WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I just mean that as a practical matter; it's a rather niche topic

And 5e really doesn't have much detail for the Great Wheel. Most of the planes get a handful of paragraphs or fewer detailing them in the 5e DMG. And no one reads the DMG. It's just logical that their main target audience (the huge group of people brought to the game through 5e) aren't deeply familiar with the Great Wheel.

 

[Malmuria]

They should definitely dump the real-world gods. Even the really old ones like the Sumerian gods. What I would do is make up a new pantheon or two and use them to fill up the book space that opened up when the real gods get removed.

But I think that Planescape would be an amazing place to show that good and evil don't have to be inherent. Imagine an "underground railroad" for fiends who have renounced evil (since archfiends probably would call for the capture and execution of any such traitors), or celestials who have gone to the dark side (or who chose hedonism over smiting evil).

Yes, but let's not call it an "underground railroad."
PS: Torment had the character Fall from Grace along these lines. I wonder if the impact of "good devilish" creatures is somewhat muted now due to the popularity of tieflings. In any case, while I think the blood war is not really an adventure-friendly concept (what are the PCs going to do, defeat an army of demons?), a Sigil game focusing on blood war politics would be great.

The third layer of Arcadia slipped over the Mechanus, but that was treated as a background event--a new Planescape could have similar losses as being an active threat or even just a natural event, with creatures trying to go against nature by stabilizing the planes.

That was a great example of a good adventure hook--that's something that PCs can get involved in in classic adventuring fashion. Though, the Arcadia-->Mechanus plotline involved a concentration camp, so maybe tone that down a bit.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

So you don’t consider Xanathar’s or Tasha’s to be Sourcebooks?

I concider Tasha's to be a core book in all but name, the beginning of the shift to D&D One.

Xanathar's I concider to be 75% great source book and 25% embarassing filler.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I think because the proposed "visionary" business strategy is a return to 2e-style setting lines and source books

wotc is not, and should not, be targeting an audience well versed in great wheel cosmology.

Depends on the product and how they do it.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I concider Tasha's to be a core book in all but name, the beginning of the shift to D&D One.

Xanathar's I concider to be 75% great source book and 25% embarassing filler.

Something being a Sourcebook or not has nothing to do with the material’s quality.

 

[Faolyn]

Yes, but let's not call it an "underground railroad."

Yeah, we shouldn't, but it was the best term I could come up with on a moment's notice--I suck at naming things in general.

 

[Faolyn]

The answer is "because ENWorld."

I think you mean "because internet."

 

[innerdude]

wotc is not, and should not, be targeting an audience well versed in great wheel cosmology.

Okay . . . who should they be targeting then?

Because you wanna know a secret?

On the surface I'd probably look like a prime consumer candidate, but in reality I'm not.

Yes, I'm an avid RPG player and GM. Until my recent move to a new state, I played a minimum of 25 sessions a year from January 2012 through July 2022.

But of the 300+ sessions I participated in during that time, exactly 4 of them were using D&D 5e.

I've spent a grand total of $32 US since 2012 on WotC owned IP, for a copy of the 5e PHB from Amazon in 2015, which I barely read, gave to a 17-year-old in my neighborhood because I knew he'd actually use it, and forgot I even owned until the kid moved to Florida and took it with him, and I wondered one night, "Whatever happened to my 5e PHB? Oh yeah, Neighbor Kid probably took it when he moved."

Even at the height of my 3.5 playing days --- when I firmly believed D&D 3.5 was the greatest RPG ever created and would have scoffed at the idea another system had anything even remotely interesting to offer --- I really didn't care about cosmology / the planes / "planeswalking" / planar travel encounters, etc. Even when I was their target market, you wouldn't find me arguing about settings/cosmology on an online message board.

So if you DO care enough to comment on D&D cosmology on an online message board, you're even more of their target market than I was in the years 2002-2006.

So why, exactly, shouldn't WotC be targeting a market of the ultra-hardcore folks who care enough to comment on D&D cosmology online?

Of course there are going to be some hidden detractors in their "optimal target market"; people who look like prime candidates but actually aren't.

• The grog-iest of grognards / OSR will appear to be in the "hardcore" RPG target market, but are unlikely to buy anything from WotC.
• Those who still play RPGs regularly, but no longer play D&D, as they've moved on to other systems that better meet their preferences.
• People who play D&D regularly, but other than the "Core 3" rulebooks aren't likely to purchase anything else.

Which, of course, is why OneD&D is such a big deal --- recurring revenue is the ultimate business "market capture" device known to man. You're no longer relying on a $40 or $50 hardcover purchase from 150,000 consumers every 18 months, you're getting $5.99 monthly from 75,000 subscribers, pretty much indefinitely.

To say that the "hardcore" market isn't D&D's prime customer base is disingenuous at best.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

To say that the "hardcore" market isn't D&D's prime customer base is disingenuous at best.

No, it isn't. 5e's "prime customer base" is people that play and run D&D 5e games. And the vast majority of 5e players were introduced to the hobby this edition. I can guarantee you that if you took a pill of all D&D 5e players, the majority of them couldn't tell you the difference between Arcadia and Acheron. I know my players can't, and we've been playing 5e for 6 years now.

"Hardcore fans" are not the target audience anymore, if they were ever. The target audience is the huge group of people brought to 5e through Critical Role, Stranger Things, and the new edition.

Also, you entirely misunderstand what OneD&D is and what little we know about how it works. It's a rules update to 5e. Not a subscription service. And D&D has proven for the last decade that you can make money just selling books.

 

[Malmuria]

So if you DO care enough to comment on D&D cosmology on an online message board, you're even more of their target market than I was in the years 2002-2006.

So why, exactly, shouldn't WotC be targeting a market of the ultra-hardcore folks who care enough to comment on D&D cosmology online?

Which, of course, is why OneD&D is such a big deal --- recurring revenue is the ultimate business "market capture" device known to man. You're no longer relying on a $40 or $50 hardcover purchase from 150,000 consumers every 18 months, you're getting $5.99 monthly from 75,000 subscribers, pretty much indefinitely.

These are two different groups. There might be some incidental overlap between people who are into dnd cosmology or any other niche topic and people willing to pay for a subscription, but that's incidental. I have nostalgia for planescape because I came into the hobby in the early 90s, but I think released data has borne out that it had an enthusiastic but small fanbase. I have played 5e in the past but don't currently play it and can't see returning to it unless my friends really want to.