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!

 

[Jester David]

Um, no.

Me not buying an AP will not cancel out someone else's purchase. That purchase will appear on the distributor's ledger and on Hasbro's.

No. As I explained, the costs of making that other book mean they need to sell significant copies of both to make the same profit. See below.

It is also more profitable to sell two books that sell will 25,000 copies than one book that sells 25,000.

However, if they only release one, they might sell more copies of the first book. D&D has one big audience and not everyone buys every book released every month or other month. One purchase comes at the expense of another. So if you can sell 50,000 copies of two books, that means you might be able to sell 30,000 or even 40,000 copies of one. And that IS more profitable.

Or, and here's the thing, delay the second book by 6 months and have both sell 30-40,000 copies. This ends up with you having the most money. Oh, and because releases are spaced out, the edition lasts longer and the hobby is more stable. And you avoid edition bloat that causes sales to flag. And you avoid the intimidation factor that costs sales (see later in this post). Spacing out releases is all gravy.

Releasing two competing products *only* works if there's no overlap between the two audiences. Like releasing an action movie and romcom on the same weekend. If D&D had two so incompatible segments of their audience, they've have big problems. (And, arguably, this is what they're doing by releasing the board game and minis along with the RPG products.)

Which one do you think will sell more copies? PotA or a Forgotten Realms campaign setting book?

PotA.
Because no one is going to buy a turd of a Forgotten Realms campaign setting rushed out the door in two months.

PotA is being written by a licenced publisher. Because the D&D team is not large enough to have a book of that size (or the planned two books) ready for March so closely after finishing the DMG and other core books. So why expect them to be able to finish an even larger book that has to be more carefully written and require even more research and feedback?

A FRCS is going to take some time. Talking about it like it's a possibility now is pure fantasy.

Up front the cost is less. That is a fact.

Up front cost only matters to small publishers who have to worry about paying bills while waiting for sales profits to come in. It's not a factor to WotC who has enough disposable capital to order large print runs and let them pay off over time.

And who is to say WotC will make 5 60 pages books? Remember, your argument making too making too many books is bad.

I went with five 64-page books because that's the same content as one 320-page rulebook. 64 x 5 = 320. So releasing five 64-page accessories takes roughly the same amount of work and manpower as writing a single 320-page book. So the production costs for WotC are the same. Which makes comparing the price difference to consumers ($50 vs $125) more dramatic.

Paizo has noted that sales of the first volume in an AP sell best, and later volumes go down in sales. They're doing the same work for less and less money. If they printed APs as a single volume it would have the same production requirements but potentially sell better than the later volumes, leading to higher overall profit.

We should forget that WotC doesn't sell PDFs and they probably sell more physical unites than Paizo. So they print more and that means economy of scale, so cheaper products for customers.

If this was true, wouldn't the D&D books be cheaper than Paizo's books of the same size?

WotC sells far more books for many reasons, not just PDFs. It's audience is just much larger. However, Paizo sells directly. Selling a book from their e-store makes them 3x as much money per copy. And Paizo makes far, far more money per copy from PDFs of adventures and the like, and comparable amounts for PDFs. So they're making money multiple ways that offset the lower sales.

It also means a lot of people won't buy them cause they cost too much. It is just fact. Not everyone can shell out 50$ or save that sum up.

A one-time $50 fee for a 320-page book is far easier to shell out for than $25 for a 64-page book five times. Or even three times.
Yeah, some smaller price point items might be nice. But I'd much rather get more bang for my buck.

Also, that whole intimidating shelve is a argument from forums. It is just as valid as an argument saying that empty shelves will mean games won't buy books cause they feel the edition is not supported. They might be even more numerous than the "intimidated ones".

Do you have any research to back that up?

The intimidation factor of choice has been well researched for academic papers. People are a tenth as likely to buy when confronted by too many choices.

 

[Jester David]

Did they have any adventures involving the Abyssal plague? I was curious at the time what the deal was, but thought it was all novel tie-ins and stuff like that. I saw absolutely nothing, outside a few references about the Abyssal plague in Monster Vault 2, that indicated that it had anything to do with, well, anything, really.

The Abyssal Plague was one of their first attempts at having a seasonal story. At the time I thought the lack of adventures was kind of a mistake. It looks like they thought so too.

 

[Kramodlog]

Yeah, but if they don't continue to produce adventures, they'll never be able to improve their rep.

(Of course, the other part of that is to make sure they produce good adventures.)

I agree, but they are jumping off a cliff without a second parachute in case the first one isn't working. I mean they could have made a safe product like the a FR campaign setting book while still doing the APs. Edge their bets while they are getting better at APs and getting a better rep. Right now they are just charging head first against Paizo who has much more experience and a better reputation. Very risky.

 

[Kramodlog]

Did they have any adventures involving the Abyssal plague? I was curious at the time what the deal was, but thought it was all novel tie-ins and stuff like that. I saw absolutely nothing, outside a few references about the Abyssal plague in Monster Vault 2, that indicated that it had anything to do with, well, anything, really.

The Encounters season at the time focused on The Elder Elemental Eye. WotC made fortune cards called Spiral of Tharizdun. http://www.amazon.com/Fortune-Cards-Spiral-Tharizdun/dp/B007BQNSN2

 

[Kramodlog]

It's worth noting that Wizards is not actually writing these adventures, and that anyone with enough investment in the history of the game to know about Wizards' past failings is also going to know that. I apologize if that sounds dismissive; it's not my intention to suggest you don't know what you're talking about. I'm just trying to make a point. I'm sure we both know and respect some of the names behind Sasquatch just like we both know and respect some of the names behind Kobold Press. I feel like Wizards has recognized their shortcomings and made a good faith effort to overcome them.

They still propose the stories, edite the adventures and publish them. They have WotC stamp all over them. Heck, all the guys at Sasquatch Games are ex-WotC employees. At Kobold Games, it was ex-WotC employees with good rep that screwed up Tiamat.

I really don't want to be in the position of defending Wizards on this because I do feel that they are hiding behind FR and it pains me greatly to see lore from other established settings sucked into FR without even the barest attempt at justification beyond, "The forces of Elemental Evil tried to invade Oerth and failed, so now they're giving Toril a try." That's not an acknowledgement of the D&D multiverse; that's what we call not having the strength of your convictions.

It certainly boost confidence in WotC.

What Wizards is doing is not recycling adventures. They are recycling /themes/, which is exactly what you do when you have a strong brand like D&D.

Or when you do not know what to do anymore. Look at Hollywood and all the remakes.

You wouldn't find it unusual for a future iteration of the Transformers franchise to have a story involving the All-Spark or energon, and you wouldn't find it unusual for an X-Files reboot to involve black oil or feature a mysterious power player who chain smokes cigarettes. I may take issue with how they are doing it, but what they are doing makes good sense.

Actually, a TV series is the medium like the is the medium. The X-Files is the adventure, the theme if you prefere. Doing a X-Files reboot only shows how much they can't innovate and just recycle stuff.

 

[aramis erak]

How about, oh, Basic D&D?
You had levels 1-3 from 1977 to 1981, then 4-14 until '83, 26-36 in '84, and 36+ in 1985. Some revisions in 1991 and that lasted until Basic ended in 2000 with 3e. Two or three rules accessories for 23 years, with only minor revisions to the ruleset. Almost everything released for Basic was either an adventure or related to the world of Mystara.

You've some major fallacy and several errors packed in there.

Holmes' Basic covers 1-3, was available in 1977, but was never intended to stand alone - it was supposed to be lead-in to AD&D, but it was really a synthesis of the Original D&D with supplements, and those continued to be available new-in-print through 1981. AD&D PHB was 1978. Sadly, Dr. Holmes' edition was left to stand alone.

1981 we get Moldvay's Basic Set - primarily covering levels 1-3, but including levels 4&5 in the DM section.
1982 we get Cook's Expert Set - Levels 4-14.

To this point, Mystara isn't a thing. Yes, there's the Grand Duchy of Karameikos - at 6 miles per hex - but it's not the same Karameikos as in the Mystaran GAZ line. Kind of a proto-mystara.

1983 We get the first Mentzer set
May 1983 Basic 1-3
July 1983 Expert 4-14 - we get the first mystarran map here.
April 1984 Companion 15-25
June 1985 Master 26-36
June 1986 Immortal i1-i36

1988 sees the first actual Mystara centered products - Elves of Alfheim, Dwarves of Rockhome. Really, tho', Mystarra is already 5 years old, as the map and places in the Mentzer Expert map are simply being detailed.

 

[Kramodlog]

No.

Um, yes. You need to re-read what the other guy wrote. Me not buying a product will not cancel out the purchase someone else made. WotC still gets the money from the purchase. If I were to seal a book they made, that would cost them. But than again theft is sometimes calculated in the prices right off the bat.

However, if they only release one, they might sell more copies of the first book. D&D has one big audience and not everyone buys every book released every month or other month. One purchase comes at the expense of another. So if you can sell 50,000 copies of two books, that means you might be able to sell 30,000 or even 40,000 copies of one. And that IS more profitable.

Yes, that argument as been made multiple times. But it is a guess. They could just as well sell 50k copies of two books. Heck, making less books might mean they sell less of them because people will lose interest in the edition.

Releasing two competing products *only* works if there's no overlap between the two audiences. Like releasing an action movie and romcom on the same weekend. If D&D had two so incompatible segments of their audience, they've have big problems. (And, arguably, this is what they're doing by releasing the board game and minis along with the RPG products.)

Or releasing one action flick one weekend and another the other or a month later. Which is pretty much what Hollywood is doing, to take our example. No one is saying WotC needs to release two products the same week. Heck, that was there plan until they cancelled the Adventurer's Handbook! Double heck, they are releasing the adventure, the boardgame and a MMO at the same. They are dividing their audience as we speak! LoL!

PotA.
Because no one is going to buy a turd of a Forgotten Realms campaign setting rushed out the door in two months.

Duh! Wow, that is quite the strawman. And no I'm not dodging, just saying this argument is seriously in no relations to what I said. Of course, they need to develop the book over a longer period. Duh! What I said is that if they made a FR setting a priority instead of PotA, the FR setting that would be release in April would sell more than PotA. Of course, they can't make it now. They would have needed working on it a year or two ago.

Seriously. That was some mental gymnastic to contradict me and say PotA would sell more books.

I tell, you kids these days.

PotA is being written by a licenced publisher.

All exployees of WotC.

Because the D&D team is not large enough to have a book of that size (or the planned two books) ready for March so closely after finishing the DMG and other core books.

Yeah, I know.

So why expect them to be able to finish an even larger book that has to be more carefully written and require even more research and feedback?

Because they would have started working on it like a year or two ago.

Up front cost only matters to small publishers

I was talking of the cost to customer. If a book cost 25$ it cost less than 50$. It is a simple fact. That 25$ makes it more affortable for more people. Also a simple fact.

I went with five 64-page books because that's the same content as one 320-page rulebook.

Yes, I understand that, but I only said one 60 pages book. It would be fun if you debated what I actually said.

And the added value of a 60 page book is less bloat. Something people seem to really care about.

Paizo has noted that sales of the first volume in an AP sell best, and later volumes go down in sales. They're doing the same work for less and less money. If they printed APs as a single volume it would have the same production requirements but potentially sell better than the later volumes, leading to higher overall profit.

Better go tell them that. It seems they think otherwise.

If this was true, wouldn't the D&D books be cheaper than Paizo's books of the same size?

Or they printed less than Paizo, knowing they weren't as popular. Or they it justa cash grab. You know, starve fans, print a book they want, over charge them, go into dormency again. A sort of boom and bust model.

WotC sells far more books for many reasons, not just PDFs.

Considering they do not sell PDFs of this edition, I would say they sell less than Paizo's current edition.

A one-time $50 fee for a 320-page book is far easier to shell out for than $25 for a 64-page book five times. Or even three times.

Hey look, that argument I didn't make. You are arguing with yourself.

People are a tenth as likely to buy when confronted by too many choices.

You'd have a point if there were choices, but there are no choices. It is AP or screw you.

 

[delericho]

I agree, but they are jumping off a cliff without a second parachute in case the first one isn't working.

Actually, we don't know that. All we know is what they have confirmed - we won't know if they have a second parachute until the first fails to deploy.

 

[Jester David]

All employees of WotC.

Princes of the Apocalypse was written and edited (and likely laid out and more) by Sasquatch games, which is an independent company from WotC. They are not employees, they are hired help.
WotC is willing to trust a licenced company to make an adventure. They're very unlikely to trust one with their big money making campaign setting.

Double heck, they are releasing the adventure, the boardgame and a MMO at the same. They are dividing their audience as we speak! LoL!

Different audiences (kinda). There's overlap but people who play the MMO and board game might not play the TTRPG. They're not focusing on a single group of people, which is problematic.

You'd have a point if there were choices, but there are no choices. It is AP or screw you.

It is AP for now. More stuff will be coming, almost certainly in August for GenCon. That we don't know what is is doesn't change that it's coming.

WotC isn't going to risk missing the con. Even when 5e wasn't ready they had product for the con.

 

[delericho]

WotC either rubber stamped it or approved it after consideration. Either way, WotC deserves a share in being criticized for any bad APs they publish.

Agreed. The books have the shiny new D&D logo on them and are published by Wizards of the Coast. It doesn't matter whether their failings (if any) were caused by WotC or their licensee; it's WotC who would get the blame.

(And, conversely, it's WotC who will get much of the credit should they produce a new classic somewhere along the line. It does cut both ways.)