D&D 5E Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble

[NewJeffCT]

Heh. Anti-Compete clauses are generally much nastier than the IP-grab ones. I recall one stunningly bad example a friend of mine mocked a prospective employer (and got changed, of course) for that stated he would not work for any competitor or *customer* of the company for a year after the contract terminated.
The company? Unilever.

ouch - don't their products touch just about everybody? Q Tips, Dove Soap, Suave shampoo, Ben & Jerry's, etc? It would almost prevent him from working anywhere for a year... "sorry, they bought a box of q-tips last year... they're out"

 

[NewJeffCT]

Eh? That's a new phrase on me. Do you have states where people don't have the right to work?

In the US, if a manufacturing company workers are part of a labor union, in "right to work" states, a new employee does not have to join the union to work there. However, in some states, a manufacturing company can be a "closed" shop, and a new employee must join the labor union to work there. Most "right to work" states are in the South and the Mountain States, while the Northeast and west coast do not have "right to work" laws.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Indeed, I agree. I would never sign an employment contract that included such an obvious IP grab, but then again, I wouldn't necessarily hold it against the company. I just wouldn't sign it. As I said earlier, it's no wonder that talented people showed themselves to the door.

Especially given the previous climate, when many of the most successful third party companies were WotC designers... like Monte Cook himself, and Chris Pramas and others. What about WotC employees who freelanced for other companies? Apparently, that's now out too.

Again, if WotC thought that they could get away with putting those into their employment contracts, that doesn't make them villainous; merely foolish, as it will provide disincentives for anyone with any talent to sign such a contract.

well, you're often not given a choice about non-compete clauses or "IP grab" clauses. It's either sign or you don't work there.

And, if Company XYZ came up to you and offered you 3x your current salary - along with better benefits and a better work-life balance - but, you had to sign a covenant not to compete for a year after you leave the company, and also any IP related to Company XYZ's business you came up with during your employment would go to Company XYZ, you wouldn't take it?

 

[Dausuul]

In the US, if a manufacturing company workers are part of a labor union, in "right to work" states, a new employee does not have to join the union to work there. However, in some states, a manufacturing company can be a "closed" shop, and a new employee must join the labor union to work there.

To clarify a bit: The decision to be a "closed shop" or not is made by the company, almost always as part of its contract with the union. "Right to work" laws ban "closed shop" arrangements.

And since Morrus's later post is quite correct about this being a politically charged topic, I shan't say anything further on the subject. Google it if you want to learn more.

 

[oracular]

 

[Desdichado]

well, you're often not given a choice about non-compete clauses or "IP grab" clauses. It's either sign or you don't work there.

That's a choice.

And, if Company XYZ came up to you and offered you 3x your current salary - along with better benefits and a better work-life balance - but, you had to sign a covenant not to compete for a year after you leave the company, and also any IP related to Company XYZ's business you came up with during your employment would go to Company XYZ, you wouldn't take it?

Depends. Not if I was Monte Cook and 1) knew I had options in the industry, or the closely related computer games industry, where lots of ex-RPG designers go, and 2) had every intention of working on things on the side.

If I had no such background and no such intentions, it'd be different. But I'm not a game designer, so that's kinda a moot point.

The point is, that's a potentially huge cost. And before signing any contract, individuals do a cost/benefit analysis. If companies are going to saddle potential employees with a huge cost to accept employment, they need to compensate them commensurately... and expect that the most talented designers with the most options will still walk.

 

[Mistwell]

Do you have an actual source for this?

He does.

The OSR market is a lot bigger than you would think... ... particularly because it has been expanding exponentially in the last 18 months

Do you have an objective source for this? Expanding "exponentially" is an extraordinary claim. I've seen a stable and slightly slowing level of discussion on the internet in general (measuring over 1000 sources) for the OSR. It's actually seen less interest in the last year (slightly).

 

[oracular]

 

[Mistwell]

Marketing/buzz does not equate with sales whatsoever. Plenty of products get talked up like crazy and fail horribly.

It excludes marketing. It excludes websites run by the companies themselves. This is just ordinary people, talking about games, on various websites and such. It's a rather good measure of what people are playing (people talk about what they are playing) and interested in (people talk about what they are interested in). If people were increasing interest in the OSR "exponentially", we'd see it reflected in what they're talking about. They would say things like "Should I buy Labyrinth Lord or C&C or ACK?" and it would get tracked.

None that I can publicly share. Sorry. But note that I didn't claim a particular figure.

You did claim a figure. You claimed "exponential" growth. And then you demanded a source from Morrus when he made a claim. So, it's fair to me to ask you for your source.

Only if taken in the context of mathematics, where as I am using it in the informal literary sense of 'rapidly'.

There is no literary sense for "exponentially". There are lots of synonyms for the word "rapid" and "exponential" isn't one of them. It has a real meaning, and that meaning is more than merely "rapid".

Again, don't equate chatter with actual/potential sales figures. People don't blog a lot about cheap used cars from the 80s, but you'd be silly to believe there was not a great deal of money still being exchanged by private parties on a daily basis in comparison to sales/marketing of new vehicles by dealerships.

People DO talk about those cars. How to repair them, how to obtain spare parts, that they are selling them, that they are looking to buy them, that there were various recalls on them, etc.. The internet talks about everything going on in people's lives. Normal stuff doesn't get hidden.

If the OSR were growing at a much more rapid rate than Morrus said, people would be talking about it a lot more. Even if you think the numbers are off by 100%, his claim still holds up and yours does not. So far, all we have to substantiate your claim is you...and nobody has any clue who you are. You're brand new, with no stated credibility in the field at all. Meanwhile, you called out Morrus as being wrong...who has run one of the largest D&D websites in the world for 15 years, and is himself a writer and publisher in that field. And his claim is backed by objective data - data which you dispute, but you won't offer any objective data yourself.

You can see why people might not take your claim as credible?

 

[Dausuul]

Lack of online chatter is not proof of lack of sales, but given that RPGs are a social activity whose practitioners tend to be technophiles, it's evidence worth noting. Meanwhile, what evidence do we have to support the claim that OSR games command significant market share? So far, I'm seeing a big fat zero in that column.