D&D General D&D's Utter Dominance Is Good or Bad Because...

[payn]

So, if WotC just won't do "certain kinds of books" (whatever that means since no one has outright said what would be not-profitable-enough) AND they are making 5E everygreen AND they refuse to make and substantive changes to 5E -- what does that leave for them to publish over the next 10 years of 5E and into perpetuity? If the last 10 years are anything to go by, it looks like a lot of adventures, very few rules expansions and a few pretty controversial settings and setting/adventure hybrids. Will 5E fandom be happy with that?

They have been. I still think the VTT is going to tell the future of 5E and D&D in general. Lot of eggs put in that basket. I could see a laylow and see how it does before moving forward.

 

[Wolfpack48]

I imagine adventures, campaigns, background for the various settings, and perhaps yes new classes, new monsters would keep things going for quite some time.

 

[Reynard]

They have been.

It's hard to tell because the fan base has been growing dramatically. That growth absolutely cannot continue into perpetuity. Eventually it is going to level off and new players who haven't exhausted the PHB are going to start wanting more, or different.

I still think the VTT is going to tell the future of 5E and D&D in general. Lot of eggs put in that basket. I could see a laylow and see how it does before moving forward.

It still seems like a niche within a niche product to me, aimed at a very particular subset of players.

 

[payn]

It's hard to tell because the fan base has been growing dramatically. That growth absolutely cannot continue into perpetuity. Eventually it is going to level off and new players who haven't exhausted the PHB are going to start wanting more, or different.

Honestly, I don't hear folks complaining about not enough stuff anywhere but online. I get thats anecdotal but I havent seen anything solid saying its wrong either.

It still seems like a niche within a niche product to me, aimed at a very particular subset of players.

Not to me, I think its going to change everything. Then again, folks here still think physical books are the be all end all of D&D.

 

[GrimCo]

Adding 3PP isn't that simple.

First, as a platform owner, your brand is on the line if something problematic comes up. So all 3pp material would need to be checked for anything that might be problematic for the D&D brand. Second is negotiating business deals - what percentage of sales goes to WotC, what goes to 3PP creator, what are conditions ( as in can one side unilaterally decide to remove content from the platform for example). In short, it's similar to adding apps to Apple store.

@Reynard

Adventures and settings with some new player options and monsters. Stuff that appeals to broadest possible audience. They have new half edition core books that will no doubt be good sellers. Then it's back to above mentioned.

 

[Corinnguard]

Then again, folks here still think physical books are the be all end all of D&D.

More like a fallback measure in case you lose power at your home or when the internet goes down during a role-playing session.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It has to make a profit, not all the profit imaginable. I didn’t say that. But frankly niche products often break even at best.

Not when WotC makes them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How many options are enough? How little profit would be "acceptable"? They flooded the market with books in previous editions, all it lead to was new editions being released to keep the IP afloat. We're lucky we have continued development of 5E. The people working on 5E thought it was the end of the line. TSR went bankrupt in part because they kept cranking out options.

Seriously, they cannot just keep cranking out product because random people on the internet think they should.

Is that what they've been doing? Cranking out product?

If you make more options and it starts not making you money, that's when you stop. Or you could assume that only products that absolutely everyone will buy are worth making. Maybe there's a middle ground?

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not greed. It's just good business practice to invest company resources into products that have best ROI. Publicly traded companies have fiduciary duty to operate in the best interest of shareholders.

3PP are there to fill the niches WotC finds not profitable enough. It's synergistic ecosystem.

This is why I hate publically-traded companies, and feel D&D is a worse game than it would otherwise be because it's owned by one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right, it is great to see the recent steps they've taken in this direction. What I would like to see is more support to add and share content in DDB that doesn't require any internal coding and formatting. Give creators the tools to do it themselves. It feels like they added a lot of support for more basic third-party content early on, but that they haven't done much more development in this area in the past few years.

But I agree that their priority needs to be to provide the best support for official content, even if that means restrictions and limits on what you can do with homebrew content. Still hoping, however, to see even more support for TPPs and homebrewers added to DDB.

Priority for making the best game, or the most profit?