D&D 5E A Board Game style Release Schedule

[Ace]

Just my personal opinion but Hasbro probably doesn't see the kind of numbers in the tabletop model that it wants and sees D&D as "IP" to made into books, movies, board games, compute games and in other areas with much bigger margins,

They still released the core books and will support with with adventures mainly to keep the tabletop people from thinking the system is dead but otherwise the RPG side is a largely irrelevant. There are several million D&D players which if they thought D&D was too moribund and moved on would hurt brand awareness of the IP but market wise the tabletop people are much closer in effect to "advertisements" for other lines than important customers. They like our coin but its small change.

Also not releasing crunch means less development issues with computer games, They never need to go above "the Players handbook" as nothing in the adventures really contradicts them much.

On those lines what I expect to see is a few adventures a year that will probably sell so-so to keep things going and the public engaged with the game , they hope anyway and of course plenty of bits of crunch released in Unearthed Arcana. I also expect we won't see anything like an OGL for D&D 5 anytime soon though Hasbro is being pretty good natured about 3rd party stuff thus far.

Thus however isn't going to be a problem if Hasbro sees more in licensing revenue which just a few products could show more annual profit than any splat book.

That said the upside is for those of us who care nothing for adventures, we'll get the "official" crunch we want free and legal which is pretty sweet if you ask me.

 

[Manchu]

I think you are on the right track Ace. Seems like the important thing is to have D&D-branded RPG books on the shelf to maintain the value of the IP for licensing purposes.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

I don't get psyched over AP'S. I get psyched over some real content.

Why don't you consider adventure oaths to be real content? What do you consider to be real content?

So the PHB came out in August. Having something to actually use with the core books form WoTC (that doesn't suck like HotDQ) would be nice. Spell cards and a DM screen do not really count as content as such.

Maybe having Dungeon for 20+ years helped things out.

This has been a recurring question for a few pages now - perhaps it would help us avoid talking past each other if we can mutually agree on a shared definition of "support".

We all have our preferred type of support, but if we go with a basic "anything that's not the core books that adds to the game or helps DMs or players play it", than yes, the products that have been released so far do constitute support.

An entirely different debate is the amount of support that is preferable for 5E going forward. That of course depends on the audience WotC is targeting this time around, and I'm convinced that that audience is not us.

I think they're looking to expand the brand amongst casual players, who probably won't buy books past the core three anyway, if they even purchase that much. If that's the market they're catering to, Catan-style "4 expansions over 20 years" makes a lot more sense - you don't want 40+ D&D books at your local Barnes and Noble to confuse or intimidate anyone.

Mind you I think we'll get more support than that. But it's likely going to be one or two non-adventure products a year. There's not a lot of crunch to be added to the game - I don't think we'll ever see 5E prestige classes and with feats being meatier but less critical pieces of the game, I don't think we'll see the same explosion in them that we saw previously. There could be always be more spells, subclasses, monsters and magic items, obviously, but those will come in time - and with the latest batch coming to us free this May, no less.

There's 40 years worth of adventure and setting material for D&D that needs very little work, if any, to use with 5E. I'd love to see Dragon and Dungeon come back as much as the next gamer but honestly it would just be adding to the treasure horde of material I'm never going to get through as it is already.

 

[Mistwell]

Third-party releases are irrelevant to the issue of WotC's approach to 5E, which I think is the topic under discussion ITT. As to the "official seal" -- consumers experience products via brand.[/COLOR]

It's not irrelevant to their approach. The issue is "Does the game see sufficient support". That's the only real reason it would matter what their approach is or is not. And it does receive a LOT of support. As for consumers experiencing products via brand, I see Pathfinder third party support getting lots of cheers and sales. I see Pathfinder's launch having less support, both from Paizo and third parties, at this same point during their launch and yet it doesn't seem to be subjected to this level of criticism for these kinds of reasons.

 

[BryonD]

Just my personal opinion but Hasbro probably doesn't see the kind of numbers in the tabletop model that it wants and sees D&D as "IP" to made into books, movies, board games, compute games and in other areas with much bigger margins,

This is a popular opinion.
I pretty much agree with it.

But I don't think their IP maintains value as well without some steady flow of foundation from us geeks.

And why do they have ANYONE on staff if it works entirely as you describe?
Why not forget the OGL, but sell licenses to two or three third parties and keep one person on staff to review and approve content? Make a small margin on a fees and a % and keep your IP churning.
(Not actually proposing this, but under the hypothetical it makes sense)

 

[Mistwell]

So I am trying to figure out how much had "officially" come out for Pathfinder at this point in Pathfinder's history (3 months after their last core book). From what I can tell, it was:

Pathfinder Core Rulebook (August 13, 2009)
Pathfinder Beastiary (October 2009)
Pathfinder Chronicles: Rise of the Runelords

That seems to be it, within 3 months of the last core book being released (Beastiary). Can anyone confirm or correct that?

 

[Manchu]

[MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION]

"Support" generally refers to something first parties do to increase the value of their existing products or product lines: expanding the line, organizing events and communities, reaching out to the market, etc. For example, I wouldn't call a third party mod for a video game "support" for that game. Would you? Would you call all the advice and discussion about 5E on this forum and others "support" as well? And even though WotC itself offers "support" for 5E in the form of Facebook updates, links to webcomics, licensed spell cards, miniatures, and board games ... I don't think any of this even qualifies for this discussion.

This discussion is about what WotC is putting out for 5E.

Incidentally, why are you surprised that more third parties are scrambling to exploit the OGL regarding 5E than do or did to exploit Pathfinder? D&D is a much more valuable brand and reaches a far larger market share.

 

[Mercule]

I think they're looking to expand the brand amongst casual players, who probably won't buy books past the core three anyway, if they even purchase that much. If that's the market they're catering to, Catan-style "4 expansions over 20 years" makes a lot more sense - you don't want 40+ D&D books at your local Barnes and Noble to confuse or intimidate anyone.

I agree with your assessment. Honestly, I'm not sure that isn't what I want, too.

After four editions, with multiple incompatibilities each time, I really just want an "evergreen" game. We've got a really good set of rules, now. Sure, there's going to be a few bugs that need to get fixed, but Monopoly reprints every few years with minor clarifications -- they just don't radically redefine things (usually). I don't want a bazillion splat books that will inevitably cause the game to collapse in on itself. I definitely don't want a ton of piecemeal, online revisions disguised as "errata".

The board game model is a good one. The various flavors of Risk are good models for settings. Don't worry about finding a place for Warforged in Faerun or genasi in Eberron. Adventures are a different kind of expansion, but still an expansion. But, an adventure set in a specific setting is an expansion for an expansion, not the base game. That's not a bad thing, but it limits the audience.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely confident that Hasbro/WotC hasn't decided to make D&D and Forgotten Realms synonymous. That would really tick me off and push me out of the game, but I can see the strategy. It gives them a consistent way to market across media.

That's the catch. The difference between a 3e, 4e, and 5e Eberron or Forgotten Realms campaign setting is likely 5-20 pages of crunch in a 300-page book. It's an insignificant percentage. With the Eberron article for Unearthed Arcana, you could purchase a 3e or 4e Eberron campaign guide and run a complete campaign without problems.

But, are they on the shelves? If I start up a 5E Planescape game, will my players know where to go to get stuff. As a 30+ year gaming veteran, I don't know what I'd need to GM Planescape. I'd start by hitting Drive Thru RPG and look for a core setting, but that's it's own sort of specialized knowledge. Pity the GM who got into D&D because he stumbled onto his dad's copy of Torment. Also, converting 2E to 5E is going to be a lot easier for me than for a green teenager.

This is where the boardgame analogy can break down. Risk Godstorm is entirely self-contained. If someone really liked the sound of it, they either find the game or not. Try running Talisman 1E Dungeon with the 3E base game. Someone with some experience and ingenuity could do it, but not a new player. The Artifacer is key to Eberron, but it's not a direct port to 5E. The numerous threads about Dragonmarks show the difficulty of that conversion. It's not trivial, even for decade-long fans.

 

[BryonD]

So I am trying to figure out how much had "officially" come out for Pathfinder at this point in Pathfinder's history (3 months after their last core book). From what I can tell, it was:

Pathfinder Core Rulebook (August 13, 2009)
Pathfinder Beastiary (October 2009)
Pathfinder Chronicles: Rise of the Runelords

That seems to be it, within 3 months of the last core book being released (Beastiary). Can anyone confirm or correct that?

Are you counting 3.5 Golarion stuff as they transitioned?
Are you counting stuff published by companies not Paizo?
How does the advertisement for upcoming stuff compare?


Here is my "downloads" added bewteen Aug and December 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook (OGL) Lite–One File per Chapter August 2009
Pathfinder Companion: Cheliax, Empire of Devils (PFRPG) August 2009
Pathfinder Chronicles: Legacy of Fire Map Folio August 2009
Pathfinder Adventure Path #25: The Bastards of Erebus (Council of Thieves 1 of 6) (PFRPG) Single File August 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary Preview (OGL) August 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Conversion Guide (OGL) August 2009
Pathfinder Adventure Path: Council of Thieves Player's Guide (PFRPG) August 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary Preview II (OGL) September 2009
Pathfinder Adventure Path #26: The Sixfold Trial (Council of Thieves 2 of 6) (PFRPG) Single File September 2009
Class Options, Volume 1: Sorcerer Bloodlines (PFRPG) October 2009
Pathfinder Chronicles: Book of the Damned—Volume 1: Princes of Darkness (PFRPG) Single File October 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary (OGL) Lite–Single File October 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary (OGL) Single File October 2009
Adventure, Dungeons & Danger: Horror at Dagger Rock (PFRPG) October 2009
Pathfinder Adventure Path #27: What Lies in Dust (Council of Thieves 3 of 6) (PFRPG) Single File November 2009
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game GM Screen (OGL) One File per Panel November 2009
Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets—A Guide to the Pathfinder Society (PFRPG) Single File November 2009
Pathfinder Chronicles: Cities of Golarion (PFRPG) Single File November 2009
Pathfinder Chronicles: City Map Folio Single File December 2009
Pathfinder Companion: Dwarves of Golarion (PFRPG) December 2009
Pathfinder Adventure Path #28: The Infernal Syndrome (Council of Thieves 4 of 6) (PFRPG) Single File December 2009
The Genius Guide to Loot 4 Less: Volume 1—Armor and Weapons (PFRPG) December 2009
The Genius Guide to Loot 4 Less: Volume 2—Pretty, Pretty, Rings (PFRPG) December 2009
The Genius Guide to Ice Magic (PFRPG)

 

[Jester David]

I agree with your assessment. Honestly, I'm not sure that isn't what I want, too.

After four editions, with multiple incompatibilities each time, I really just want an "evergreen" game. We've got a really good set of rules, now. Sure, there's going to be a few bugs that need to get fixed, but Monopoly reprints every few years with minor clarifications -- they just don't radically redefine things (usually). I don't want a bazillion splat books that will inevitably cause the game to collapse in on itself. I definitely don't want a ton of piecemeal, online revisions disguised as "errata".

The board game model is a good one. The various flavors of Risk are good models for settings. Don't worry about finding a place for Warforged in Faerun or genasi in Eberron. Adventures are a different kind of expansion, but still an expansion. But, an adventure set in a specific setting is an expansion for an expansion, not the base game. That's not a bad thing, but it limits the audience.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely confident that Hasbro/WotC hasn't decided to make D&D and Forgotten Realms synonymous. That would really tick me off and push me out of the game, but I can see the strategy. It gives them a consistent way to market across media.

This is me as well. I'm super tired of the edition cycle. I'm happy to try new games, but anything I buy will be a bonus. I've been looking for a "good enough" edition of D&D for a long while and 5e is finally just right.
3e was a big improvement from 1e/2e's wonkiness, but there were problems that showed the longer I played, and 4e just went down a different direction than I wanted. I love Paizo and the people there, but Pathfinder didn't fix enough of the flaws of 3e to make it a long term solution. It was fine for a time and better than the alternative, but not ideal.

I don't think I'll upgrade again. 5e has enough design space for me to play with and make content, it's simple enough that it can be one of the first RPGs I teach my son in 5-8 years, and fun. Between 5e, Fate, and Pathfinder (plus Shadows of Esteren and Vampire the Masquerade) I'm set for anything I want to play.