Could the D20/OGL end up hurting WoTC?

[Pramas]

First of all, D&D has never enjoyed a captive audience. There's always been other games that people can choose from.

Yes, obviously. But D&D has always been better than any other RPG in bringing in new people and keeping them loyal to D&D only. d20 was different than D&D's previous competition in that was designed to serve those exact same fans and WotC itself promoted this compatibility. So when I said "some percentage of its captive audience", that's exactly what I meant. Folks who likely wouldn't have tried Vampire or GURPS or the latest rpg.net darling were willing to buy books they could slot right into their D&D games.

That said, none of your argument makes any sense. In the real world, people simply don't operate that way.

Yes, they do, Mike, because people don't have infinite amounts of money. If a guy goes to a game store with $30 and he wants a new book for his D&D game, he's only coming out of that store with one book. It might be a WotC book but it very well might not be. You can pretend that the millions of dollars generated by d20 companies have had no impact on WotC, but I think that's plainly false.

RPGs are not a necessity. There are no binary choices here - if a gamer buys product X, that doesn't mean he will never buy product Y. RPG products are pure luxuries.

Sure they are, but even with luxury products people make choices. Sometimes people will go buy up something they couldn't afford previously. Then again, maybe not. By the time they have extra cash, there could be some new shinier thing in the game store.

If we applied this logic to other forms of entertainment - books, movies, DVDs, it falls apart. Only a lunatic would say that everyone who went to see The Incredibles will never see any of the other movies that were playing at the theater that night. The same thing applies to DVDs, books, whatever. What is so magical about RPGs? I'm honestly curious.

There's nothing special about RPGs. Again, this is economics. The amount of disposible income is not infinite. If you spend money on one thing, that means you haven't spent it on something else. You are voting with your dollars. People who have good jobs may very well buy two d20 books and two WotC books on the same day, but lots of folks won't. Some percentage of those folks will never buy Races of Stone or Frostburn or whatever. That's what I'm talking about. The question is whether that percentage is significent or not. I think it is. I think if WotC sells 10,000 less of every D&D book because of competition from the d20 market at large, they are losing way more than any network effect or feel good PR can make up for.

And that's really all I'm trying to say here. I'm not talking about absolutes. I'm not saying that if you buy the Advanced Bestiary, you'll never in your life buy Monster Manual III. Obviously, that's ridiculous. There are folks for whom that'll be true though, because the Advanced Bestiary serves their needs better or because they can't afford both books or because they'll have lost interest in MMIII by the time they can afford it. That number of lost sales is insignifcent to WotC in and of itslef, but multiply it across all d20 releases since 2000 and I think it's quite a different story.

Besides - let's say there is competition. I'm curious why those factors I listed are irrelevent.

They are irrelevant to the topic of this thread--whether d20 and the OGL have hurt WotC in the long run. Regardless of the quality of WotC's offerings, it is a fact that hundreds and hundreds of thousands of d20 books have been sold over the past four and a half years.

Does that mean that promotion, advertising, quality design, color interiors, high-quality artwork, and so forth have no bearing on a book's sales?

Sure they do, but that's not what we're talking about.

How could a d20 publisher ever compete with WotC?

Offer something WotC can't or offer it before they can. Lots of companies made money selling mass combat systems and seafaring rules before WotC got around to covering those topics, for example. How much better would the Miniatures Handbook have sold if it came out two years earlier? A lot, I bet.

If you want to set up a competition between publishers, and keep score or whatever in your head, go ahead. Whatever makes you happy.

Mike, I'm a business owner. I don't "set it up", I just live with it. Green Ronin's products compete with those of other RPG publishers--in stores, online, and around the game table. That's just the way it is.

 

[Maggan]

Anecdotal observation

In Sweden D&D always played fifth fiddle or something like that. The dominant systems are native. But with the release of D&D3e and the d20STL and such products, D&D is now one of the big three (saleswise according to the shop where I buy my stuff). My theory is that this is because d20 was a huge credibility boost for gamers here, who generally avoid level-based systems.

Suddenly there were stuff out there that was interesting to play even if you didn't like D&D, and after buying eg Conan, many people realised that D&D might be fun as well. Or at least interesting. So sales of D&D are high.

Me, I buy D&D stuff, as well as d20. Every d20 products I buy is in addition to the dollars I sink into D&D. So the bottom line is that d20 has been bad for my wallet.

Cheers!

Maggan

 

[MerricB]

Yes, they do, Mike, because people don't have infinite amounts of money. If a guy goes to a game store with $30 and he wants a new book for his D&D game, he's only coming out of that store with one book. It might be a WotC book but it very well might not be. You can pretend that the millions of dollars generated by d20 companies have had no impact on WotC, but I think that's plainly false.

However, that argument only holds if you assume that the d20 companies have not increased the number of people buying D&D books.

If some people are dissatisified with the books that Wizards are putting out (and I see quite a few of them on ENworld), they may go to the d20 books that do a better job of catering to them. It is quite possible that this option keeps some of them in role-playing at all - in the past, a player not having a substitute might leave the game altogether. Based on comments on ENworld and my own observations, I believe that this was indeed the case during the period before 3E was released.

The d20 publishers actually form a safety net for Wizards - if Wizards books decline in quality, the d20 publishers benefit, but the D&D hobby does not lose some of these people altogether.

Indeed, with the retention of players improved, then the recruiting of new players becomes something that grows the player base, rather than merely slowing the rate of decline. And with more people playing, the more opportunities for new players to join in due to the increased exposure of the game. That's the heart of the Skaff Effect.

The figures I've heard suggest that the ongoing sales of D&D core books dropped by about 50% on the release of 2nd edition, and that D&D has now regained the ongoing sales it had during the 1st edition period, if not surpassing them.

If the d20 publishers cause the Wizards profits to be 10% lower than they would be without them, but they prevent that 50% drop in sales... then they would definitely be worth it to Wizards. It is possible that the d20 publishers don't actually stop sales dropping, and they still take away some portion of Wizards sales, but it isn't something we can measure.

Cheers!

 

[Turanil]

I'm constantly reading about people and their AU campaign, their Grim Tales campaign, or some other non-WoTC campaign.

Anyone who has taken basic Marketing 101 knows that there are only so many gaming dollars from the typical gamer to go around in a given month. So, if I have $50 to spend on gaming materials in January, and $25 of that goes to Grim Tales, and another $25 of that goes to Races of Stone (just making up costs here), then that's $25 that WoTC didn't get, but which was made possible through the use of their d20 license.

And yes, it may be a small amount on an individual d20 product level, but added up in total, all the Green Ronin's, Sword & Sorcery Studios, Malhavoc Presses, and others of the world in sum have to have some effect on WoTC's bottom line.

I am in love of the OGL and be able to get other d20 stuff than WotC DnD. But keep telling and proving that WotC loses money in doing so, and we will eventually reach the point where they will put an end to the OGL. At which time I will go and buy Chaosium or GURPS products rather than DnD.

 

[Sir Elton]

I am in love of the OGL and be able to get other d20 stuff than WotC DnD. But keep telling and proving that WotC loses money in doing so, and we will eventually reach the point where they will put an end to the OGL. At which time I will go and buy Chaosium or GURPS products rather than DnD.

That's not likely to happen. The OGL can't be revoked. The worst that Wizards can do is stop releasing D&D under the OGL. In other words, they stop releasing SRDs for D&D and say that the game is no longer open. But they can't stop the OGL.

 

[Rasyr]

He did not say "revoked", he said "put an end to the OGL". Theoretically, since the OGL has not been tested in court, there is no guarantee of it being unable to be revoked. The is a good reason to believe it cannot be revoked, but the facts about whether it can or cannot are still open, and will remain so until it is tested in a court of law.

However, Hasbro already has a reputation for lawsuits. If they really really wanted to "put an end" to the OGL, they would institute lawsuits against publishers, and gain wins through attrition.

 

[Turanil]

You can pretend that the millions of dollars generated by d20 companies have had no impact on WotC, but I think that's plainly false.

Since Green Ronin is almost the leading company in the d20 field (or among the top three), it means your own company generated millions of dollars. You must be rich!! Congratulations!!! (I envy you, making so much money with rpgs...)

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

However, that argument only holds if you assume that the d20 companies have not increased the number of people buying D&D books.

The d20 publishers actually form a safety net for Wizards - if Wizards books decline in quality, the d20 publishers benefit, but the D&D hobby does not lose some of these people altogether.

Indeed, with the retention of players improved, then the recruiting of new players becomes something that grows the player base, rather than merely slowing the rate of decline. And with more people playing, the more opportunities for new players to join in due to the increased exposure of the game. That's the heart of the Skaff Effect.

If the d20 publishers cause the Wizards profits to be 10% lower than they would be without them, but they prevent that 50% drop in sales... then they would definitely be worth it to Wizards. It is possible that the d20 publishers don't actually stop sales dropping, and they still take away some portion of Wizards sales, but it isn't something we can measure.

Cheers!

I waded through every post in this thread just to say I agree with everything Merric said?

Well, I gotta say something.

Obviously, the third party publishers are competitors for gaming dollars. (Agree with Pramas).

But by that rationale I'm also competing with the dairy industry, cause folks gotta have milk. (Straw man!)

A sale to a 3rd party doesn't necessarily mean WOTC lost a sale. WOTC is more likely than anyone to pick up a second sale even if someone already bought a 3rd party product that fills the same niche. (Kinda agree with mearls.)

However, I don't think the OGL has hurt WOTC. (Agree with Merric's observation.)

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

However, Hasbro already has a reputation for lawsuits.

They do? A reputation for justly protecting their rights, yes. By and large, though, I assure you that Hasbro is more interested in settling out of court than filing lawsuits-- especially frivolous ones.

Every judgement that goes against Hasbro in court wastes their legal capital.

If they really really wanted to "put an end" to the OGL, they would institute lawsuits against publishers, and gain wins through attrition.

No, they wouldn't.

Their lawyers are going to go into court with a contract that they drafted, and which has gone unchallenged by them for years, then try to argue to a judge that their own contract is invalid, for the sole purpose of obviously yanking the rug out from under their competitors?

Man. How do you sleep at night worrying about the big evil corporation under your bed?


Wulf

 

[Cergorach]

Hmm...
I'm not so certain that D&D would be where it is today if it wasn't for the D20 and OGL licenses (and all the publishers that picked it up). While there was a lot of hype around the release of 3E i doubt it would have lasted as long as it did without D20/OGL support. The alternative would have been for WotC to release more products and as a result would have risked more financially if it failed (not to mention the impact it would have had on the D&D brand).

Folks like us (and with that i mean people that hang around ENworld) are a conduit to a lot more players and DMs that haven't heard of D20/OGL and do not intend to buy it. But folks like us are often the driving force in their gaming groups, if D&D/D20/OGL doesn't keep our attention we might start to play other games (like WoD, Shadowrun, etc.) or stop playing all together for a time. I for example buy a lot of D20/OGL stuff, but also all D&D stuff (inc. Modern), the rest of my group on the other hand doesn't buy any D20/OGL stuff on only some D&D stuff, and those of my gaming group that can also DM have also DMed for other games that where also pure D&D. What does this mean? Probably that D20/OGL gives a certain amount of staying power to the D%D brand, that staying power is only effective to a small percentage of the D&D players/DMs, but those are often the driving force behind larger groups of players/DMs. I am pretty certain that i directly influenced between 10 to 20 people to pickup D&D 3E before it was even released (and how many of those inluenced others?), i'm also certain that i influenced half those people to keep playing D&D 3E(3.5) over the years and that was only possible due to D20/OGL influences (like GR, AEG, FFG, S&SS,HD, etc.) that kept me interested in D&D, without that i'm certain that we would have had long breaks (during which no D&D products would have been bought) and maybe even been playing WoD right now.

Over the years WotC have increased the product releases per year, have increased the size of the supplements (and thus the price), and have started to release fringe products such as board games and collectable miniature games, all the while taking back market share from the D20/OGL publishers. Remember just before it was known that there was a 3.5 comming, how the market had 'stalled', masses of D20/OGL publishers where failing? The release of 3.5 invigorated interest in D&D but suddenly there where also more releases of D&D products, practically in a vacum that the failing D20/OGL publishers left behind. Now the D20/OGL publisher list is shrinking even more as well as the releases the remaining D20/OGL publishers release (with the exception of a few like Mongoose, but even Mongoose is setting it's sights on other games beside D20/OGL, miniature games). What does that mean? Probably that WotC can pick up the peaces that D20/OGL publishers left and increase their market share, i just don't know if that means wether WotC is making profits on the products they sell, i think they can, but it really depends on the quality they produce. [off topic] Races of stone is an example of how not make a race book, not that it's bad on how it presents dwarves and gnomes, but giving more pages to a new race no one has an interest of playing then established races (such as dwarves and gnomes) is wasting the consumer's money, and leaves the consumer with the idea that WotC couldn't come up with more material on dwarves and gnomes and just filled the rest of the book up with other crap. [/offtopic]

Is D20/OGL hurting WotC in the short run, yes because there are others that share a small pie and not everyone who tastes of the pie takes a bite of the WotC part. Is D20/OGL hurting WotC in the long run, no, because D&D would be what it is now without D20/OGL and it gives D&D more staying power. Not to mention the fact that the D&D rules sytem is nipping away at other gamesystems...