D&D 5E A Board Game style Release Schedule

[Mistwell]

The thing that will help D&D gain customers is to make D&D feel like it's supported and right now it doesn't.

I have said this over and over and I will continue to say this. You can have a healthy schedule that will make customers feel like the game is actually being supported without the glut.

I also find the glut argument to be extremely weak because of the success of Pathfinder. You don't even have to go to that level and still be successful. Communication is a place that Wizards always fails at. They are too worried about rubbing people the wrong way but I find that to be a weak argument as well. You aren't going to please everyone, but you will run off a large piece of your fanbase by keeping them in the dark. I'm sorry but no news is better than news doesn't apply in this situation.

Three core books, three BIG adventures (fourth on the way), spellcards, DM Screen, third parties making many many products for it (Necro: new spell book, new monster book, new big book of adventures, GoodmanL lots of adventurers, etc..). And the game hasn't been out long. Your desire isn't invalid, but it seems to demand a larger quantity than most people seem to want. Because, from where I am sitting, there is a TON of stuff for 5e right now to support it. Way more than I can handle right now. I'd have to be playing 3 games a week, with lots and lots of leisure time for reading and preparation, to possibly keep up with the stuff coming out for 5e right now.

My suspicion is you're not getting the TYPE of books you want, as opposed to the quantity. I think you're getting the quantity right now - in fact I think between official stuff, Necro, and Goodman, you're probably seeing more in these months than what came out for Pathfinder in those same months. My guess is, you want settings and splat books and such, and you're not getting those, so that's what you're upset about. Well...that's a different argument.

 

[BryonD]

Good stuff

You make very good points.

For me, I'm significantly discounting 3PP stuff for the time being. Some form of clarification and support of this would help.

I also like adventures, but adventures alone don't cut it (I don't remotely expect this to be anything more than one guy's opinion there)
Core isn't support. Core is Core.

Spellcards? DM Screen? These are nice, but how much of your "lots and lots of leisure time" are you dedicating to squeezing every drop of value out of your spell cards? They don't enhance the game itself, they just facilitate play.

So I'm left with..... Nothing.

And the fact that I can't buy anything else right now is perfectly cool. It is the fact that, as far as WotC is saying, there is nothing to expect that is the real problem.

Give me an SRD under the OGL and my complaints are gone. I'm suspicious of efforts to do a new OGL, but of it works for the 3PPs it works for me. So an SRD under the current OGL is not at all do or die. But a GSL substitute that misses the point would be a "die".

Yes, I want splats.

At this point in Pathfinder the amount of 3PP stuff out was HUGE. APs were coming monthly BEFORE the core book dropped and other 3.5 Golarian based splats were paving the way as well. And Paizo was trumpeting ALL KINDS of upcoming material. So I think either way you are wrong on that bit.

But the "stuff in the pipeline" (or lack thereof) is far more the concern than what is on shelves.

 

[Jester David]

Yes. I don't want to have to convert. I want better production values than they had a couple decades ago. And I don't want my players to be familiar with the adventure. New adventures of the size and quality of The Lost Mine of Phandelver would be a boon for any game.

And I'd like Ravenloft adventures. And a full deluxe campaign setting. Preferably in a boxed set with a cloth map. For under $100.
It's no more than Planescape received during 2e.

But that doesn't mean it'd be in the best interests of WotC and the long term health of the game/hobby.

I don't see how that makes the least bit of sense. The experience of playing board games is quite different.

Granny Smith versus Golden Delicious.
If the only two points of comparison are a Granny Smith apple and a Golden Delicious apple you will find dissimilarities. But once you add a pear to the mix the two seem a lot more alike. And if you have a pear, apple, and orange the former two seem a lot more alike than the latter.

Comparing just D&D and a hobby board game (in this case Catan but easily any long lived board game with expansions), and the two seem dissimilar. But when you add video games and athletic games to the mix then board and tabletop RPGs have more in common.

You're playing in person, with friends, often at a table, for a variable length of time and the experience is not identical. It's a social activity that everyone is equally participating in, in an active role.
While the actual play might vary (depending on the games) the market and possible product design and release schedule.

And, if we just assume you are right for the sake of argument, how many games came out in 1995?
Who says that D&D will be like Catan and not any of those other games?

What does it matter what other games came out in 1995?
Why does it matter if D&D mimicks Catan. Catan is just an easy example as it's the most well known hobby game, like D&D is the most well known RPG. I could just have easily picked Pandemic or Carcassonne.

 

[Jester David]

Not any more. A lot of video games now are the 'base' and get continuous content updates over longer periods of time, either paid through in game currency, or smaller DLC packs. These are affordable and released on a regular basis, to keep fans engaged, however if you're invested you can also purchase all the more cosmetic stuff.
Crusader Kings 2 has something like 20-30 DLC packs for it. People love it, and the publishers continue to update it.

DLC packs have cut into the expansion market, but there are still expansions. The delivery is just different. And bigger updates still tend to be pricey and have a lot of additional content.
(And there's no real comparison for cosmetic stuff in D&D as you can't pay money for a funny hat or better sword).

In this case, the free online articles are effectively DLC while larger books would be expansion packs.

Pazio gets it, WoTC/Hasbro do not. The "big expansion" model is obsolete. Entire consumer sentiment is moving away from paying full price for slower release of content to faster, "free", and subscription based consumption. I'd be very worried about any business that still relied on that older antique model.

Subscriptions didn't work for WotC so well with DDI. Nor did fast rapid monthly content in the form of e-magazines.

And Pathfinder is very much going down the "big expansion" route with three big tentpole books each years. Their subscriptions are really a residual part of their start as a magazine company and wouldn't work with WotC who doesn't sell directly or operate an e-store.

Let's not forget that D&D is competing against these mediums as well for peoples time. I love D&D 5e but people will eventually follow the path of least resistance.

D&D simply CANNOT compete with video games or similar entertainment on their terms. Video games just have too much of a budget. 4e/DDI showed that: the business models are just too different.
WotC can't release three or four different RPGs each year that everyone plays through once or twice then discards in favour of the next game, like people do with video games. Nor can they release endless DLC in the form of online content, free or otherwise.

I can play through a new video game in a couple weeks, and some DLC in a weekend. A single new subclass in D&D is a year's worth of play to fully appreciate. Video games are more popular, but the hobby board game market is arguably much closer to D&D's market and buisness model.

You yourself have said in another thread that once you start getting high level it's not that easy to convert content.

I said it wasn't effortless. I said that you couldn't do it on the fly. I even said that sometimes it would be hard.
Nowhere did I say it was impossible or not worth doing.

 

[BryonD]

Granny Smith versus Golden Delicious.
If the only two points of comparison are a Granny Smith apple and a Golden Delicious apple you will find dissimilarities. But once you add a pear to the mix the two seem a lot more alike. And if you have a pear, apple, and orange the former two seem a lot more alike than the latter.

Comparing just D&D and a hobby board game (in this case Catan but easily any long lived board game with expansions), and the two seem dissimilar. But when you add video games and athletic games to the mix then board and tabletop RPGs have more in common.

You're playing in person, with friends, often at a table, for a variable length of time and the experience is not identical. It's a social activity that everyone is equally participating in, in an active role.
While the actual play might vary (depending on the games) the market and possible product design and release schedule.

That may be true for you. It is entirely not true for me.
The rewards of the game itself (in addition to the social activity) are way different.
Board Games to RPGs is Apples to Pizza.

Honestly, if you don't get more out of RPGs than you do board games, then (IMO) you are not doing RPGs right.
That isn't anything against board games or loving them. The same thing comment could fairly be made in reverse.

But if Catan produces the same experience for you as an RPG, then you have no clue what I experience in RPGs and thus really can not offer any insight that will be relevant to me.

What does it matter what other games came out in 1995?
Why does it matter if D&D mimicks Catan. Catan is just an easy example as it's the most well known hobby game, like D&D is the most well known RPG. I could just have easily picked Pandemic or Carcassonne.

You are missing the point. There are hundreds if not thousands of other board games. The vast majority fail, you are pointing at a release schedule as a key to success, when obviously the core game itself was a huge outlier in the field.

 

[Jester David]

That may be true for you. It is entirely not true for me.
The rewards of the game itself (in addition to the social activity) are way different.
Board Games to RPGs is Apples to Pizza.

Honestly, if you don't get more out of RPGs than you do board games, then (IMO) you are not doing RPGs right.
That isn't anything against board games or loving them. The same thing comment could fairly be made in reverse.

But if Catan produces the same experience for you as an RPG, then you have no clue what I experience in RPGs and thus really can not offer any insight that will be relevant to me

I'll ignore the concending tone.

Again, board games play differently than RPGs when you only compare them to RPGs. But when you compare D&D to a board game (Catan) and a sport (let's say hockey) and a video game (let's go with Mass Effect solely because I'm currently replaying) then the play of the board game with be *closer* to the board game than the other activities. And the needs of producs can be much closer to board games than a video game or a sport or many other activities.

As has been mentioned, video games get some DLC, but typically get support for a year then replaced. And there's no accessories or expansion for hockey. Even something like books or movies doesn't match.

The vast majority of the time, we just compare the release schedule of D&D with other tabletop RPGs. Which is comparing a small niche product with a smaller niche product. The thesis of this thread, if you will, is that it might be better to broaden out from just tabletop RPGs to hobby game in general, and specifically board games (opposed to card games, although non-collectible card games would also be a fair comparison).

You are missing the point. There are hundreds if not thousands of other board games. The vast majority fail, you are pointing at a release schedule as a key to success, when obviously the core game itself was a huge outlier in the field.

Which is irrelevant. Most games fail, yes, but D&D is unlikely to fail. It's already succeeded. By that logic (I.e. we can't compare D&D to board games because most board games fail) we also can't compare D&D to other RPGs as most of those fail as well, or are minor forgettable products.
We're not talking about failing games, we're talking about the two biggest, most recognizable and profitable games of their type.

 

[BryonD]

I'll ignore the concending tone.

Again, board games play differently than RPGs when you only compare them to RPGs. But when you compare D&D to a board game (Catan) and a sport (let's say hockey) and a video game (let's go with Mass Effect solely because I'm currently replaying) then the play of the board game with be *closer* to the board game than the other activities. And the needs of producs can be much closer to board games than a video game or a sport or many other activities.

Not really. For the purpose of this comparison RPGs, Catan, and football are all equally different. (to me)

Which is irrelevant. Most games fail, yes, but D&D is unlikely to fail. It's already succeeded. By that logic (I.e. we can't compare D&D to board games because most board games fail) we also can't compare D&D to other RPGs as most of those fail as well, or are minor forgettable products.
We're not talking about failing games, we're talking about the two biggest, most recognizable and profitable games of their type.

You are missing the point. I'm not saying D&D is more likely to fail. I'm saying you are giving credit to Catan's release schedule when you should be giving the credit to Catan's merits as a game.

 

[Jester David]

You are missing the point. I'm not saying D&D is more likely to fail. I'm saying you are giving credit to Catan's release schedule when you should be giving the credit to Catan's merits as a game.

Catan's quality let it be a success, but its release schedule kep it one. It's doubful Catan would have lasted 20 years if it filled the market with accessories and expansions

 

[Shasarak]

Catan's quality let it be a success, but its release schedule kep it one. It's doubful Catan would have lasted 20 years if it filled the market with accessories and expansions

What happens if DnDs quality let it be a success and its release schedule kept it one?

Maybe it would not have lasted 20 years without the accessories and expansions?

 

[Zardnaar]

D&d has sod all from wotc and i suspect most players were not playing the last time this happened with a new edition in 1977. I ran a 6 hour session today finishing the last encounter from bad moon rising and the noble rot adventure. Both adventures were in quests of doom A book from necromancer games. Outside the core books all 5e material has not come from wotc 8 months after release. They outsourced the tiamat books.