Chris Perkins: Reintroducing Settings in Ways that Surprise People

WotC's D&D Story Manager, Chris Perkins, was the subject of an interview by a chap called Chris "Wacksteven" Iannitti. One of the topics covered is campaign setting books; Perkins says that they want to reintroduce settings in "surprising" ways, and that they're not guaranteed to be books. (thanks to Mistwell for the scoop)

The video is below, but if you can't watch it right now, here are the highlights as listed by pukunui on WotC's website:

• He can't talk about products that haven't been announced yet
• They value all of their worlds, as each one has "tons of fans"
• They are focusing on specific areas within settings to detail and "codify" via their story bibles
• Their goal is to "challenge people's expectations" re: sourcebooks
• They're "not interested in releasing books for the sake of releasing books anymore"
• They want book releases to be events that will "surprise and delight people"; they also want to put out books that people will actually use rather than books that will just get put on a shelf to "stay there and slowly rot"
• "One of our creative challenges is to package [setting] material - reintroduce facts and important details about our worlds - in a way that we know that DMs and players are going to use, that's going to excite them, that's actually going to surprise them. We may get that content out, but I'm not going to guarantee it's going to be a book. I'm not going to guarantee that it's going to be anything that you've seen before. But it will be something."

[video=youtube;alnwC34qUFs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alnwC34qUFs&feature=youtu.be[/video]
​

 

[Kramodlog]

Umm, just a point here. The first WOTC module, the one with the basic set whose name I'm blanking on, is generally very well regarded.

Mimes of Pantsdelver?

The first AP, true, is lackluster. The current AP is currently at a 95% approval rating from reviewers here at EN World and all the buzz has been consistently positive.

Two out of three isn't bad is it?

Sortish. PotA is mostly compared to Hoard and Rise. It is good that it is better than those two APs. When its compared to Paizo's APs, the industry standard, it gets less glaring revues. Also, the revues mostly come from people who just bought it.

 

[Kramodlog]

Paizo still reads the forum. Them having the quantity of employees to read the forum is not the same as them having a "better" staff, but they sure have a lot more staff. So yeah, I am definitely saying Paizo reading the message board does not in any way indicate the D&D guys at WOTC read the message board.

I agree that from Perkins and Crawford's interviews, time for WotC employees is rarer than Vecna's Hand. But working in a vacuum doesn't lead to desirable products. The poll they released is a good iniative, but all market research helps.

Goldomark, are you saying one (of many) reasons you post to this message board is to send a message, in some fashion, to the D&D staff at WOTC?

No, mr. Mod, but if it happens, cool.

 

[Mistwell]

Just to back up Morrus here - that's really none of your business. You think that, if they had not chosen to make it public, that we should out them? That would be professional conduct on our part?

You know, we've had conversations around here lately about how professionals get treated, and how WotC can't seem to ever have anything they do come across as positive. This makes a fine example: Engaging in what is possibly the most bleedingly obvious and cost-effective form of market research available to them is something they should be criticized for? Really?

And we wonder that they're distant?

You should probably read the whole thread before you assume intent on my part which is frankly the opposite of what I am thinking (I was not criticizing them, I was expecting critique of them from the crew that critiques any information about WOTC).

Actually what am I saying...right there in the post you were responding to, in part you actually had to go and cut out, I said, "If the answer is "I'd rather not spoil their privacy" I understand." And you thought it was a polite thing to cut that part of my paragraph and then say, "that's really none of your business. " OK Unbran...way to pick a fight for no reason.

 

[TrainedMunkey]

I am in a meeting right now reading these boards, a rather boring meeting that has nothing to do with the product I support.

My group is not happy with the current state of D&D, we have only played Tyranny of Dragons. We switched to a different system this weekend, with plans to come back to D&D at some point in the future if they release anything that interests us. The game isn't developed enough to interest us and being working adults we don't have enough time to do our work on the setting.

You can always tell what direction a company is going by looking at a company's hiring boards. Currently WoTC's openings lean heavily towards digital, they have one non digital hire. This is the direction they will be going in the future.

Things change and everything evolves thankfully, but this hobby is not a modern hobby. The trick for the D&D team will be to bring in new fresh blood to the hobby while keeping us old grognards interested. This is an uphill battle and one that I fear they will loose. Modern teens have many other more exciting and interesting outlets for their time. I have a very small sample group of two teenage children.

At this point I don't believe that tabletop gaming can be a profit making enterprise, in the scope of modern big business, but needs to be a labor of love to succeed.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

You can always tell what direction a company is going by looking at a company's hiring boards. Currently WoTC's openings lean heavily towards digital, they have one non digital hire. This is the direction they will be going in the future.

Sweet! That potentially saves me from writing my own. Right now I'm working on something for creating/running dungeon brawls (fog of war; keeping track of furniture/terrain/position of 35 different creatures; brownian motion for dungeon inhabitants when I don't tell them to do something more specific; HP/condition tracking and action declaration) but if WOTC does their own I would pay fifty bucks for it, if it works well for my scenarios.

 

[TrainedMunkey]

Sweet! That potentially saves me from writing my own. Right now I'm working on something for creating/running dungeon brawls (fog of war; keeping track of furniture/terrain/position of 35 different creatures; brownian motion for dungeon inhabitants when I don't tell them to do something more specific; HP/condition tracking and action declaration) but if WOTC does their own I would pay fifty bucks for it, if it works well for my scenarios.

This is the direction Hasbro wanted to go with 4e and for obvious reasons. They stand to make a larger profit off a digital game, garner interest in the tabletop game and many have their D&D groups spread across the US and even the world. While I have run games via Skype, it just doesn't hold the same feel for me or interaction as sitting around a table. It also offers more distraction.

 

[timbannock]

But we are talking about WotC.

Also, not every books must be a smash it. That is impossible to achieve for any publisher. In any enterprise, there is risk.

And yet companies like Wizards of the Coast and Marvel completely change direction in their business when a book or line isn't a smash hit by comparative industry standards.

 

[Kramodlog]

And yet companies like Wizards of the Coast and Marvel completely change direction in their business when a book or line isn't a smash hit by comparative industry standards.

A complete change for D&D is an edition change. If one book sells less than the core books, which always happens apparently, they won't start a new edition because some APs aren't "smash hits". I'm not even sure how to determine a smash hit.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'm not even sure how to determine a smash hit.

Natural 20 with a bludgeoning weapon.

 

[Umbran]

You should probably read the whole thread before you assume intent on my part which is frankly the opposite of what I am thinking...

I did read it, thank you. When I did, I found the "If the answer is..." bit to be... passive aggressive?

I mean, if you have real concerns like that, you still ask the question in public, where he now kind of has to address it publicly in some manner? That's a ploy typically used to bring peer/public pressure into play, you know. Either he gives the answer, or he has to look all stern and such telling people to shove off.

I recognized that may not have been the intent, so I responded in the rhetorical question form. Even if you didn't intend it, the implied answers give the reasons that should forestall anyone else from picking up the question.