D&D 5E Is long-term support of the game important?

[Ruin Explorer]

Well, they'll almost certainly release the new editions as PDFs also. Will that do?

For my group? Definitely not, truth be told. DIsorganised information spread through dozens of poorly-organised and utterly unreliably arranged PDFs? That's actually worse than books in many ways, because so few tablets and phones handle PDFs with true grace (to be fair, even on computers they aren't wonderful).

No character generator/record would be particularly insane, given how simple they are and how long they've been around.

If WotC doesn't do it, someone else will, and then either WotC will have to engage in a legal battle to make their own overall product utility worse (lowering people's opinion of them and the value of their game), or will have to let someone else make any money of it and dictate it's pace of development and so on.

On a serious note: how many people do you think are out there who:

1) Are not currently DDI subscribers AND
2) Would subscribe to a 5e DDI?

Because that's the number that needs to be high enough to justify the investment in developing new 5e tools. And I just can't see it myself.

I don't think they really need new tools, but at a minimum they need to make a copy of the tools and put the 5E info into them. That said, developing new tools, including apps, would be a tiny investment for the potential reward - we're talking hundreds of thousands in exchange for potentially millions and millions. Everyone at my gaming table(s) has a smartphone or tablet, most of them use it for some kind of in-game function, and tons of them use shoddy 3rd-party apps that an proper developer could out-do easily.

Also your 1) isn't quite right, because no 5E DM/player is going to *keep* paying for the DDI unless it contains 5E info.

I would also suggest that if they really to make $$$, it easy - develop proprietary apps which access the DDI information, and which work really well in a simple and fast way. That is a deeply non-challenging proposition, from a programming perspective. It is low-hanging fruit.

(Okay, technically there's also the number of people who are current DDI subscribers and who would definitely cancel unless 5e tools were added. But if they're still subscribing now when the only thing in DDI is the 4e tools, it's hard to imagine they'd cancel en masse without dedicated 5e support. I might, of course, be wrong.)

I know you're wrong on this issue, because I'm one of the people who will cancel if they don't support 5E with the DDI, but I want to play 5E. There is no reason I would keep paying for the 4E service if I stopped playing 4E. Indeed, if I stopped playing 4E, and 5E wasn't supported by something along the lines of the DDI (not just shoddy PDFs - and there is really no other kind of PDF associated with RPGs in my experience), then I'd probably go play another game entirely.

Honestly, I will be quite surprised if any setting other than Forgotten Realms gets in-print support from WotC for 5e. It's just about possible that they might license out a few other settings, but I suspect the bulk of the rest (and any new settings) will be presented in DDI... assuming they do indeed resume the eMags.

I think there's a real market for collector's edition-type setting boxes with fancy maps, colourful books and so on, and one that is largely untapped, but that is, I will admit, my opinion, and not any kind of demonstrated fact. So I think supporting only the FR in print might be a tad silly, in the long run.

 

[Umbran]

Wizards has to listen to Hasboro who makes the rules on how their games are made. Therefor Wizards must keep rolling in the 'dough' as it were in new and creative ways.

This is often asserted. It has not, to my knowledge, been supported by evidence.

Hasbro cares about how much money WotC makes, yes. But note that the big cash cow at WotC is Magic: the Gathering. D&D is small potatoes by comparison. It is not well established that Hasbro really cares much about D&D, in particular.

 

[steelsteve]

This is often asserted. It has not, to my knowledge, been supported by evidence.

Hasbro cares about how much money WotC makes, yes. But note that the big cash cow at WotC is Magic: the Gathering. D&D is small potatoes by comparison. It is not well established that Hasbro really cares much about D&D, in particular.

I like to think that Hasbro looks at d&d and asks why it doesn't sell as well as monopoly. Of course they make that comparison sadly. My vote's still out on how Hasbro (through wizards) will handle 5e once it comes out, but I hope that it doesn't turn out like 4e's support did

Also, evidence is hard to prove since we're not part of the company (as if they'd say anything overt anyways)

 

[delericho]

Also your 1) isn't quite right, because no 5E DM/player is going to *keep* paying for the DDI unless it contains 5E info.

I did actually deal with that later in my post...

I know you're wrong on this issue, because I'm one of the people who will cancel if they don't support 5E with the DDI

With respect, you by yourself don't constitute "en masse".

The bottom line is that the number of DDI subscribers with 5e tools has to be significantly higher than the number of DDI subscribers without 5e tools.

If WotC don't believe there are lots of untapped potential subscribers out there, and they believe that the DDI will remain stable even with just the 4e tools available then it doesn't make sense to develop new tools. (The first part of that is very likely true. The second part is much less certain, but given how stable the numbers have been even with only the 4e tools available recently, I can see how they'd believe that.)

(And, of course, the total number of subscribers has to be high enough to be worth bothering with. According to Ryan Dancey, DDI was pitched on an assumption of 200k subscribers, which is a long way from the actual ~80k they have. So if RD's figure is correct (though I can hardly believe it), it's likely WotC wouldn't have bothered if they'd known the truth. If it's true, it's also entirely possible that they simply don't think that's enough subscribers to justify a new set of tools, period.)

But, more to the point: if there was going to be a 5e DDI of any significance, I believe we would know about it by now. WotC do not currently have the expertise needed in-house, so they would have had to recruit people for the job or contract it out to someone else. AFAIK, there has been no indication of them doing that.

 

[Kinak]

For my group? Definitely not, truth be told. DIsorganised information spread through dozens of poorly-organised and utterly unreliably arranged PDFs? That's actually worse than books in many ways, because so few tablets and phones handle PDFs with true grace (to be fair, even on computers they aren't wonderful).

I don't disagree with this at all, but if you're still looking for a good solution, my spouse has had a lot of luck with GoodReader on the iPad. It lets you have different documents open in tabs, keeping your place in each, so it's actually easier to cross-reference stuff than physical books.

It's not free, but it pays for itself as soon as you replace any book purchase with a PDF. Obviously the iPad itself costs a bit more, but even that pays for itself distressingly quickly.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Henry]

I don't disagree with this at all, but if you're still looking for a good solution, my spouse has had a lot of luck with GoodReader on the iPad. It lets you have different documents open in tabs, keeping your place in each, so it's actually easier to cross-reference stuff than physical books.

It's not free, but it pays for itself as soon as you replace any book purchase with a PDF. Obviously the iPad itself costs a bit more, but even that pays for itself distressingly quickly.

Cheers!
Kinak

Actually, using Goodreader and PFRPG rd, I haven't bought a Pathfinder paper book in a while, and I bring all my PDFs on ipad to my game nights, and it works very well for me. I don't want to lug 7 or 8 hardcovers around along with my pawns, dice, and maps, and this just fit the bill.

 

[Mistwell]

"Sorry I missed our anniversary honey. But, if you think about it, this whole year is our tenth anniversary."
Yeah, don't buy that.

It's not that kind of anniversary. The date is a total guess, from a fan writer. Nobody knows for sure the actual date, just the actual year. And there was nothing special about the date (unlike a wedding anniversary, which had a wedding). No "event" happened on whatever day it was, as the roll-out was slow and varied depending on your location and quantity supplied. It was just the year and number "40" being attached to that year-count, that was important.

And I have no idea why you think this particular date was important. I think you're making a mountain out of less than a mole-hill.

 

[Jester David]

It's not that kind of anniversary. The date is a total guess, from a fan writer. Nobody knows for sure the actual date, just the actual year.

By "fan writer" I assume you mean published writer who researched the date laboriously and narrowed it down to the 21st. It wasn't just some wild guess, actual effort was made.

And there was nothing special about the date (unlike a wedding anniversary, which had a wedding). No "event" happened on whatever day it was, as the roll-out was slow and varied depending on your location and quantity supplied. It was just the year and number "40" being attached to that year-count, that was important.

And I have no idea why you think this particular date was important. I think you're making a mountain out of less than a mole-hill.

Even if we are celebrating "the year", it's a third over and we haven't seen a lot of festivity. We're unlikely to see anything until July when the starter set comes out. So half the anniversary is gone. Most people won't get the core books until September. That's assuming they release them all at once and don't stagger the releases.

Anyone who hears about the game in the intervening period will have some difficulty getting into the game. There's no easy on ramp right now. Anyone who hears about the 40th, or watched Community and is thinking D&D is SoL.

When I think back at 2014 it won't be "the year of D&D". It will be "the year with less D&D than any other year since its creation." Well... since 1978 maybe.

 

[Lanefan]

Uh, what?

You won't buy new material because other people have the option of subscribing to a digital service?

No, I won't buy new material if I have to subscribe to a digital service in order to do so.

If the future is like the PF/4e model, where the core material and a lot of the supplements are available as physical items to buy in a store and the digital-only content is not specifically required in order to play the game, no problem. But if the day comes when required core content is not sold as physical items and is only available behind a subscription wall, I'm out.

Lanefan

 

[billd91]

No, I won't buy new material if I have to subscribe to a digital service in order to do so.

If the future is like the PF/4e model, where the core material and a lot of the supplements are available as physical items to buy in a store and the digital-only content is not specifically required in order to play the game, no problem. But if the day comes when required core content is not sold as physical items and is only available behind a subscription wall, I'm out.

Lanefan

Uh, the PF and 4e models aren't the same. The PF subscriptions are for physical materials. They include a perk for free digital versions, but the primary product is the physical books.