The 5 'Tiers' of TTRPG Publishing

Cannibal Halfling Gaming published an interesting article recently in which they divided tabletop roleplaying game publishers into five tiers, based on annual revenue. Here were their categories, but you should check out the article for a deeper dive.

~$500 million annual: D&D
~$50 million annual: Paizo
~$5 million annual: Steve Jackson Games
~$500K annual: Evil Hat Productions
~Everyone else (up to $100K)

They chose one example publisher per tier; they didn't list every TTRPG publisher. That's why your favourite publisher is not on that list of 4 companies. But feel free to add to the list!

Also, we talked about it in last week's episode of Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG Talk, for those who prefer to absorb their news in video format!

 

[LegendaryGames]

Well the tiers are arbitrarily chosen. They could have divided it in other ways. But it would be fascinating to compile a list of all companies and see how many are in each category.

FWIW, for a couple of years during the pandemic Legendary Games was juuuuust short of that $500K annual "Evil Hat" tier. The last couple of years have been more like half that.

 

[LegendaryGames]

That’s pretty standard for mid and low tier publishers. There are exceptions, of course, but it’s certainly our model, and the model of many of our fellow smaller publishers.

Definitely. We also adopted Morrus' idea of a "quick-starter" - crowdfunding as a fast-turnaround project rather than a monumental build-up with lots of stretch goals. We still do some of those now and then, but most of our crowdfunding is done with projects when they are 100% finished or right on the cusp of it. There's a sweet spot where it makes sense to do an offset print run, and for projects that fall short of that amount, it's POD and let it go.

 

[LegendaryGames]

I'm relatively new to the space - somewhere around 5 years, but one of the interesting things I noticed with KP - their older stuff is Pathfinder. (Maybe during the years when PF seem ascendent compared to D&D?) And they recently had a customer survey where they asked if people would be interested in Daggerheart modules from KP. At the same time they have ToV (which I love) and continue to support with the advantage that it is broadly compatible with D&D (to the level where their Northlands Kickstarter was released in both a D&D and ToV edition - and I expect the only real difference will be the subclass section).

In the mid-to-low tier - how many people are doing their own thing vs making modules for others? (Or a mix - as in the case of KP) I wonder if there would be an easy way to quantify. Also, how many are making for multiple systems? Like Legendary does a lot of Kickstarters that are 5e & PF1e. I've seen more and more people on RPGdrivethru who are making for both D&D and Black Flag (ToV's SRD-eqiv). Are they also making for A5e? And so on...it's a fascinating industry where some people (Evil Hat, I think) are licensing out their engines. Others are mostly making modules/supplements for someone else's game. And some are making their own thing. (Or all of the above)

Legendary Games started out doing Pathfinder stuff in 2011 but since 5E came out has always approached publishing from a multi-system perspective. We've done tons of 5E stuff but also added Starfinder, Pathfinder 2E, Tales of the Valiant (we even did one ToV-only Backerkit project last year), LevelUp, and even Savage Worlds, SWADE, and Shadow of the Demon Lord. We've been working on our own Corefinder game for some years, a streamlined and updated rewrite of PF1, but it's always kind of floated on the back burner while we keep the lights on with one new project after another.

The tilt of which systems are most popular has shifted over time. We still sell a lot of PF1 stuff, probably more than most companies do, because we built that following and they've stayed with us. It would surprise no one that 5E has sold better than other systems, but the ongoing fragmentation of the market has made things harder. Sure, it helps us that we've already got that solid history of doing multiple systems, but it also makes it harder to hit targets for offset print runs if you get a Kickstarter with (just to make up arbitrary numbers) 200 backers each for four different games vs. 800 backers for one game. That leaves you with lower-margin POD. Doing our own game would add to the problem in its own way, though the potential benefits are there as well for a self-reinforcing ecosystem.

Being diversified does buffer your exposure when one game falls out of favor, and it helps you remonetize existing assets like art and maps if you release them for multiple systems, but it also adds to the churn of getting things done and out the door.

 

[djotaku]

Legendary Games started out doing Pathfinder stuff in 2011 but since 5E came out has always approached publishing from a multi-system perspective. We've done tons of 5E stuff but also added Starfinder, Pathfinder 2E, Tales of the Valiant (we even did one ToV-only Backerkit project last year), LevelUp, and even Savage Worlds, SWADE, and Shadow of the Demon Lord. We've been working on our own Corefinder game for some years, a streamlined and updated rewrite of PF1, but it's always kind of floated on the back burner while we keep the lights on with one new project after another.

The tilt of which systems are most popular has shifted over time. We still sell a lot of PF1 stuff, probably more than most companies do, because we built that following and they've stayed with us. It would surprise no one that 5E has sold better than other systems, but the ongoing fragmentation of the market has made things harder. Sure, it helps us that we've already got that solid history of doing multiple systems, but it also makes it harder to hit targets for offset print runs if you get a Kickstarter with (just to make up arbitrary numbers) 200 backers each for four different games vs. 800 backers for one game. That leaves you with lower-margin POD. Doing our own game would add to the problem in its own way, though the potential benefits are there as well for a self-reinforcing ecosystem.

Being diversified does buffer your exposure when one game falls out of favor, and it helps you remonetize existing assets like art and maps if you release them for multiple systems, but it also adds to the churn of getting things done and out the door.

Thanks for replying; It was great to hear your publisher perspective. I backed your Black Flag Asian and Hispanic monsters a few years ago. Used them in a game - loved them. Loved that you had FoundryVTT support.

 

[Von Ether]

Fair enough, but to each their own. I like hexcrawls, and subsystems, and I'm fine with complexity if it adds depth. I see abstraction as a thing I have to do sometimes for practical play, not a goal.

I don't equate complexity with Sim, more with consistency, ala Champions was not realistic but it's complexity supported it's internal philosophy and comic book "physics."

Also, Kriegsspiel is knows that in later years many of Prussian referees eventually skipping detailed rules and using their own experiences and institutional knowledge to make their own calls.

From my perspective, rules are the scaffolding that supports a gamer's personal expectations for verisimilitude/suspension of disbelief. Also one of the main reasons chit/hex wargames have become more niche is that computers now can handle complex rules in the background.

 

[LordEntrails]

What do these tiers mean for the community? Sure, they matter to publishers in the business, but to gamers? Do I care? Is there a noticeable impact if I'm all in on a publisher that is tier 2 or tier 4?

 

[Morrus]

Do I care?

We can’t answer that for you.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What do these tiers mean for the community? Sure, they matter to publishers in the business, but to gamers? Do I care? Is there a noticeable impact if I'm all in on a publisher that is tier 2 or tier 4?

I know I generally trust private companies over publicly traded to care about the quality of their product more.

 

[...m...]

I feel like you've missed the news for the last 15 years. D&D is MASSIVE now. And has been for a long time.

...i'm curious what portion of that is games versus media + merchandise; similar to when marvel grew into an 800-pound gorilla on the entertainment landscape but the actual comics remained just a little blip in their ledger book...

 

[...m...]

Definitely. We also adopted Morrus' idea of a "quick-starter" - crowdfunding as a fast-turnaround project rather than a monumental build-up with lots of stretch goals. We still do some of those now and then, but most of our crowdfunding is done with projects when they are 100% finished or right on the cusp of it. There's a sweet spot where it makes sense to do an offset print run, and for projects that fall short of that amount, it's POD and let it go.

...yeah, at this point i get the sense that you've just embraced crowdfunding as your distribution model, rather than as a development seed; some other publishers still frame their initiatives toward the latter despite actual revenues really supporting the former...