7 Years of D&D Stories? And a "Big Reveal" Coming?

When asked what he was working on, WotC's Chris Perkins revealed a couple of juicy tidbits. They're not much, but they're certainly tantalizing. Initially, he said that "Our marketing team has a big reveal in the works", and followed that up separately with "Right now I'm working on the next seven years of D&D stories". What all that might mean is anybody's guess, but it sounds like there are plans for D&D stretching into the foreseeable future! Thanks to Barantor for the scoop!

 

[Doc_Klueless]

Do they care about the products we want? The minimal release schedule and the exclusive focus on APs seems to indicate that they do not.

They don't care to produce products that YOU want. The jury is still out if minimal release schedule and an exclusive focus on APs is what the majority of players want. It's just too early to tell.

For example, the minimal release schedule is something that I want and an exclusive focus on APs is a non-issue for me. So from my perspective, they are taking into account what I want.

We cancel each other out, more or less.

 

[Irennan]

Well, there's this: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...cts-You-Would-Like-to-See-WotC-Publish-For-5E

And yes, it's ''just a poll on the internet'' and it is of relative value, but it shouldn't be outright dismissed or ignored just because of that.

 

[Queer Venger]

Do they care about the products we want? The minimal release schedule and the exclusive focus on APs seems to indicate that they do not.

Hmmm, unless Im mistaken, having slower/fewer product releases is exactly what we asked for in the D&D Next playtest. I think Wizards is giving us exactly what we want, so how can you fault them?

 

[HobbitFan]

Fans asked for less product true.
That doesn't mean that all fans agree with THIS slow of a schedule or the specific form and content of support WOTC is doing now.

 

[Staffan]

Hmmm, unless Im mistaken, having slower/fewer product releases is exactly what we asked for in the D&D Next playtest. I think Wizards is giving us exactly what we want, so how can you fault them?

The problem is that Wizards seem to be bad at doing things by degree. Player material sells well - so let's make every book have lots of new feats, spells, and prestige classes. People loved Tome of Battle - so let's make all classes have kewl powers and per-encounter abilities in 4e. People want fewer books - so let's go from two books per month to one book per quarter.

They're like a TV with a broken volume button - the only way of getting less than top volume from the TV is to press the mute button, and then you don't get any sound at all.

 

[Jester David]

Do they care about the products we want? The minimal release schedule and the exclusive focus on APs seems to indicate that they do not.

They may be less interested in releasing monthly or bi-monthly roleplaying game books, but that doesn't mean they want the few books they do release to be undesired. That makes it more important that they really release the right books and tell the right stories.

Why not? What does Hasbro have to lose? Potentially damaging a brand in an extremely small market segment that honestly doesn't bring in that much money? And what do they have to gain? If they happen to hit it reasonably big, they get a slice of a box office pie that for a single movie would dwarf the entire tabletop industry, plus a perfect opening for making even more off of associated toys. It's the equivalent of buying a cheap lottery ticket for them. If they run the numbers and decide that the (chance of hitting it big) * (projected revenue gain) is greater than (chance of damaging brand) * (reduction in value of damaged brand) then it could easily be a bet they are willing to take. And the projected revenue gain is probably a much larger number than the potential reduction in brand value, meaning that the chance of pulling off doesn't even need to be particularly good for it to be worth trying.

As a gamer and someone who likes D&D, I'd like to think that the D&D game is really worth something, but to the execs Hasbro it might just be an asset on the balance sheet, nothing more and nothing less.

For Hasbro and even WotC this is true. They're not gambling anything worth losing. For the D&D Team - the ones actually doing the gambling and deciding on the focus of the game and products - they're gambling their careers, their reputation, and their hobby.
WotC is unlikely to be forgiving of another failure in D&D land. If 5e doesn't do well, they'll likely retire the RPG and focus on side products related to the brand. If they drop the ball now, Mike Mearls will forever be known as the man who killed D&D, becoming more hated in the hobby than even Lorraine Williams. I'm pretty sure he doesn't want that.

 

[Jester David]

Fans asked for less product true.
That doesn't mean that all fans agree with THIS slow of a schedule or the specific form and content of support WOTC is doing now.

Two thoughts.

1) It's easier to start slow and build than pull back once you start strong.
We're seeing blowback to the slow release schedule now after two years of minimal product (and three years since WotC stopped monthly books). If they tried reducing books because they released too many after starting a faster release schedule there'd be even more revolting from the fans.

2) The schedule we see now might not be the schedule we see this time next year.
People talk of the "slow release schedule" but the fact of the matter is we'll have seen 8 RPG products in 9 months. And if you add the minis, spell cards, and the like we've seen even more. It's only slow in February and when looking ahead beyond March. (But, given when they announcing things, they could have books planned for May and we'd never know.) The D&D was crazy-busy working on the core rulebooks. So crazy-busy that they couldn't write their own launch and follow-up adventures. Now they have time again. So they might increase releases slightly now that they have time to write the books.

 

[JeffB]

:toungeincheek

d&d brand meeting .....

" Here is what we do....

We produce core books using the latest feedback, they sell awesome. We look awesome.

Then we farm out a couple books and card sets a year to others...if the sales suck, we can complain about the 3rd party, and back it up with our core book sales being so good. Find another 3d party. No increase in staff on our end. Costs kept low. We look awesome.

If the farmed out products do well, we still look awesome....

We've got 7 years worth of 2 page outlines for stories ...2 stories a year. That's like what? 28 pages ? It was pretty grueling. But now the bulk of our work is done, and we have time up the wazoo to play all the new Pathfinder adventures coming out every month!

Everyone: golfclap : "

 

[Nellisir]

Hmmm, unless Im mistaken, having slower/fewer product releases is exactly what we asked for in the D&D Next playtest. I think Wizards is giving us exactly what we want, so how can you fault them?

Saying I want to lose weight is not the same as saying I want PB&J for three meals a day for the rest of the year. I've already listed the products I'm interested in, and none of them are APs or incompatible with a slow release schedule.

 

[Kramodlog]

They may be less interested in releasing monthly or bi-monthly roleplaying game books, but that doesn't mean they want the few books they do release to be undesired. That makes it more important that they really release the right books and tell the right stories.

Heh, I sort of agree with that. Judging from the reactions about Realmefying adventures/NPCs who were stables of other settings and reclycling over and over the same adventures, I somehow think a psionic handbook and FR campaign setting would be more desired.