Are we fair to WotC?

[Dannager]

I'm sorry... What? The vast majority of role-playing games are still published as books... even if it's PoD... so exactly what predicament am I in?

You're fine for now, I'm sure. But we're in a transition where a) games in general are moving from static products to actively-supported services, and b) physical books are transitioning to digital. Unless you believe that RPGs are immune to both of those transitions, at some point you're going to need to get on board with the idea.

 

[Imaro]

You're fine for now, I'm sure. But we're in a transition where a) games in general are moving from static products to actively-supported services, and b) physical books are transitioning to digital. Unless you believe that RPGs are immune to both of those transitions, at some point you're going to need to get on board with the idea.

Well a PDF is far from a digital subscription service, which as I said you can have printed. At places like rpgnow you can download and save the file version you want or choose never to update the files in your library.

As far as them moving from static products to actively supported services... I'm not so sure you're correct in this about role-playing games (or board games or any other games except video games)... give me an example of a company doing this with role-playing games currently... just one and I might be convinced it's the future if not all you're doing is proclaiming something with nothing to back it up.

 

[Dannager]

I'm not so sure you're correct in this about role-playing games (or board games or any other games except video games)... give me an example of a company doing this with role-playing games currently...

Wizards of the freaking Coast.

They haven't moved to it exclusively, but they are clearly providing a tabletop roleplaying game as a subscription service, and are using the subscription service as the foundation of a policy of active system support.

 

[Imaro]

Wizards of the freaking Coast.

They haven't moved to it exclusively, but they are clearly providing a tabletop roleplaying game as a subscription service, and are using the subscription service as the foundation of a policy of active system support.

So none are relying on it exclusively, and the one who tried it concurrently with print with their last edition... have made no announcements as far as whether it will be a factor in their newest edition. One would think if this was the preferred wave of the future... there wouldn't even be a question as to whether it will be a part of Next...

EDIT: I would also think that if this model is the wave of the future and inevitable more companies would be following in WotC's footsteps... even if just doing it concurrently with print and on a smaller scale, but again no one has adopted a full service based, sub model.

 

[Wicht]

You're fine for now, I'm sure. But we're in a transition where ... physical books are transitioning to digital.

"Print is dead." - Egon, 1984.

"The report of my death was an exaggeration." - Mark Twain, 1897.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I favor the subscription model because it changes the paradigm from an RPG as a product to an RPG as a service - I much prefer the latter, and I think most people would if they understood how a fully realized tabletop RPG-as-a-service would look. A product is static. There is little (some, but not much) incentive for a publisher to continually refine or improve a product, but a service model requires the publisher to maintain relevancy over the course of the game's projected lifecycle. It also - eventually - is the only reasonable solution to the edition treadmill issue: a game as a service can go through iterative updates that allow it to stay competitive and compelling without ever having to invalidate any part of itself. For an example of how this works (keeping in mind that the fact that these examples are computer games is largely unimportant; what's important is that they are games as a service, and it just so happens that currently the only way to do that is with a digital product), see games like EVE Online, or World of Warcraft. An RPG as a service also provides the publisher with a much more stable stream of revenue, which allows them the flexibility to try things that would not be considered conservative, smart moves in a product-based environment. Paizo benefits from this model - their subscription base is vital to the way they like to do business.

Fair enough; I can respect that point of view. I don't personally adhere to it -- I prefer my RPG as a product, as I feel it's my job as a DM to provide my players with the "service".

Digital vs. print products are all equal in my mind; I couldn't care less whether it is a tablet or book at the table, though at current price points I generally favor books.

 

[Ahnehnois]

You're fine for now, I'm sure. But we're in a transition where a) games in general are moving from static products to actively-supported services, and b) physical books are transitioning to digital. Unless you believe that RPGs are immune to both of those transitions, at some point you're going to need to get on board with the idea.

Talk about unsupported assertions.

An individual campaign requires some consistency in the rules. Changing the rules as you go is problematic. This limits the extent to which game providers can provide dynamic rather than static content, because the consumers are using it in a somewhat static sense. You make your character once. You start a campaign with one set of rules. Sometimes you change them, generally you don't.

And from what I can tell, companies aren't so much transitioning to digital as using digital to supplement the physical books. What is becoming popular are cheap pdfs of the full book and free SRDs of the basics, which both PF and now 13th Age are doing. No one's talking about disposing of physical books as the primary method of dissemination.

 

[Dannager]

An individual campaign requires some consistency in the rules.

I'll be honest - I've never seen any campaign that didn't have more rules inconsistencies introduced by natural lack of familiarity with the rules than caused by official changes to the rules themselves.

Changing the rules as you go is problematic.

Assuming the changes happen incrementally, in manageable chunks, then no, it's not really that problematic at all.

This limits the extent to which game providers can provide dynamic rather than static content, because the consumers are using it in a somewhat static sense. You make your character once. You start a campaign with one set of rules. Sometimes you change them, generally you don't.

A properly-built set of tools can easily alert you to changes in your character.

And from what I can tell, companies aren't so much transitioning to digital as using digital to supplement the physical books. What is becoming popular are cheap pdfs of the full book and free SRDs of the basics, which both PF and now 13th Age are doing. No one's talking about disposing of physical books as the primary method of dissemination.

Not yet, they're not (actually, I'd be surprised if the topic hadn't come up within the companies, at least informally; I doubt they consider it time to go that route yet, though). But I see that as inevitable. I can't envision a scenario wherein tabletop RPG publishers stick to a primarily print-based product and maintain relevancy past the next 25 years or so.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I can't envision a scenario wherein tabletop RPG publishers stick to a primarily print-based product and maintain relevancy past the next 25 years or so.

You can imagine a world where wizards shoot lightning at dragons using their spellbooks, but not one where real people use real books to play rpgs indefinitely?

 

[Dannager]

"Print is dead." - Egon, 1984.

"(Television) won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night." - Darryl Zanuck, 20th Century Fox founder, 1946