D&D General Ray Winninger on 5e’s success, product cadence, the OGL, and more.

[Iosue]

WotC hasn’t released a single D&D product after my departure that wasn’t initially planned by my team. (That will finally happen toward the end of this year.) We planned four years out, and those plans included long range forecasts that were reviewed by the print production team, among many others.

Ray, given the above, do you have any insight as to the Starter Set situation? I.e., why a new starter set was released 2 years before the new rules, and yet another one planned for release a year after the new rules, rather than having one primed and ready to release with the new rules?

 

[dave2008]

Genuine question: What was changed because of playtest feedback? I wasn't following it super closely but it seemed to me the consensus was that the playtest was pretty much pointless because nothjng changed?

Things definitely changed, but a lot of the more invasive / dramatic changes were not implemented. Some for better and some fore worse IMO.

 

[dave2008]

I would agree with that. Curse of Strahd might be the most popular WotC adventure, but D&D isn't a horror game, no matter how many vampires your wizard fireballs.

You can definitely run horror with 5e. What type of horror determines what, if any, tweaks to the default you might want to make.

 

[mearls]

WotC hasn’t released a single D&D product after my departure that wasn’t initially planned by my team. (That will finally happen toward the end of this year.) We planned four years out, and those plans included long range forecasts that were reviewed by the print production team, among many others. Planning for the new PHB began in late 2020 and we were advised, even then, our forecast was large enough that the job would almost certainly require multiple printers unless we could send the book to press much earlier than usual. And yes, we usually reserved “slots” at various printers at least a year in advance. We didn’t know the final margin on any book until around a year before it was printed, but we made educated estimates of margins long before that (and those estimates factored in things like rising paper costs). In my time on D&D, these initial estimates significantly deviated from the final margins just once, and that was a dice product.

Paper was often purchased well in advance, but not necessarily earmarked to a particular product at the time of purchase; D&D books all use the same paper stock. Sourcing paper and managing production capacity alongside the R&D and reprint schedules is really, really complicated. Again, the people who managed that were very good.

As for the playtest, we had target release dates and working schedules for the three core books in 2021. We even had target page counts and proposed Tables of Contents. We built a full year of playtesting into the PHB’s schedule, and we had a detailed plan for how the playtest would roll out and how/when we would collect and implement feedback. By that time, all player-facing content underwent public playtesting so we had a good handle on the process. It’s not unlike how James Gunn knew in March of 2022 that his Superman movie would hit theaters in July of 2025 even though he hadn’t finished its script yet, much less conducted test screenings and reshoots; all of that was built into the schedule.

So to be clear:

1. You started planning for the new PHB in late 2020.
2. You built a four year product plan covering 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, and parts of 2025. All this back in 2020. It was built with such precision that you had printer slots covered and were buying paper stock.
3. The playtest started in 2022.

You specifically cite a 1 year testing plan for the PHB. Were there no plans to test the DMG or the MM? Why did the PHB test run three months over that one year schedule?

Were there no D&D movie tie ins or products supporting Baldur's Gate 3 because you had set the plan in stone ahead of time?

Was the $60 price increase rolled out in 2023 part of your plan?

What about the OGL update? Was that included in the plan when you put it all together in 2020?

I get where you're trying to go with the movie analogy, but a product line is an incredibly different beast than a movie launch. It's wild to me that you planned out all of those years so far ahead of time, from the playtest period, to the final release date, to the OGL.

 

[mearls]

Ray, given the above, do you have any insight as to the Starter Set situation? I.e., why a new starter set was released 2 years before the new rules, and yet another one planned for release a year after the new rules, rather than having one primed and ready to release with the new rules?

Great question! I'd love to hear the thinking behind that decision.

 

[billd91]

So to be clear:

1. You started planning for the new PHB in late 2020.
2. You built a four year product plan covering 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, and parts of 2025. All this back in 2020. It was built with such precision that you had printer slots covered and were buying paper stock.
3. The playtest started in 2022.

You specifically cite a 1 year testing plan for the PHB. Were there no plans to test the DMG or the MM? Why did the PHB test run three months over that one year schedule?

Were there no D&D movie tie ins or products supporting Baldur's Gate 3 because you had set the plan in stone ahead of time?

Was the $60 price increase rolled out in 2023 part of your plan?

What about the OGL update? Was that included in the plan when you put it all together in 2020?

I get where you're trying to go with the movie analogy, but a product line is an incredibly different beast than a movie launch. It's wild to me that you planned out all of those years so far ahead of time, from the playtest period, to the final release date, to the OGL.

Um, is there a bit of hostility you’d like to disclose, Mike? You’re kind of ratcheting up some intensity, don’t you think?

 

[Spellslinging Sellsword]

If the planning started 4 years ago, then it really is mind boggling that they failed to execute a 50th anniversary release during the 50th year.

 

[mearls]

Um, is there a bit of hostility you’d like to disclose, Mike? You’re kind of ratcheting up some intensity, don’t you think?

No hostility intended at all! I am genuinely curious to hear the answers. My experience in game dev is that it is very rare to have a plan detailed to the point that you have print slots and paper ready to go two years ahead of time, especially when you haven't yet launched the playtest for a product.

 

[dave2008]

So to be clear:

1. You started planning for the new PHB in late 2020.
2. You built a four year product plan covering 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, and parts of 2025. All this back in 2020. It was built with such precision that you had printer slots covered and were buying paper stock.
3. The playtest started in 2022.

You specifically cite a 1 year testing plan for the PHB. Were there no plans to test the DMG or the MM? Why did the PHB test run three months over that one year schedule?

Were there no D&D movie tie ins or products supporting Baldur's Gate 3 because you had set the plan in stone ahead of time?

Was the $60 price increase rolled out in 2023 part of your plan?

What about the OGL update? Was that included in the plan when you put it all together in 2020?

I get where you're trying to go with the movie analogy, but a product line is an incredibly different beast than a movie launch. It's wild to me that you planned out all of those years so far ahead of time, from the playtest period, to the final release date, to the OGL.

I think you are reading into the "plan" to much. Just because you have a plan doesn't mean everything is set in stone. I will liken it to a field I know very well: building construction (I am an architect).

In a traditional design-bid-build scenario the architect develops an estimate of construction for the client. We are not contactors, we don't get bids, and the project is not fully designed when we start the process of estimating. However, through analysis of past projects, market trends, and reaching out to reliable contractors we have relationships with we can develop a very good budget estimate early in the design. The budget estimate can then guide the design. As the design evolves and the details worked out we get more accurate estimates. The process typical cycles through 3-4 times:

1. Programming: develop the basic scope and budget of the project. 10,000 sf and $2,000,000)
2. Schematic: develop the basic design of the project and verify the budget (11,500 sf & $2,400,000)
3. Design Development: review and design all major systems and components and verify the budget (10,500 sf & $2,100,000)
4. Construction Documents: final details and specifications for a contractor to bid and finalize the budget (10,200 sf $2,100,000)
5. Bidding: Contract bid the documents and guarantees a cost of construction (10,200 sf & $1,995,000)

Step one can easily be 1 year or 2 before we get to step 5. However, historically our firm has been able to be within 2% of the cost/sf from programming to bid award. There are ups and downs in the process, and changes made along the way, but with a good plan you can account for a lot of variables and it sets a target you design to.

Perhaps I am wrong, but something similar is what I imagined when @WinningerR was discussing the 4 year product plan.

 

[bedir than]

If the planning started 4 years ago, then it really is mind boggling that they failed to execute a 50th anniversary release during the 50th year.

Pandemic delays, note all of the years included include the pandemic
Printers shuttering
OGL crisis/own goal
eOne purchase and failure
Goldner's death to cancer, an interim CEO for Hasbro and then Cocks' promotion from out of WotC
The waves of layoffs that started during the playtest (that would eventually include the two particulars in this thread)

All lot went wrong at Hasbro while WotC was booming, plus some things went wrong at WotC