And then there were 8! On Chris Sims and Jennifer Clarke Wilkes' Layoffs...

I've seen quite a few people speculating that Chris Sims and Jennifer Clarke-Wilkes may not have been made redundant, but possibly fired for various reasons, or because contracts ended (given that Jennifer has been at WoTC for about 15 years, that latter guess was always going to be very unlikely!). For that reason, I feel it's a good idea to set things straight and find out exactly what happened; I'm sure neither want rumours like that to start! The short version: yep, they were lay-offs.

Chris Sims kindly shared with me that "Jennifer Clarke Wilkes and I were laid off on Wednesday the 28th. Our positions were eliminated, reducing the D&D team to eight people working directly on the tabletop game."

Hopefully that will put some speculation to rest! Here's the original article, for context.

Who makes up the 8 still working on the RPG? Mike Mearls, Rodney Thompson, Jeremy Crawford, Greg Bilsland, Chris Perkins, Peter Lee, Matt Sernett, Adam Lee.

The 8 does not include art or brand staff, including community manager Trevor Kidd, brand/marketing managers, Organized Play program managers and the like, which brings the number up to about 13.

As an interesting point of comparison, Paizo CEO Lisa Stevens kindly shared that "We don't have any part time employees. The 25 full-time were folks that worked directly on Pathfinder products in design, development, editing and art. Currently, we are pushing 60 employees in the company and growing. In the next few months, we will be hiring more editors and developers to support Pathfinder. 2014 was our best year ever in both sales and profits. Still going up!"

 

[Mallus]

I'm curious more than anything else as to where WotC goes from here. If I find myself in dire need of a module this year, I'll try a straight substitution (or as much as possible) from my trusty collection of AD&D adventures.

Really, I wouldn't worry about a lack of new content. All WotC has to do is wave their magic wan of licencing agreements and there'll be a torrent of adventures, supplements, etc. If they decide to go that route.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

While not entirely unexpected after the completion of the core 3 and WotC's business model of outsourcing much of D&D RPG development at a slower pace while they leverage the brand name in other products ... I had hopes that the success of 5E would mean they would add staff.

I hope the developers land back on their feet quickly.

 

[Kramodlog]

I hope they take a look at some of this stuff quickly. I know once I'm done playing this wizard, I doubt I'll play another caster again until this stuff is fixed. I'm going to stick with archers or hybrids. I can't take the near immunity to magic of legendary creatures, the limitations of concentration, and watching martials do a ton of damage while I use all my slots to protect them or let them get into battle. That's not fun.

I doubt you'll see any fix to the mechanics. They have trouble producing a splatbook and an adventure at the same time, release the warforge and kender info on the net, a conversion guide, and whatever I'm forgetting. They certainly do not have time to fix what was intended from the start.

I'm not sure how they thought that a bounded edition could be fun or that not supporting the edition with some books would be profitable. The only time something bounded is fun is when your doing [redacted].

 

[Sacrosanct]

Hmm. I wonder what's going on.
***snip***.

Is there *not* a thread that you feel the need to chime in and complain about how you hate playing a wizard in? I mean, what does this thread have anything to do with your complaint? A complaint, I'll note, that shows up in just about every thread you post in, regardless of the topic.

 

[Mark CMG]

Is there *not* a thread that you feel the need to chime in and complain about how you hate playing a wizard in? I mean, what does this thread have anything to do with your complaint? A complaint, I'll note, that shows up in just about every thread you post in, regardless of the topic.

It's worse than bringing up the OGL every thread . . .

 

[OpsKT]

He's still mad he can't replace the rest of the party entirely.

 

[Umbran]

He's still mad he can't replace the rest of the party entirely.

Good afternoon, folks! A few of you seem to need this reminder...

This is a topic that will make many folks annoyed - vent annoyance on your fellow EN Worlders, or act to increase the general level of annoyance, and you can save us some trouble and take a week off from posting, as that's what the mods are apt to give you anyway.

I will write it in all caps, so you can be sure to see it: DON'T MAKE IT PERSONAL! Is that clear enough? If not, please discuss with a moderator via e-mail or PM, please.

Thanks for your time.

 

[ppaladin123]

Hmm. I wonder what's going on.
I am getting somewhat bored of the game.....

I understand your frustration but I am not sure I understand how this relates to the discussion at hand. WotC can't possibly be laying off folks in response to this sort of annoyance at a mechanic because it has yet to release follow up products that would allow them to gauge demand/continued interest in 5e.

 

[Rygar]

I thought WOTC was doing this with their subscription model. I can't remember how much I paid per month to use their character builder and stuff in

3E.

Actually, the subscription model (DDI, PDF, etc) is a model wherein one plans to fail.

D&D is based primarily on the content of a set of books. 100% of the D&D customers buy some or all of those books. If the business plan is then to continue the product primarily through digital initiatives we arrive at a major problem. The problem is that only a percentage of those customers will want or need digital tools, will be willing to pay a subscription price to play an offline game with friends that didn't advertise itself as requiring an ongoing subscription to play, or be part of the small percentage of total book readers who purchase E-books.

Essentially what happens is that some significant percentage of the total initial customer base is lost. For tabletop products this is catastrophic, tabletop products generally acquire new customers through introduction from existing customers, when you cut the number of existing customers you cut the rate of gain for new customers.

Thus far it looks like WOTC is planning to fail, as they're making all of the same mistakes they made at the end of 3rd edition by not really having any plan for how to grow their business other than "Lets throw some digital stuff out there, I heard people like digital stuff". There's a reason why Paizo uses both models, and it isn't because digital only is a perfect formula for success.

It's actually amazing to me. This isn't all that complicated. Purchasable adventures increase the customer base by removing the time impediment that comes with homebrewed adventures. Periodical content vectors like Dungeon and Dragon let people continue to keep their games fresh with a low cost to the consumer and is perfectly marketable if your plan isn't "News stands" in an age of direct sales. Novel lines keep people invested in settings and the product itself, even if they can't play, and in some cases even if they don't play (Dragonlance was always good for having a number of customers who never did and never would play the game but still bought D&D novels).

I honestly don't think WOTC wants to succeed with D&D, I don't think they have any intention of actually trying. Their business plan is apparently to leave the lions share of their customers without product, refusing to sell your product to people who want to buy it is a very good way to have your product fail spectacularly.

 

[trentonjoe]

If the business plan is then to continue the product primarily through digital initiatives we arrive at a major problem..

It doesn't need to be "primarily". The use of some "services" (character generator, online books, encounter set up) through a subscription brings in a income stream while being a supplement to the traditional market.