older editions. If WotC made DDI the repository of all D&D, historical and current, that would definitely get my subscription money back. And if they made the electronic tools like the Encounter Builder compatible with the older edition...as George Takei would say..."Oh...my!"

As far as a new edition goes, I'm not sure they could win me back. As I get older, I tend to prefer more rules-light systems to the more tactical and simulationist systems that seem to be preferred for D&D. Somehow, I don't see WotC making D&D rules-light; it wouldn't be D&D for so many people. I'm not a fan of the direction 4E went, but I don't hate it either. In the last couple of years, my enthusiasm for 3.X has dampened somewhat, too, and I've actually rediscovered what I appreciated about older editions like BECMI and 2E.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I pre-ordered the Castle Ravenloft board game from Amazon but outside of that I havent bought a WOTC product since the 4E Core rulebook box that I ordered from Amazon. There are parts of me that want to pick up the Dungeon Tiles as I did pretty much faithfully through 3.5, but instead if I need something specific I just make it myself using Fat Dragon games, WorldWorks or Empty Room Tiles.

I think that there are a few people here who might be saying that since someone like me who didnt adopt 4E is in fact not wanted by WOTC as a customer. That's fine, Paizo gets most of my RPG dollars these days. They get more of my money overall than WOTC would have ($20 a month for AP subscription + subscription to their RPG line, never mind the money spend on item cards and flip mats.)
If WOTC decides to bring back PDF's at a decent price I would most certainly become a customer of theirs again. The fact that I wouldn't be buying new stuff isnt the point. I'd be filling out the gaps in my collection (mostly interested in 3.5 and AD&D modules...) and they would be getting my money. And if they allowed Paizo to at least release the rest of the Savage Tide Dungeon AP's in PDF that would be awesome as well.

You know what would be even better? IF some how WOTC (or Paizo) released some sort of classics line with Hardcover versions of the complete Age of Worms and Savage Tide AP's like they did with the Shackled City. It's a dream, I know but even if they were priced at $60 - $75 a piece they'd be worth it for me.

The fact is with the exception of the Ravenloft board game (which the more I think about it I might cancel that pre-order...) WOTC doesn't make a product that I'm interested in buying. I'll also be honest, I wasnt a big fan of how they rolled out 4E to begin with, so that's part of it. but it's not like they're Mel Gibson or any thing, it's entirely possible for them to win me back. Just give me something that I actually want.

 

[Desdichado]

Over the past 24 months or so, they've been mediocre at best, and outright bunglers at worst when comes to PR, and only a staunch Wizards defender would disagree.

I'm hardly a staunch Wizards defender and I disagree. I don't even play 4e. I've never even read 4e, or played a single trial game of it, or anything.

That said, I think most of the complaints about Wizards' PR job come from spoiled, entitled fanboys with wildly unreasonable expectations. The interenet is one of those funny things where a handful of people willing to make a lot of "noise" can give the false impression that there's some huge blunder happening, when in reality most people are either indifferent, or even happy with the state of affairs.

I happen to be one of the indifferent ones. But most gamers I talk to are the happy ones.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I know. What I'm getting at is it wasn't released under the OGL while WotC was making d20 books, the heyday of the OGL. I really don't think Pathfinder would have the steam it does if there was an OGL for 4e in the same way.

Personally, I think that the "heyday of the OGL" is just begining, as more and better open source games are being produced......Many for free.



RC

 

[El Mahdi]

Personally, I think that the "heyday of the OGL" is just begining, as more and better open source games are being produced......Many for free.

RC

Quality-wise I'd definitely agree. There's some very good OGL stuff out there now. I think the last couple of years have produced some of the best mechanical innovations for D20/OGL games. I feel 4E's mechanics have inspired some of those innovations, but there's a plethora of unique mechanical innovations out there now. D20/OGL seems to be the tinkerers system of choice.

 

[scruffygrognard]

Somehow, I don't see WotC making D&D rules-light; it wouldn't be D&D for so many people. I'm not a fan of the direction 4E went, but I don't hate it either. In the last couple of years, my enthusiasm for 3.X has dampened somewhat, too, and I've actually rediscovered what I appreciated about older editions like BECMI and 2E.

If WotC were smart, the next iteration of D&D would be modular enough to allow for rules-lite D&D. The core books would present classic races, monsters and classes, and the fundamental rules needed to run the game, as was the case with 3.X.

The fundamental rules could easily be pared down from what they were in 3.X, with sidebars for adding complexity.

Later volumes could add funky class and race options, as well as more complicated rules for expert players.

 

[DaveMage]

My ire is directed at the team that set the vision for D&D 4e, which changed many, many of the things I like about D&D.

If WotC makes products I want to buy, I'll buy them, but since both the 4e timing and changes made greatly annoyed me, there's not much that can be done at this point to change my mind.