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

[Dannyalcatraz]

Heard that a lot of people found it hard to swallow.

Perhaps the timing was off...premature. Thus nobody wanted to splurge on it.

One thing is for sure: we'll probably never see a leather-bound edition of it.

 

[Dire Bare]

I know many of us are wishlisting and realize that some of what we would love would not happen . . . could not happen . . . but . . .

I see a lot of folks asking for the resumption of PDF sales of older material. Would that really bring you back as a significant customer? I mean, sure, you might pick up a few titles you are missing in your collection . . . and maybe you might even pick up EVERY title if you have no collection as of yet, but then . . . wouldn't your patronage of WotC end? If you aren't interested in 4e, why would WotC want to spend any money (and yes, releasing existing PDF copies of older material would cost money) trying to win you back?

Plus, WotC has stated multiple times that they DO plan on releasing the older material again. They haven't promised WHEN they will do this, or HOW, but considering the Gleemax debacle, WotC has learned not to promise electronic goodies until they are truly beta ready.

I also noted a few people asking for D&D minis that support the RPG line . . . uh, they do that. Right now. Really! The D&D skirmish game is dead, and WotC continues to produce minis that support the current edition of their game. I know some folks don't care for random packaging, but that hasn't come up in this thread as much . . .

 

[The Human Target]

Put me in the "I hope they don't do anything to bring back the disenchanted" camp.

The simple fact is, you're going to lose some people every time you switch editions.

And you're going to gain some people.

I'm very worried the Essentials line is going to try too hard to bring back the lapsed DnDers and end up changing the game in ways I myself no longer want to support.

 

[Dire Bare]

Another possibility is releasing new material for older editions. I don't think that's "splitting the market,"

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. Licensing is a possibility, but WotC has already made the decision that licensing aspects of D&D to other companies is not a direction they want to go anymore (Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Kalamar, Hackmaster, Oriental Adventures). I wouldn't mind if WotC did produce material for older editions either themselves or through a license, but I don't begrudge them for choosing not to do so (not that you are, I'm just saying).

One thing I'd love to see that I think would work would be for WotC to have a unique license with Paizo for Pathfinder to use any official D&D 3e material and have some sort of low-key "Official Classic D&D" logo or phrase or something like that. I'm not sure if Paizo would want to do that, and I doubt that WotC would, but I think it would work out well for WotC, Paizo, and the consumers. And I dig it.

But, I play 4e, so WotC doesn't have to win me back!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I know many of us are wishlisting and realize that some of what we would love would not happen . . . could not happen . . . but . . .

I see a lot of folks asking for the resumption of PDF sales of older material. Would that really bring you back as a significant customer? I mean, sure, you might pick up a few titles you are missing in your collection . . . and maybe you might even pick up EVERY title if you have no collection as of yet, but then . . . wouldn't your patronage of WotC end? If you aren't interested in 4e, why would WotC want to spend any money (and yes, releasing existing PDF copies of older material would cost money) trying to win you back?

I think that the call for older material in electronic form works on 2 levels:

1. It satisfies the drive for ease of storage & use as more players become increasingly technophillic
2. The rebuilding of corporate goodwill that was lost in the waning months of 3.5 and the early months of the 4Ed rollout. Many people didn't like the way WotC handled the expiration of licenses with other companies, the way 4Ed was marketed, and clearly, the removal of downloadable legal PDFs.

The second point is important. The mere fact of the PDFs returning to the market may soothe enough people that they continue to patronize WotC's site- the reason for their "boycott" would be over.

Plus, as noted before, it lets them continue to profit from extant material.

 

[Dire Bare]

I just don't understand what you're saying, and I suspect it's because you're not making logical sense. DCA is a continuation of the OGL "revolution," it is an OGL game, based on an OGL game, and still has an OGL declaration.

If by "petering out" you mean the OGL is no longer a force in gaming, you are incorrect. DC Adventures is an OGL game with a major license and is a continuation of a thriving M&M fanbase. I can't think of any way it could be less petered out.

Just because you don't understand someone, doesn't mean they are not making logical sense. No need to be an ass about it. Besides, he was making perfect sense, you just didn't get it. Which is fine, no fault on you.

Mutants & Masterminds (both 1e and 2e) were clearly OGL games. Heavily modified, of course, but also designed with the intent to stay within OGL bounds. Not for licensing reasons, but because GR felt at the time that keeping the game close to D&D 3e (or the d20 system) was an important design goal.

DC Adventures (and M&M 3e) is still an OGL game. It's derived from M&M 1e and 2e of course! But the designers have actually stated in their design journals that with the demise of the d20 system as a driving force in the RPG market, they are more comfortable dropping tropes of d20 and moving away from the system.

What would have happened if 4e had gone the way we all thought it would a year before it released, with a new d20 license and new OGL as open as 3e? Would the eventual DC Adventures and M&M 3e be 4e D&D based? Would it stick closer to the original 3e OGL than it is currently? We will never know, of course, but there's a good chance things would have played out differently.

Also, Pathfinder would not likely exist. Pathfinder is essentially D&D 3.75e and is clearly an OGL game . . . but Paizo was seriously considering going 4e and (new) d20 before they got a hold of the more restrictive GSL. Again, if WotC had from the start given the industry an open 4e, things would have played out differently.

Edit: The (D&D 3e) d20/OGL boom is not "dead", but it is mostly over and waning. The boom has come and gone. The success of Pathfinder is a unique case and DCA is only OGL because M&M 1e & 2e were. GR has dropped all other d20/OGL product lines.

 

[TarionzCousin]

They could include a coupon in every new book:

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

They could include a coupon in every new book:

I'm sure that polls would show that that coupon would have firmed up the sales of the BoEF, for sure!

Yep. Polls would show that.

 

[Dandu]

One thing is for sure: we'll probably never see a leather-bound edition of it.

That would whip up a storm of controversy.

 

[AngryMojo]

I just don't understand what you're saying, and I suspect it's because you're not making logical sense. DCA is a continuation of the OGL "revolution," it is an OGL game, based on an OGL game, and still has an OGL declaration.

If by "petering out" you mean the OGL is no longer a force in gaming, you are incorrect. DC Adventures is an OGL game with a major license and is a continuation of a thriving M&M fanbase. I can't think of any way it could be less petered out.

Another key reason for putting a new iteration of M&M in DC ADVENTURES was the change in the d20 System market. M&M Second Edition had long since established its independence from its Open Game License "ancestor" so why not go the rest of the way towards making it a truly independent system? That involved looking closely at what really worked in the game, and what was merely a holdover from the System Resource Document(s), whether it was terminology (*cough*feats*cough*) or mechanics (ability scores vs. ability modifiers; the scores didn't actually do much of anything).

DC Adventures is, as directly stated by Green Ronin, a truly independent system, spurred by a change in the d20 market.

As for the OGL petering out, examine the number of OGL products released over the past year, and compare them to the number of products released in 2005. The products released over the past year are a much smaller number, but of much higher quality. Pathfinder alone blows most all third party d20 products released up to the 2008 mark out of the water. That's my point ,the current market change of the OGL separated the wheat from the chaff. Weak products are no longer propped up by the overwhelming popularity of the system, while those games that belong in other systems are no longer pressured into d20 to stay relevant.

Edit

Snip

Exactly what I was trying to say. Thank you for reminding me I'm not crazy.