D&D General Is DnD being mothballed?

[Malmuria]

Last year wotc said that they want to create a "recurrent spending environment." Arguably, this has been the problem (from a business perspective) with dnd and ttrpg since the beginning: all you really need to play is a rulebook-or-three, some dice, and your imagination. So how to get people to keeping buying more things that they don't strictly 'need' to play the game. This could be 1) supplements with more options, 2) settings, lore, metaplot 3) adventures 4) game aids, branded content, etc. Too much (1) or (2) is arguably bad for the mid- and long-term viability of the game and its design, as they create too much overhead for dms as the game becomes unbalanced, leading to a new edition. (3) works, but one only has time to run so many adventures, so they become written to be read and thus harder to actually use. (4) doesn't affect the game, but requires people buy-in to the brand because it's the most obviously unnecessary.

The current approach, judging by their investors calls, seems to be to lean into digital game aids--dnd beyond, the 3dVTT--as the surest path to create this recurrent spending environment. This is a risk, and could fail, as it has the potential to actually affect the design of the game and lead to the same problems of overhead (on both DMs and their computers). Or the market could take it as something nice but 'extra' and not really needed (which it is), and the huge investment of the vtt could be a flop. If the attempt to create this recurrent spending environment does not go well, it will likely have an effect on the game comparable to the risky business decisions of previous editions, i.e. a massive review of the business strategy that would be extremely disruptive to players.

 

[darjr]

There is another option that has seemed to be doing rather well. Keep selling the PHB to more and more people by keeping the barrier to entry low.

I don't think, after ten years, that it's a mistake or accident now. It may have been initially but I think the insistence on a slow release cycle , especially player splat books, shows they know it's working.

What I think they think is that it's going to end, maybe sooner than they hope.

I just wish they'd double down even more on the thing that's been really working so far.

Maybe they think they have by going digital, reaching out to folks who don't wanna dive into a book, or can't get together in a in person group, or can't keep that group meeting satisfactorily.

Actually now that I type this I think them releasing "DNDBeyond Maps" kinda shows that they are trying.

Though I think things in the playtest are counter to keeping that barrier to entry low. Unfortunately.

 

[mamba]

They are making a whole new set of core books while they develop adventures, internally. How is that not investing more than 2014?

didn't they do the exact same thing in 2013 / 2014?

They have ramped up substantially the folks working on the pen and paper game. How is that not ramping up more than 2014?

Do you have any numbers on that? I am not really seeing this reflected in the release schedule

They have begun to sell, themselves, digital bundles with the books. How is that not ramping up more than 2014?

Same books, just bundled, how is that ramping up at all?

Internally they were calling 5e the "pink slip edition" because it was supposed to be the last edition with a five year plan of evergreen books and then let it just be, like monopoly. Is monopoly mothballed?

I'd say it absolutely is. No new development, just selling the PHB, DMG and MM indefinitely is basically the equivalent to what Monopoly does

They are trying different formats with these new releases, sometimes failing, sometimes succeeding (well hopefully). How is that not investing more than 2014?

You have a weird understanding of investing. Same page count, or fewer, slightly different format, sounds very much like the same investment

They've brought much of the development of the books internally vs large swaths of freelancers. How is that not investing more than 2014?

You have to pay the freelancers too, often not exactly less either. I do not really see this as investing either

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It's not wrong, but the way he phrased it as "I'm as close to an expert as anyone in the world." to me implies that there aren't any real experts, and among those who are close to being an expert, he's at the top.

Well, probably more among a group of peers that are at the top - effectively equal to anyone else. But I'm sure that there was some hyperbole born of frustration in the original post that anyone can reasonably credit to mean he didn't mean it entirely to be taken to the furthest extreme and beyond. He's an expert, among a few, and I think that's probably true.

But we've definitely given more thought to this than is needed.

 

[darjr]

didn't they do the exact same thing in 2013 / 2014?

No, they had freelancers make the first adventure.

Do you have any numbers on that? I am not really seeing this reflected in the release schedule

Ugh, I hate this kind of debate. Start here https://www.enworld.org/threads/pos...oyees-at-wotc-working-in-d-d-division.691109/

Same books, just bundled, how is that ramping up at all?

They have a whole digital store that direct ships and doesn't go through a distrubutor. That's a whole division they had to ramp up. And from accounts it took them a while to get wright. That wasn't even a possibility in 2014.

I'd say it absolutely is. No new development, just selling the PHB, DMG and MM indefinitely is basically the equivalent to what Monopoly does

Monopoly isn't a mothballed product. A mothballed product at Hasbro means nothing on the shelves. Monopoly is absolutely on the shelves.

You have a weird understanding of investing. Same page count, or fewer, slightly different format, sounds very much like the same investment

So did you miss the Dragonlance board game? Or that you can only get Spelljammer physically in a splipcase and it was sold as a setting?

You have to pay the freelancers too, often not exactly less either. I do not really see this as investing either

I think you know taking on employees is more of an investment than freelancers.

 

[darjr]

I gotta add, there are few people in this industry you could call experts. Russ is absolutely one of those.

 

[dave2008]

It's not wrong, but the way he phrased it as "I'm as close to an expert as anyone in the world." to me implies that there aren't any real experts, and among those who are close to being an expert, he's at the top.

I can see how that twist might change the interpretation; however, it doesn't have to change the interpretation. So it is up to the reader to some extent to interpret that as being at the top of the top as opposed to the top of class below the top.

To use an anime/manga analogy: he is saying he is #1 in A rank, but he is still below S rank

At least that is how I interpret it (but I see the counter argument too)

 

[Parmandur]

Do you have any numbers on that? I am not really seeing this reflected in the release schedule

Pretty easy way to see this is to examine the book credits from, say, 2016 (Curse of Strahd, Storm King's Thunder, Volo's Guide to Monsters) and then looking at the credits pages for 2022 and 2023. There have a huge number more people working on the game, to the point that different books have wholly different design teams now.

 

[SlyFlourish]

What do you mean, WotC is the top paying gig in the industry, and gave been on a hiring streak.. ?

I don't think that's true from a freelancer's point of view. Things change but to my knowledge, they weren't the highest.

 

[Parmandur]

Monopoly isn't a mothballed product. A mothballed product at Hasbro means nothing on the shelves. Monopoly is absolutely on the shelves.

And it's not like designing the look and feel of new boards is no work. And they do change the rules over time.