D&D 5E Settings played in D&D: cause or effect?

[Bluenose]

It's possible. I think FR works in part because it is the easiest to steal from for home brew games, so it will sell to the FR fans and to a good chunk of the homebrew folks. Dark Sun and Ravenloft and the like begin to cut that number down, to varying degrees.

And don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that WotC shouldn't try some alternate routes than the pretty regimented product line they are offering so far. I just don't think it's as simple as "ignore the past and take a chance because it's what I want".

Why is FR "easiest to steal from for home brew games"? Is the idea that the 5e rules are so steeped in FR concepts that any game run under them is likely to resemble an FR game anyway?

The only version of such a story that I know has Moongoose's Matt Sprange as its source. And the book was Menzoberranzan, not Neverwinter.

That does sound familiar. It certainly doesn't make it sound like FR is necessarily equivalent to high sales.

Um, no. Those homebrewers are chock full (about 50%) of people who freely filch from published settings, they just don't see the need to stick to one exclusively. That's exactly what they're data says. So, no, "all those homebrewers" are NOT people who "won't buy FR". You're making crap up.

There's some who'll buy an FR product if it has something they're particularly interested in using in it. There's some who'll buy it because it's the only new thing to buy. There's some who'll not buy it because it's an FR product. But there's almost none who are going to buy FR products because they're FR products, and then use them in a homebrew setting.

 

[pming]

Hiya!
[MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] ...yup. I agree with you completely. Zero chance of any of what I want to see happen. So, for me and pretty much my entire group, we are, for all intents and purposes, "finished buying 5e stuff". I know we aren't exactly WotC's target...but we were. And that's the sad part.

If 4e was geared towards the younger, gotta-have-it-now, MMORPG-style gamer...well, we saw what happened there (D&D knocked off #1 and their HUGE market share reduced significantly). So what did they do next? Sat down and probably said to themselves "Well guys, the OSR has really taken off. New gamers are coming in...to play old games, not 4e so much any more. Maybe we should hit up the other side of the coin? The older folks. The ones who grew up with a little brown box of photocopied pages of a typed out rules set and the ones who started when Disco was just nearing it's end, or the slightly younger ones who started with the Basic D&D box set, with the chits or the chewy dice you had to colour in with crayons. Yeah, those guys. I mean, what could it hurt? Lets do a play test and see what happens...".

...and we get 5e. More "old skool" style of "rulings, not rules", of "if it's not in the book...make it up!", of "the DM is the final decider of stuff in the game", and where finding a +2 sword is fricking awesome, as opposed to "oh, well, yeah...I bought three of those back at that last town, just to be safe; kinda have to have it or I'll die". What happened there? BOOM! D&D rockets back to #1, great press, surge of positive feelings and praise (at least quite a bit more than any negative-Nancy blog-bitching), and FLGS's that can't keep 5e on the shelves (at least here; if a batch of 5e stuff came in, it was gone in two days...tops).

The sad thing? Now that 5e is "successful again" they seem to be slipping back towards the "Yeah! Awesome! I know! Lets put stuff out for the younger, gotta-have-it now, MMORPG style gamer via a big 'story tie in' between all the D&D stuff! Video games, novels, supplements for those video games, etc. Oohhh...! We can have a big story line, and then divide it up among different products! A video game can have one part, novels can move the story along in another part, a supplemental RPG book can piece some other things together, that kind of thing. That way, everyone will by all this stuff because, well, it's new and the only way to really 'get' the whole story! While we're at it, lets drop that old Forum and move on to what all the kewl kids use now...social media! What could possibly go wrong?"

Yes, I know I'm being a bit of a negative Nancy here myself, I see that. But my point is this: They brought D&D back to #1 and massive appeal via "catering" to the "grognards" and "old skool" folk and style of gaming. Now that they are back on top, it's like they are kicking all these folks (which includes me in that camp), to the side. Like they are blinded by their success, and can't see that their success isn't because of some huge, over reaching "epic story line" that is spread out over some fictitious idea of "D&D isn't an RPG...it's a brand" (whomever came up with that beauty needs a swift kick to the donkey snacks, IMNSHO). Their success is because the people who bought in to 5e did so because it offered a slick, easy to use, OSR style rules system of D&D. Not because of a big story line. Not because of a video game (or the promise of one). Not because of full-colour glossy pages. Not because of marketing. It was because it is well written, easy to play, adaptable to many styles of play, and is set up to empower the DM and players to make their own stuff. Just look at the data we just saw here on this site about how most folk are using home-brewed worlds for their campaigns...not Forgotten Realms, Ebberon, Greyhawk, etc. To suddenly think that "everyone" is going to want to buy FR books, novels and video games 'using' D&D as a brand is, IMH, folly. I think it's going to bite them in the ass much sooner than later.

Anyway, yeah. My dream of a b/w PDF "campaign document" for the old TSR worlds of Greyhawk, Birthright, Dark Sun, etc, are just that. Dreams. But, I'm a gamer. Dreaming is kind of my bag, baby!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[oknazevad]

Why is FR "easiest to steal from for home brew games"? Is the idea that the 5e rules are so steeped in FR concepts that any game run under them is likely to resemble an FR game anyway?

I think it's less "5e rules are so steeped in FR concepts" and more "FR makes many of the same assumptions regarding character archetypes that Dave and Gary did when they originally created the game".

In other words, like Greyhawk, The Realms are "generic D&D" in tone (though they're a little higher magic), so an edition of D&D that intentionally tries to (and succeeds in!!!) bring back to that sort of feel of earlier editions is going to find FR material an easy fit.

See, I am quite sure (based on personal experience and many discussions in real life and on the Internet) that a lot of homebrewers are such not because they are trying to create a distinct new concept, but simply because they don't want to bother getting bogged down by existing lore in the setting. Their campaigns are still every much "generic D&D", but they don't want to worry about what happened in a novel published 30 some years ago to know about the setting, nor have to deal with players that do know more then they do about the place. It's a more casual homebrew, for a group of more casual players. But they're still more than willing to grab something from the Realms to use if it strikes their fancy precisely because it is "generic D&D" enough that it still fits their campaign.

There's some who'll buy an FR product if it has something they're particularly interested in using in it. There's some who'll buy it because it's the only new thing to buy. There's some who'll not buy it because it's an FR product. But there's almost none who are going to buy FR products because they're FR products, and then use them in a homebrew setting.

Agreed. As I said, and based on what Perkins said that prompted these threads, about half of all homebrewers borrow from published setting material, regardless of which setting it is. So if FR material works with their campaign, they'll buy and use it. And I'm sure there are those buying it because it's just what's on the shelf. I was just calling out the false claim that "all homebrewers" are people who actively reject all Realms material because it's Realms material. Sure, some might, but they're probably in the half that don't use any existing setting material.

Again, it comes back to trying to be smart with the limited resources that WotC have. If Realms material has at least some appeal to 60% or so of the potential audience (the 35% of players who do play in the Realms outright, plus the 25-30% who will freely borrow from it for their home campaigns), then that's the safest bet for aiming those limited resources. I know it's frustrating for those who like other settings, but until people higher in the corporate food chain start giving more resources to the D&D team (which seems like it might happen because of the success of 5e sales), then it's just smart business.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Why is FR "easiest to steal from for home brew games"? Is the idea that the 5e rules are so steeped in FR concepts that any game run under them is likely to resemble an FR game anyway?

No, not exactly. I think it's because FR content is more likely to translate to a homebrew setting more easily. I think most homebrews are based more on a traditional setting than not, so for those, all they have to do is change character names and location names and they're all set.

Taking the city of Urik, ruled by the Sorceror-King Hamanu, whose law is enforced by his Templars takes a lot more conversion than Waterdeep to drop into a homebrew.

Hiya!

[MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] ...yup. I agree with you completely. Zero chance of any of what I want to see happen. So, for me and pretty much my entire group, we are, for all intents and purposes, "finished buying 5e stuff". I know we aren't exactly WotC's target...but we were. And that's the sad part.

If 4e was geared towards the younger, gotta-have-it-now, MMORPG-style gamer...well, we saw what happened there (D&D knocked off #1 and their HUGE market share reduced significantly). So what did they do next? Sat down and probably said to themselves "Well guys, the OSR has really taken off. New gamers are coming in...to play old games, not 4e so much any more. Maybe we should hit up the other side of the coin? The older folks. The ones who grew up with a little brown box of photocopied pages of a typed out rules set and the ones who started when Disco was just nearing it's end, or the slightly younger ones who started with the Basic D&D box set, with the chits or the chewy dice you had to colour in with crayons. Yeah, those guys. I mean, what could it hurt? Lets do a play test and see what happens...".

...and we get 5e. More "old skool" style of "rulings, not rules", of "if it's not in the book...make it up!", of "the DM is the final decider of stuff in the game", and where finding a +2 sword is fricking awesome, as opposed to "oh, well, yeah...I bought three of those back at that last town, just to be safe; kinda have to have it or I'll die". What happened there? BOOM! D&D rockets back to #1, great press, surge of positive feelings and praise (at least quite a bit more than any negative-Nancy blog-bitching), and FLGS's that can't keep 5e on the shelves (at least here; if a batch of 5e stuff came in, it was gone in two days...tops).

The sad thing? Now that 5e is "successful again" they seem to be slipping back towards the "Yeah! Awesome! I know! Lets put stuff out for the younger, gotta-have-it now, MMORPG style gamer via a big 'story tie in' between all the D&D stuff! Video games, novels, supplements for those video games, etc. Oohhh...! We can have a big story line, and then divide it up among different products! A video game can have one part, novels can move the story along in another part, a supplemental RPG book can piece some other things together, that kind of thing. That way, everyone will by all this stuff because, well, it's new and the only way to really 'get' the whole story! While we're at it, lets drop that old Forum and move on to what all the kewl kids use now...social media! What could possibly go wrong?"

Yes, I know I'm being a bit of a negative Nancy here myself, I see that. But my point is this: They brought D&D back to #1 and massive appeal via "catering" to the "grognards" and "old skool" folk and style of gaming. Now that they are back on top, it's like they are kicking all these folks (which includes me in that camp), to the side. Like they are blinded by their success, and can't see that their success isn't because of some huge, over reaching "epic story line" that is spread out over some fictitious idea of "D&D isn't an RPG...it's a brand" (whomever came up with that beauty needs a swift kick to the donkey snacks, IMNSHO). Their success is because the people who bought in to 5e did so because it offered a slick, easy to use, OSR style rules system of D&D. Not because of a big story line. Not because of a video game (or the promise of one). Not because of full-colour glossy pages. Not because of marketing. It was because it is well written, easy to play, adaptable to many styles of play, and is set up to empower the DM and players to make their own stuff. Just look at the data we just saw here on this site about how most folk are using home-brewed worlds for their campaigns...not Forgotten Realms, Ebberon, Greyhawk, etc. To suddenly think that "everyone" is going to want to buy FR books, novels and video games 'using' D&D as a brand is, IMH, folly. I think it's going to bite them in the ass much sooner than later.

Anyway, yeah. My dream of a b/w PDF "campaign document" for the old TSR worlds of Greyhawk, Birthright, Dark Sun, etc, are just that. Dreams. But, I'm a gamer. Dreaming is kind of my bag, baby!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

I can understand the desire for setting material. What I don't understand is how you dismiss the modern fans as the "gotta have it now" crowd while simultaneously complaining that WotC isn't giving you what you want now.

 

[Maxperson]

I just don't see the evidence for this assertion.

WotC is a money-making enterprise. And it has chosen not to publish a wide range of setting material - a change of approach from what the company was doing during the 4e period.

What makes you think that WotC is deliberately choosing not to make money? It seems to me far more likely that, given their knowledge of sales during the 4e period, they have worked out that publishing setting material (other than what they are publishing) won't make money.

I don't think they're choosing not to make money. I think they're choosing to make more money by only putting out the FR. By doing so, they are alienating those who won't use the FR, or even borrow little bits from it. Alienating customers is not a good practice as ultimately it could cost you more than you made on the FR product put out instead of the Darksun, Ravenloft or whatever product, as those alienated for lack of support go to games that will support them.

 

[Maxperson]

Um, no. Those homebrewers are chock full (about 50%) of people who freely filch from published settings, they just don't see the need to stick to one exclusively. That's exactly what they're data says. So, no, "all those homebrewers" are NOT people who "won't buy FR". You're making crap up.

I can filch from a setting and never spend a $ on it. I'm not going to buy a product if all I need is the name Cormyr, it's cities and a few names of NPCs. Google gives me that. Those home brewers are also chocked full of people who won't touch the realms and won't filch from FR, the ONLY published setting (not published settings).

 

[Maxperson]

Sure but my point was that not all fans agree. They can't do what "the fans" want because there are varying opinions about what fans do want.

Sure they can. If "the fans" want 3 settings, they can provide 3 settings. You seem to be assuming that "the fans" means 100% of them wanting one thing and that isn't the case.

 

[Maxperson]

Are you kidding? 3e? Do you have any idea how much 2e FR material there is? There is easily as much FR material in 2e as all other settings combined. There are hundreds of FR 2e products. Never minding regular features in thing like Dragon and whatnot.

Why do you think that every successful DND branded video game has been set in the Realms? That didn't start in 3e, that goes back to the eighties.

You should make an effort to understand what you read before you respond. Yes, 3e. While 2e had a ton of FR stuff, it also had a ton of Darksun, Ravenloft, Al Qadim, Planescape, Birthright, yada yada yada stuff, so no, it didn't try to shove FR down the throats of the players like 3e did. It gave options to the players and had other successful campaign settings. It just made too many of them.

 

[Corpsetaker]

What happened there? BOOM! D&D rockets back to #1, great press, surge of positive feelings and praise (at least quite a bit more than any negative-Nancy blog-bitching), and FLGS's that can't keep 5e on the shelves (at least here; if a batch of 5e stuff came in, it was gone in two days...tops).

I just want to focus on this for a moment.

I think you are giving Wizards a little too much credit here. Let's look at a few things.

1: D&D was going to sell well in the beginning years really no matter what.

2: Who's it's nearest competitor? A 14 year old ruleset made by a company who sells most of it's products through it's own online store which consists of books, dice, tile sets, PDF's, toys, etc... Not to mention the fact that you can get all the game material for free online through the SRD.

Do we really even know if it's reached number 1? If you compare Amazon and store sales then it would be number 1 amongst those but if you look at Paizo's entire franchise through their online store then we don't really know because they aren't going to hand out that information.

We aren't talking blood, sweat, and tears here.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I don't think they're choosing not to make money. I think they're choosing to make more money by only putting out the FR. By doing so, they are alienating those who won't use the FR, or even borrow little bits from it. Alienating customers is not a good practice as ultimately it could cost you more than you made on the FR product put out instead of the Darksun, Ravenloft or whatever product, as those alienated for lack of support go to games that will support them.

I'm not following that. It's not like folks who are mad that WotC is not making Ebberon can just go to another game company and get Ebberon stuff.

I can filch from a setting and never spend a $ on it. I'm not going to buy a product if all I need is the name Cormyr, it's cities and a few names of NPCs. Google gives me that. Those home brewers are also chocked full of people who won't touch the realms and won't filch from FR, the ONLY published setting (not published settings).

You can filch from all the settings online. And homebrewers are varied for sure, but I doubt most of them absolutely won't filch from the FR related material. Why not?

Sure they can. If "the fans" want 3 settings, they can provide 3 settings. You seem to be assuming that "the fans" means 100% of them wanting one thing and that isn't the case.

No, my point was exactly the opposite...that 100% of the fans is an impossible audience to obtain or satisfy. So they have to look at the resources at their disposal and decide how best to use those resources.

So far, it seems that they don't feel that publishing another setting would provide as significant a return on an investment as producing FR related material. They are not doing so to alienate their fans. They're doing so because that's what they feel is the best approach for the longevity of their product.

I think that there are enough indicators that hint they plan on using other settings at some point. It just seems like they want to do so when they feel the time is right and they have their resources aligned to make the most of it.