D&D 5E A Board Game style Release Schedule

[Jester David]

D&D is not a board game though.

True. But I could have just as easily said video games. Video games, both MMO and regular, also have a slower expansion cycles. The number of video games with multiple large exoansions is rare.

Expansions in video games and board games tend to be major releases with lots of new options that changes how the game is played, not just adding a few more options for the game.

It'd be good to think of D&D similarly: big expansions that you're not expected to use more than one or two at the same time.

 

[SkidAce]

D&D is not a board game though.

I think that's why board game was used as an analogy.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Why would a business choose to delay income?

If it were simply delayed profits, they wouldn't. But a slower release may cause each product to sell better over time, increasing the return on investment. WotC might make more money through diverse investment in other games rather than trying to maximize the profits of the D&D product line.

There is also the possibility of perennial items beyond the core books. That's common with expansions to games like Catan or Dominion. Once a few are out there, they continue to sell without any development costs.

But I believe there is a limit. It would be harder to convince people to buy Catan: Cities and Knights if there were 20 expansions. But there are really only three. Not only is it less intimidating, but it also encourages people to collect the whole set.

This model doesn't work for all RPG content, but I do think it can work very well for rules. Possibly settings as well.

 

[BryonD]

I think that's why board game was used as an analogy.

Ok, so what is the completion of the analogy?


The OP seemed to imply a direct 1-to-1 relationship (thus not an analogy but an equivalence).
But it could be read as ambiguous. So if it is an analogy, 4 board game expansions in 20 years (plus a lot of other related products) is to how many RPG supplments?

Also, is Catan is to Board Games as 5E is to RPGs a valid analogy?

How many board games came out in 1995? Could 5E be better compared to one that is long out of print by now?

 

[BryonD]

If it were simply delayed profits, they wouldn't. But a slower release may cause each product to sell better over time, increasing the return on investment.

Right. But he specifically said it was fixed, so no increased return.

WotC might make more money through diverse investment in other games rather than trying to maximize the profits of the D&D product line.

I think this is very much true.
But just as I though their plan to vastly expand the fan base with 4E was doomed, I think this plan is also flawed.
They *could* make more money on one smash hit movie that D&D will make in a decade. So the chance is there. T Shirts, action figures, etc, etc,... And I am ALL on board with marketing that approach.

But, IMO, if they don't keep the RPG strong and running (even just in a little niche market) their opportunity for success on these other things goes down.

There is also the possibility of perennial items beyond the core books. That's common with expansions to games like Catan or Dominion. Once a few are out there, they continue to sell without any development costs.

But I believe there is a limit. It would be harder to convince people to buy Catan: Cities and Knights if there were 20 expansions. But there are really only three. Not only is it less intimidating, but it also encourages people to collect the whole set.

This model doesn't work for all RPG content, but I do think it can work very well for rules. Possibly settings as well.

I'm not sure the historic evidence supports that conclusion for RPGs.

 

[Reynard]

Initial sales aside, the only way for D&D to grow its audience is to keep people playing (and talking about) the game -- in public. People walking into game stores need to see people playing D&D. Students need to see signs for D&D clubs in school. Conventions need to have tables filled with D&D players. Kids need to see their parent splaying, and vice versa. And people need to be enjoying themselves enough to talk about it out loud around non D&D players so those folks get interested and want to give it a try. The vast majority of folks come to D&D through a person who already plays. That is only going to get more pronounced as the niche gets smaller and the hobby shrinks. One way to keep people playing is to keep interest up through a healthy release schedule. If the release schedule gets too sparse I think you will see people continue to play but they will do so in their isolated groups.

Organized play is part of it, but not the whole thing. Some people love D&D but just do not care for organized play. Modules provide a common ground and often a point of entry. But those modules have to be *good* in order to serve that purpose, and arguably have to have the capacity to become classics (I don't think you can intentionally create a classic). Assuming the work is high quality in general, a more robust release schedule of adventures improves the chance of a classic breaking out. Look at Pathfinder: they have lots of APs but it seems they really have two classic APs about which you hear a lot -- Rise of the Rune Lords and Kingmaker. Folks that have never played PF are going to hear about those adventures and maybe want to give them a try, even if they have only ever played 2E or 4E before or whatever. There are lots of pre-3E D&D module examples, from ToEE to Dragonlance to Ravenloft, and 3.x has 1 or 2 (Red Hand of Doom gets mentioned a lot), but I can't think of a single 4E module that is thought of as a classic. 5E has the potential with LMoP (but I think when the starter box finishes its print run they need to put that module out in a more traditional format for it to hit true classic status). I don't think Hoard or Rise are of the necessary quality to become classics themselves.

My point, I guess, is that what a more robust release schedule does is keep a conversation going about the game that helps draw new people in, and if you are going to rely on the 3 core as your primary revenue drivers, you absolutely must bring in new players -- especially new DMs because only DMs need to buy all 3 books.

 

[Jester David]

Ok, so what is the completion of the analogy?


The OP seemed to imply a direct 1-to-1 relationship (thus not an analogy but an equivalence).
But it could be read as ambiguous. So if it is an analogy, 4 board game expansions in 20 years (plus a lot of other related products) is to how many RPG supplments?

Also, is Catan is to Board Games as 5E is to RPGs a valid analogy?

How many board games came out in 1995? Could 5E be better compared to one that is long out of print by now?

They're very comparable.

Catan hasn't released a new edition. It's continually among the best selling games. And it continues to make money. All without releasing monthly or even annual content or a revision.

Now, I'm not saying D&D IS Catan, just that treating D&D accessory products like board games treat expansion might be a valid strategy, and similar to WotC's planned released schedule.

 

[Coredump]

Why would a business choose to delay income?

Perhaps they think it will make for a stronger product long term, or even better sales long term. WotC releases a book a month, I will pick and choose what I buy, if they release one every 4-6 months, I am much more likely to buy all of them.

It also makes it easier for each book to be playtested more, balanced better, higher quality, etc.


I don't want a lot of crunch continually released, it makes me less enthused about the game in general. Others feel the opposite, they need to pick which group to cater to the most....

 

[Zardnaar]

They're very comparable.

Catan hasn't released a new edition. It's continually among the best selling games. And it continues to make money. All without releasing monthly or even annual content or a revision.

Now, I'm not saying D&D IS Catan, just that treating D&D accessory products like board games treat expansion might be a valid strategy, and similar to WotC's planned released schedule.

Being blunt WoTC has screwed the pooch. We have had 3 and 4 year edition cycles and each new edition has been a new game in effect. Basic, 1E and 2E were all very similar up to the point you could run a BECMI adventure in AD&D without needing to convert much or even using the stats as printed.

I was one of the ones who askled for less glut but there is a differnece between less glut and almost nothing. HotDQ sucked being blunt, LMoP was good but I bought a 3pp adventure book as there is no Dungeon or Dragon either for the 1st time in decades with a new edition launch. Dragon was there for every edition since 1E and Dungeon was there for 2E,3E, and 4E. Would not really bother me if WioTC sold the IP or even mothballed it.

 

[Mistwell]

I think this is how it works:

Book A Month: Sells 10,000 copies each
Book every 6 months: Sells 75,000 copies each

Why? Book a month discourages some from buying any books at the perceived glut. Book every 6 months feels special, and people who avoid glut will be more interested in it - same group who buy core books and nothing else, for many other games. Meanwhile, people who would have bought a book a month, will still buy the book.

Therefore it's more profitable to do a book every 6 months.

Which isn't the exact schedule. The actual schedule seems to be a book every 2-3 months, with an initial pause after the core books to assess what people like/dislike/want/don't want.