D&D 5E 5E: Is it possible?

[Morrus]

There's certainly no way to please all of the people all of the time. You can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, or - as is likely here - aim at pleasing as many people as possible as much of the time as possible.

 

[Sunseeker]

Yet, you're suggesting they go back to the old 4E method.

That worked wonders the first time they did it.

I'm suggesting they market to an audience with an interest in buying new WOTC prodcuts on a regular basis. Does someone who hasn't bought a WOTC product in 20 years, and only buys spin-offs of the only WOTC product they own, sound like someone who is going to buy new products from WOTC?

Because that sounds like someone who's going to go to a used-car lot and buy an 88' VW Bug and complain that the 2002 VW Beetle is "too girly".

 

[DMKastmaria]

I'm pretty sure that's what I said.

Didn't say it wasn't. You didn't say it very clearly, though, so I reiterated.

This is a guess.

No. I've spoken with "numerous" such folk. I'm not guessing. You may accuse me, or them, of lying, if you wish.

Again...not WOTC or D&D titles.

Do I really have to spell out the obvious, here? Ok.

I go by what I hear here, I think if I actively posted on more than one RPG forum, I would be driven mad. But the thing is, your statement there applies to WOTC marketing too, which was my whole point way back at the beginning.

That's an awefully small sampling, for the purposes of assessment. Especially since there are only a very small number of OSR folk, who post here at all. And you can bet that WotC keeps a much better eye than that, on all aspects of the market.

If WOTC is altering their new edition to care to outspoken grogs who haven't purchased new WOTC, D&D material in 20-30 years, then they too are going to miss a lot. There are lots of players, who like you say, are interested in multiple editions, multiple games, and aren't outspoken at all. WOTC is going to miss a lot if they are designing DDN with the goal of drawing in people who have demonstrated no interest in their product.

Well, the whole point of 5e is to interest folks not currently buying their product. Otherwise, they would be focusing on 4e.

Sure, I'm not saying they're not buying ANYTHING at all ever, and they're probably one of the better markets when it comes discretionary income as you say. I'm just focusing on how readily they are buying WOTC products.

Yeah, but that's not the point. The point is, how readily they would buy WotC products that interested them. Many would. I don't see a lot of WotC hate on OSR blogs. The company has lost a lot of respect, among former customers, but many would happily buy stuff from WotC.

If, that is, the company was putting out material they wanted.

 

[P1NBACK]

That's my point, you're not buying WOTC products, you're buying remakes, clones, spin-offs of products you already bought. This evidence would suggest that the only way WOTC could get your money, would be to make a remake, clone, or spin-off of a product they already made.

That's what new editions are: remakes and spin-offs.

Well, they were until 4E was introduced. And, guess how that turned out?

People don't necessarily want an entirely new game like 4E was. They want a game that refines and enhances a game they know.

If Ford gets the rights to build a Hyundai, and paints it red, is it a new car?
No.

You're right. All cars, ever are "remakes" of the Model T.

Clearly, you haven't played some of the new games coming out based off older version of D&D. Adventurer Conqueror King is to B/X what 3E was to 2E. It's a whole new game. Does it build upon some existing frameworks? Of course. That's what we want. But, is it simply a new "coat of paint"? No.

Same with Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG. That game uses the 3.x unified mechanic, but it's as new a game as any.

It's ok to be ignorant about it. I don't expect people to buy, read and play all of these games. I just would prefer it if those people also didn't blow smoke about them.

It's the level of marketing to people who have for, several decades fewlt WOTC has nothing worth buying. That's a lot of history.

I think the people you are speaking of are much smaller numbers than you realize. Read some OSR blogs / forums and you'll see people interested and hyped about 5E... same as everywhere else. You'll also see some people disillusioned and uninterested... same as everywhere else.

But, portraying all people who play older editions as these sort of whacked out, non-consumers because they didn't buy 4E, is just wrong. It's entirely possible they didn't buy 4E because 4E just wasn't D&D to them.

If 5E is, perhaps you have some new customers.

 

[Sunseeker]

Yeah, but that's not the point. The point is, how readily they would buy WotC products that interested them. Many would. I don't see a lot of WotC hate on OSR blogs. The company has lost a lot of respect, among former customers, but many would happily buy stuff from WotC.

If, that is, the company was putting out material they wanted.

That interest is incredibly narrow, is my point. IMO, people take what WOTC does far too personally. My LGS refuses to carry WOTC products until he get a "personal written letter of apology" for some perceived slight.

If 5e isn't the edition for me, it's not a personal attack. It seems to me a great many people who don't buy new products, do so because they feel the latest edition of D&D was explicitly designed to alienate them. That just strikes me as a little absurd.

 

[P1NBACK]

If 5e isn't the edition for me, it's not a personal attack. It seems to me a great many people who don't buy new products, do so because they feel the latest edition of D&D was explicitly designed to alienate them. That just strikes me as a little absurd.

Sure. But, it's also not a personal attack against WotC just because you don't buy their next edition.

It just means they haven't created a product that spoke to the large customer base they have.

You act like people don't buy WotC because it's WotC. Maybe people haven't been buying WotC because their products weren't that good.

 

[Sunseeker]

That's what new editions are: remakes and spin-offs.

Well, they were until 4E was introduced. And, guess how that turned out?

People don't necessarily want an entirely new game like 4E was. They want a game that refines and enhances a game they know.

I shouldn't have to point out the obvious errors in your statements here.
A: 4e was not universally hated, even by older editioners.
B: How it turned out is subject to some intpretation due to the fact that we have almost no information on how it turned out. You thinking it was bad does not make it bad.
C: "don't necessarily" isn't saying anything very solidly. A lot of people want a lot of different things. I didn't like Warhammer Dawn of War. Dawn of War II totally changed the style of the game...I didn't like it either. Dawn of War III however looks promising. I don't think you were chosen to speak for the masses, and if this forum is any indication, there is a great deal of diversity among what the various players of D&D enjoy and want to see and are willing to purchase.

You're right. All cars, ever are "remakes" of the Model T.

Please, if you're going to play a reducto ad infinitum, don't even reply. I can play with Straw Men all day long on the various politics forums I do to.

Clearly, you haven't played some of the new games coming out based off older version of D&D. Adventurer Conqueror King is to B/X what 3E was to 2E. It's a whole new game. Does it build upon some existing frameworks? Of course. That's what we want. But, is it simply a new "coat of paint"? No.

Because I have no interest in those games. Their design does not appeal to me(I did read up on ACK). I'm OK with that. If you're not willing to buy outside of a limited niche, I don't have an issue with that. But a large company like WOTC cannot market to a niche of a gaming niche and expect to succeed.

It's ok to be ignorant about it. I don't expect people to buy, read and play all of these games. I just would prefer it if those people also didn't blow smoke about them.

So, even though you've clearly stated, as I did, that these are spin-offs, remakes, or clones, they're...not?

I think the people you are speaking of are much smaller numbers than you realize. Read some OSR blogs / forums and you'll see people interested and hyped about 5E... same as everywhere else. You'll also see some people disillusioned and uninterested... same as everywhere else.

But, portraying all people who play older editions as these sort of whacked out, non-consumers because they didn't buy 4E, is just wrong. It's entirely possible they didn't buy 4E because 4E just wasn't D&D to them.

If 5E is, perhaps you have some new customers.

Since I continually reference "20 years" that would include 3e. If you bought and enjoyed the previous edition you are not in the group so far gone from the modern marketplace that I'm referencing. If your last edition was 2nd, well, yeah, that puts you pretty out of touch.

And to be fair, my argument applies to people who would only by a 4e expansion, or a 3e expansion. If anyone's desired look for 5e is to essentially be a redeco of their favored edition, I think they're pretty out of touch with it too. They are a niche of a niche, and should not be marketed to.

 

[DMKastmaria]

If 5e isn't the edition for me, it's not a personal attack. It seems to me a great many people who don't buy new products, do so because they feel the latest edition of D&D was explicitly designed to alienate them. That just strikes me as a little absurd.

Your last two sentences strike me as laughably arrogant. Most of us buy and play the games we like. But, at least I know where you're coming from now.

 

[P1NBACK]

...don't even reply...

I won't. Cheers.

 

[DMKastmaria]

So, even though you've clearly stated, as I did, that these are spin-offs, remakes, or clones, they're...not?

Just a quick point. Clones and near clones make up a rather small percentage, of the total for-pay OSR products available. 10%, perhaps, if you count every little homebrewed ruleset on Lulu, that most people have never even heard of.

edit: A year ago, I stopped counting the number of non-clone releases. They were at 200+, then.

Since I continually reference "20 years" that would include 3e. If you bought and enjoyed the previous edition you are not in the group so far gone from the modern marketplace that I'm referencing. If your last edition was 2nd, well, yeah, that puts you pretty out of touch.

A large number of OSR folk have experience with newer editions. I ran 3.x for seven years.

But, even given that there's a segment of "old schoolers" who will not, under any circumstances buy a WotC product, so what?

There's a segment of "Old Schoolers" who won't buy retro-clones! There's a segment of "Old Schoolers" who won't purchase a modern module, or setting book, that's designed for OSRIC, or LL, etc!

And there's OSR bloggers who posted pictures of their shiny new Pathfinder Starter Box Set!

So, you seem to be arguing that because there's a group of people "so far gone from the modern marketplace" that they've never purchased a WotC product, that the company shouldn't attempt to market to the OSR, at all.


That's the part of your argument, that makes no sense. And frankly, with no insult intended, I submit to you that you're just not familiar enough with the OSR to make a cogent argument, about what that market might or might not do.

Now, if you want to argue that the OSR is too small, to risk alienating d20 gamers for, then I would agree.