Critical Role Announces Publishing Company

The first game will be a board/card game called Uk’otoa. This will be followed by role playing game products including Syndicult, “an original modern magic roleplaying game designed by Matthew Mercer in which mob families jealously guard secrets and battle it out for power on the city streets.”

Announcing Darrington Press, Our Game Publishing Company | Critical Role

critrole.com

I’ve long wondered whether there might one day be the official Critical Role role playing game, and whether CR's massive influence could make a dent in WotC, the traditional 800lb gorilla.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That implies Crit Role are going anywhere soon. The current campaign probably has over a year to go, maybe 2.

I DM a lot of games (four ongoing campaigns during the pandemic). I cannot imagine two more years at or above this power level.

 

[wicked cool]

since 5E could we argue that pathfinder has lost steam?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Now more generally speaking, what I find interesting about this is the choice of name: Darrington Press. Why not Critical Role Publishing? Wouldn't that give them more automatic sales? I wonder what the reasoning is behind this; maybe they don't want to step on WotC's toes, as Critical Role has a strong relationship with them and starting a self-named publishing company might be viewed as overt competition, rather than the more covert competition of Darrington.

I think they just want to have a company beyond Critical Role, both to expand beyond the audience and to outlive the streaming show. Very few companies are named after their biggest product.

 

[Mercurius]

since 5E could we argue that pathfinder has lost steam?

It is hard to say, because it may simply be that Pathfinder doesn't loom as large in a relative sense. Let's say they rose to a popularity of "5" at the point where they surpassed D&D in sales (2012-13, I believe). Even if they plateaued and stayed a "5," D&D burst back onto the scene in 2014 as a "7" and rose to a "10" over the next few years. So now Pathfinder looks small in comparison.

(All numbers are just used as an analogy and not meant to signify anything other than to illustrate the point).

I am also unclear as to how P2 has impacted sales. Presumably they're still going strong, but I imagine some unhappy P1 players either opted out or returned to the D&D fold. Either way, Paizo still seems to have a diehard core base that drives sales, so they're doing fine.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I guess Darrington Press will want a relation with WotC as Hasbro and River Horse or Renegade studios. Something like frenemy or rival-partner, or a outsourcer for licences.

To be a true rival of WotC Darrington Press had to publish its own TTRPG and this would need a lot of time if we talk about a general fantasy genre without links with a previous franchise (Batman, Hellboy, Terminator?).

 

[Morrus]

if we talk about a general fantasy genre without links with a previous franchise (Batman, Hellboy, Terminator?).

... Critical Role?

 

[hawkeyefan]

While I agree that controversies have an impact, where I agree with @Zaukrie (although don't want to speak for them), is that I don't think the majority of D&D players care about the controversies, or have a strong opinion either way, or even if they are aware of them at all. Most just...play D&D.

I agree with that in a lot of ways. Of my group, I'm the only one who regularly follows up on RPG news and the like. And although I'm aware of the controversies that have popped up, that doesn't mean I always have a strong opinion about them. Some seem more meaningful than others, some resonate with me, some don't.

The rest of the players in my group have no idea of what's going on behind the scenes with D&D or the larger RPG world.

Similar to Black's comments about liberals and conservatives, as if all D&D fans can be so neatly categorized on one side of the political spectrum. And even if they are, they don't necessarily care or have the same level of upset about the controversies as Black implies (e.g. not all liberals are upset about WotC's "milquetoast" attitude, and not all conservatives are raging against every change to their game). Most D&D players seem rather happy with WotC, or happy enough to keep driving record sales, and just want to play.

While this is true, there is also a vocal section of the fanbase that is demanding change. That one portion of this fanbase is unaware of the requests of another portion doesn't really matter.....because WotC seems to be aware and seems to be adjusting in response. They may not always adjust in a way that many would consider the "right" way, but they are responding. Which most likely means that they think it is good for business to do so.

Disclaimers on older products, adjustments in many longstanding elements such as racial characteristics for PCs, attempts to portray more diversity among the casts of characters in their products, attempts to diversify their design team......they've done all these things, to some extent, and in each case there has been a loud outcry from parts of the fanbase.

Now more generally speaking, what I find interesting about this is the choice of name: Darrington Press. Why not Critical Role Publishing? Wouldn't that give them more automatic sales? I wonder what the reasoning is behind this; maybe they don't want to step on WotC's toes, as Critical Role has a strong relationship with them and starting a self-named publishing company might be viewed as overt competition, rather than the more covert competition of Darrington.

I think so that they can offer things that have nothing to do with Critical Role. They can create new games or supplements for existing games that don't connect to the world established in Critical Role. They can always slap a "from the creators of Critical Role" label on a product if they think that will help, but the name of their publishing company being more neutral is probably just a way to broaden expectations.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I am wondering why not Disney produce its own game-live show podcast as CR. They have hire lots of young aspiring actors. Although I suggest to add a virtual tabletop because it gives a better look on the screen.

Today technically Exandria(CR) is within D&D, and I am OK about this totally.

We can't forget D&D Beyond is one of the sponsors. And the day WotC wanted to publish a no-D&D game (for example Gamma World or a new d20 Modern) CR would be a perfect tool to promote it.

I haven't watched it, because my level of oral English isn't enough to understand and enjoy.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I'd like to see Matt Mercer do a new full length rpg campaign that's NOT D&D. I think that's the only way to see if the Mercer Effect was real or if it only appears to be a real thing for some people who love D&D so much.

Syndicult sounds like lots of fun. I won't watch them play D&D, but I'd watch them play this game. Set the game in the Roaring 20s and play Chicago mobsters.

 

[Zarithar]

I think people active on message boards and Twitter over estimate the impact of controversy on WotC. I bet none of the people I play with even know about them.

This. Also most of the folks screaming on Twitter when it comes to D&D remain largely unheard by the majority of the player base. I wish CR success with this venture. I enjoyed the Wildemount book and am a fringe fan of Mercer and CR in that I appreciate what they've done for the hobby overall but have not watched many episodes of CR.