DDXP Liveblogging

[Pour]

I really do not get the 5% or above 2% argument. What % of DDI do people use? Even if you make 100 different characters, what % of the options do you use? Not much, I would say.

Plus, who cares how much you use if you buy the book? Even if I bought AVII and put it on a shelf and never read it, why does WOTC care if I buy AVIII?

This argument makes no sense to me.

Well in the case of the AVII and all the other books dying slow deaths on our shelves, I don't think they're inspiring anyone, nor are they engaging new audiences. They certainly aren't strengthening the brand or people's faith in the work, so it's just not worth it when compared to products with larger creative and mechanical value. Of course the definition of what is of larger value is subjective, sure, but I rather better quality than more splat.

 

[Abstruse]

What I'm taking from the whole thing is that they're at what is usually the end of their edition lifespan. They can either print as much crap as they can as cheaply as they can and sell small numbers of a lot of products (3rd Edition's strategy) or they can completely scrap the edition and start from scratch all over again (3.5's strategy). It looks like they were trying something in the middle with Essentials (giving us the same thing we already have while at the same time rebooting without eliminating the older stuff) and the early sales figures must not have been good if this is the route they're going.

Personally, I think this is a major mistake. Nothing good has ever come from completely abandoning your core audience to chase new customers. You're gambling that the new customers will result in more profit than the ones you're alienating. Anytime it works, it's because it's done very slowly (the shift from The Nashville Network to The National Network to SpikeTV or from Sci-Fi Channel to SyFy the Wrestling and Ghost Hunters Channel). When it doesn't work, it fails spectacularly.

Personally, the cards look like the only good idea coming out of this. It adds to the game in a way that's dirt cheap for them to produce (This IS the company that M:tG and Pokemon built after all), but it's not even remotely necessary for those who don't want it. And I want that boxed set SOLELY for a well-made Deck of Many Things *drooooooool*

 

[shadzar]

With CB being web-based, they have info about who is playing what. They know what most popular classes are now. They can prioritize things to support things people play most.

OOOH because everyone that plays is accounted for when only taking data from the DDi subscribers.

People wonder why WotC decision making and research processes are not trusted.

Is this proof that online will soon be the only way for D&D, or that only the online users opinion matters?

 

[Abstruse]

Is this proof that online will soon be the only way for D&D, or that only the online users opinion matters?

Not just online, but in gaming stores only. The Encounters system has a lot of adventures and "rewards" in the form of friggin' supplements and adventures. Stuff I would LOVE to get myself but I can't because I don't want to play in a game store. It doesn't fit my schedule or my temperament (I curse a lot, like to make a lot of noise at the table, I like my games to last as long as it takes to finish or until everyone wants to go home, and I like being able to not allow some people to play in my games and not have to worry about the store owner mad because he/she loses a customer).

Everything seems to be focused on fancy online tools, board games, and adding crap to books that don't need to be in the books (like the friggin' tokens). All the content that should be in Dungeon is going to Encounters, they're more worried about the next shiny new tool than making the ones they have now work right, and Dragon has pretty much just become a dumping ground for "didn't make the cut" powers and feats and a few articles about what random Wizard employees do in their personal games.

I figure Wizards got probably $300 from me in D&D Minis, the various books, and my DDi subscription in 2008 and 2009. In 2010, I was focused on Shadowrun because my friends were interested in that so I canceled my DDi (a billing NIGHTMARE no one ever fixed so they still owe me $10). This year, even though I have a campaign starting soon, I think I'll probably be spending maybe $75 total the entire year - a few packs of those cards and the boxed set just so I can get the Deck of Many Things and let the rest collect dust on a shelf. I might get Heroes of Shadow/Monster Vault 2/Vile Darkness if I hear any of them have anything interesting, but I don't see myself getting two of them let alone all three.

Wizards, just do what you were doing. Give me minis, a PHB, a MM, an expansion book for a power source, a new campaign setting, and two or three adventure books a year. Dumb the stupid tiles, dump the tokens, fix DDi like it was before. Do that, and you'll get my money. I promise.

 

[Echohawk]

OOOH because everyone that plays is accounted for when only taking data from the DDi subscribers.

People wonder why WotC decision making and research processes are not trusted.

Is this proof that online will soon be the only way for D&D, or that only the online users opinion matters?

But why would statistics on which classes people like to play be different for people using the Character Builder compared to people who aren't using the Character Builder?

Also, I don't think it is a case of "only the online users opinion matter", but rather "only the choices made by online users can be easily measured". Really, if WotC is able to use information gathered from the online CB to improve their support of the game, it would be rather foolish of them not to do so.

 

[Nagol]

But why would statistics on which classes people like to play be different for people using the Character Builder compared to people who aren't using the Character Builder?

Also, I don't think it is a case of "only the online users opinion matter", but rather "only the choices made by online users can be easily measured". Really, if WotC is able to use information gathered from the online CB to improve their support of the game, it would be rather foolish of them not to do so.

Pick any or all of the below explanations:

Those without CB may prefer a class or classes that relatively benefits from not having all material in CB immediately available. For example, if Class A has a lot of secondary material in CB then users of CB may be encouraged to use it compared to non-users. If Race B has little extra material, users may pass over it.

Users of CB are onjline and more likely to use other tools of the medium. It may be that a particular race/class/design has become popular in online fora and its use in CB is greater than than in the wild because of that fact.

Users of CB are a self-selecting group and certain traits of that group may end up favouring some choices over others compared to the whole population of players.

Even in a fully fair poll, there is a chance of poll bias. Hopefully, the use of any data generated keeps that potential in mind.

 

[wedgeski]

Even in a fully fair poll, there is a chance of poll bias. Hopefully, the use of any data generated keeps that potential in mind.

Of course it will, see Mike Mearls' recent tongue-in-cheek "We're only going to write material for Fighters from now on" comment at DDXP.

 

[shadzar]

Pick any or all of the below explanations:

Those without CB may prefer a class or classes that relatively benefits from not having all material in CB immediately available. For example, if Class A has a lot of secondary material in CB then users of CB may be encouraged to use it compared to non-users. If Race B has little extra material, users may pass over it.

Users of CB are onjline and more likely to use other tools of the medium. It may be that a particular race/class/design has become popular in online fora and its use in CB is greater than than in the wild because of that fact.

Users of CB are a self-selecting group and certain traits of that group may end up favouring some choices over others compared to the whole population of players.

Even in a fully fair poll, there is a chance of poll bias. Hopefully, the use of any data generated keeps that potential in mind.

I was just going to say, point out, people have access to more books in the CB, than the player who buys only physical product, but this pretty much sums it up with more info.

 

[TerraDave]

...
the fact that the Monster Vault is also filled with other nefarious organisations is +1 excellent.

Is that a selling point? To me it came across as very niche.

 

[TerraDave]

Very interested in...
...- We need to find out if there will be 3 books for Neverwinter like with all the previous campaign settings...

They said one book for players and dm, like darksun, and only one product is listed on amazon. Also not clear they would really need a distinct monster product like Darksuns. Though I guess they could do a Neverwinter Monster Vault at some point.