Charles Ryan on Adventures

[BiggusGeekus]

I don't think everyone falls into this trap. Personally I've had no problem working with other companies and will continue to do so. A win-win scenario that benefits both parties is what I frequently strive for and feel I've happily achieved a number of times.

An additional complication is dimwits and slackers like me. I'm an admierer of Phil's work and the work of the guys over at Indie Press Revolution. I made an abortive attempt to cross-promote and do as Mike Mearls suggested and work with a company that I'll leave nameless for now. The problem is that some of the d20 guys like Phil do this for a living. I do it for a hobby. If my next product (yes, we're working on it) takes two years I don't care. Compare that with Phil. It'd be moronic for us to try to work together. He'd pound out his stuff in a week, while I have no trouble putting stuff on the back burner for months if I feel it would interfere with my real job or my family.

So not only does a d20 publisher have to get a sense of the other d20 company, they have to hold that independant company to a schedule. That's practically impossible because there's no way to do that other than with guilt and hope.

 

[mearls]

Then what is Charles talking about? What you've described here seems to describe a marketplace where d20 publishers definitely ARE NOT competing with WotC and trying to do what they "do best" since WotC's not out there doing licensed games and supplements for such.

I can't speak for Charles, but I think his point is that d20 companies that release core rulebooks (whether for homegrown or licensed settings) in essence compete with WotC by offering a competing system, even if it's d20-based. If a game is too far from core D&D to be completely compatible, then it competes with D&D.

I think it's more a case that such books run counter to d20's strength. If you're using d20, it makes sense to make things as compatible as possible. The strength of d20 is that D&D players can quickly and easily pick up your book and add it to their games.

I think AU is a good example of a game that does that. It's a new game, but whole swathes of it are easy to drop into D&D (classes, races) and the new bits offer alternatives to D&D (the spell system, item creation). IME, most people who use AU/AE break it into smaller pieces that they add to their D&D games.

Games like M&M and Spycraft are, IMO, exceptions, since they're not fantasy. Both build on what D&D players already know and then expand/shift the rules to fit their styles. And both avoid competing with WotC directly, so there's more flexibility there. You're using d20 to attract D&D players to a non-fantasy game. Few gamers assume that Spycraft should have rules they can directly port to their ongoing D&D game.

 

[MerricB]

Then what is Charles talking about? What you've described here seems to describe a marketplace where d20 publishers definitely ARE NOT competing with WotC and trying to do what they "do best" since WotC's not out there doing licensed games and supplements for such.

I think that's the state of the marketplace today, and Charles is more looking at the state of the marketplace leading up to today. (That massive lead-time for products at Wizards is no doubt contributing here).

Consider the state of the d20 industry a year ago and then compare it to Charles' comments. During the past year and a bit, I think the successful d20 System publishers have been transitioning to a state where they're not competing directly with Wizards, and one of the major niches they've been exploring have been licensed settings and supplements for those settings. In other words, games and support for those games that have no direct links to D&D, no different to Buffy, RIFTS, Hero or any one of another non-d20 games. The only link is in the basis of the system.

Certainly, for the first three years or more, there were many d20 publishers competing *directly* with Wizards.

So, the decision to make new adventures was made a year ago, and the reasoning Charles gives is based primarily on the state of the industry then.

(I still think Charles underestimates the problems with getting d20 System adventures to distributors, though.)

Cheers!

 

[mearls]

Are you saying that rivalries helped bring down WW's Sword and Sorcery imprint? I've a feeling you may have mistyped.

Yeah, that definitely didn't happen. S&S is a great example of each company's strengths mixing together to make a stronger whole. WW has good marketing and ties to both mass market and hobby distribution. Malhavoc and Necro each has a good, separate identity that stakes out separate ends of the market.

I think FDP was hurt in that they had simply didn't have a niche to carve out between those two other companies. But I wonder if a company that focused on d20 Modern, or one that led off with a d20 RPG and supporting material for it, would've been a good third partner.

 

[Nikchick]

Semantics. A competitor did something that didn't help your business.

Hey, I've got an idea... maybe they should revise the STL to be as restrictive as Superlink. It sure would be healthier for WotC if they didn't have to worry about competing with sourcebooks, much like there was never a super-prison superlink supplement, or a gadgets superlink supplement.

Wow, it sure sounds like you have some issues with M&M Superlink. Are you trying to suggest that M&M Superlink doesn't allow sourcebooks? That's utterly untrue. Or are you objecting to the idea that there is even the mildest of approvals processes? I can't tell what your issue with M&M Superlink is exactly.

In all seriousness, I would not be surprised in the least if WotC adopted a much more restrictive policy for the STL in the future. They've already revised the license to be more restrictive than it was when first launched (e.g. morals clause). IF 4th edition D&D ends up being open (and I think even that much is questionable) I would be shocked if WotC didn't further restrict the license where it could, especially if they really are concerned that they're being forced to compete with too many d20 publishers producing similar products. What they do with their business is their business. There was nothing in the OGL/STL that forbade people from doing whatever they wanted with the material, right down to completely recreating the system and going head to head with WotC on anything from adventures to core books; if WotC decides they don't want to allow certain types of products, they're certainly in their rights to add restrictions so they can end up with a program more to their liking.

Sounds a lot more like sowing the seeds given to you by WotC.

Right, WotC gave the OGL and the D20 license to whoever would pick it up and run with it. And Atlas Games, Green Ronin, and Sword & Sorcery GAVE the program legitimacy by accepting what WotC offered and making use of it. It's a two-way street, Uder. Companies that made their name in d20 owe their beginnings to the project, but WotC owes a portion of the success of d20 to those companies as well! If no one had picked up the system and run with it, we never would have made it past the rampant speculation that d20 was all "just a trick" that somehow WotC was going to use the program to drive their competition out of business, yadda, yadda. Even a full year into d20 there were loud nay-sayers who repeated this inspite of all the evidence to the contrary. If those early companies had not signed on, or had joined the chorus and strongly repeated the paranoia that was running rampant then, D20 could have been nothing more than an interesting idea that never amounted to anything. Its success was not a given. Yes, the seeds were the start, but seeds alone are just seeds.

WotC doesn't pay my salary, I do. They don't owe me a living, I must make that living on my own, regardless of what they may or may not have offered me to start with five years ago. Speaking of making my living, I'm not going to bother posting any more in this thread. I have far too much work to do to spend time going back and forth with people intent on responding to me with hostility whenever I open my mouth.

 

[philreed]

Wow, it sure sounds like you have some issues with M&M Superlink. Are you trying to suggest that M&M Superlink doesn't allow sourcebooks? That's utterly untrue. Or are you objecting to the idea that there is even the mildest of approvals processes? I can't tell what your issue with M&M Superlink is exactly.

My personal experience with the M&M Superlink license is that it's easy to follow, very easy to work with the approvals process (and those running the process), and the license has value. Granted I've only produced 8 M&M Superlink PDFs but I feel that's a large enough number of products that I have a good idea of how the approval process and the license works.

In fact, I wish WotC had a similar process for the D20 System license. It would cut down on a lot of the gross mistakes that continue to happen to this day.

I cannot see how anyone would be upset with the M&M Superlink license.

 

[MacMathan]

All I can say is kudos to Mr. Ryan for responding to this thread despite itself.

As far as why WoTC has not entered the Ennies lately I think this thread has pretty much given the answer. They have very little to gain from supporting the Ennies.

 

[Uder]

Wow, it sure sounds like you have some issues with M&M Superlink.

None really. I just thought Chris' comments were somewhat hypocritical, considering M&M1E had a shorter lifespan and a more restrictive license than D&D3E.

I have far too much work to do to spend time going back and forth with people intent on responding to me with hostility whenever I open my mouth.

I don't see much hostility, just words on a screen. On the internet, tone is almost entirely in the perception of the reader. (Maybe having a flame-head scowl-jowled troll for an avatar doesn't help...)

Edit: if that last bit doesn't make sense, it's because I changed my avatar for this very reason

There does seem to be some disconnect on what's good for gamers and what's good for game designers though.

 

[delericho]

I'm inclined to think that the sluggishness of the d20 market has more to do with the volume of currently-available material than the lack of companies doing adventures.

I have shelves bowing under the weight of d20 books. I have a half-dozen boxes containing yet more roleplaying books, and I have at least one pile of books tucked away in a storage closet out of the way. I will never again make use of a large proportion of these books. Quite simply, I do not need to ever again buy a d20 book, without ever having to fear that I'll run out of material to use.

As a consequence of this, I have become rather more picky in what I buy. In fact, I essentially no longer even look at a book that isn't from Green Ronin, Malhavoc or, of course, Wizards. There are two exceptions: I'm interested in the Babylon 5 line from Mongoose (but haven't actually bought anything in months), and will look at the occasional product I see recommended here. I'm aware that this means I'm missing some real gems, but I don't have a lot of time to seek out good products, nor any huge incentive to do so, and I don't have a FLGS where I can browse such things at leisure (sadly, following a house move )

The one area where I am interested in new product are 'disposable' items like adventure modules. However, even here, an adventure would have to have some sort of hook to interest me, as I subscribe to Dungeon, and so again have more material than I will ever use.

I don't know how typical I am of the consumers in the d20 market. However, given the size of the market, if even a small number of people are in the same position, that could have a significant effect on the whole, especially with so many small companies competing for the same small pool of customers.

(As regards Charles Ryan's comments, I'll say only this: I am very interested to hear more about this 'long term solution' that Wizards are working on.)

 

[Staffan]

Or, y'know, blowing it on cocaine. I don't know what the other designers do, but I can't resist a good hit of the C.

Paging Thayan Knight... Thayan Knight, please pick up the white courtesy phone.