D&D 5E D&D article on Polygon re: direction of the brand

[Sacrosanct]

Article here.

Pretty interesting, and confirms a lot about how they approached Gen Con. Or rather, how they didn't approach Gen Con.

Also reassuring to know that 5e is a huge success so far, and is bringing in a lot of new players. Let's hope they get the digital tools/support thing addressed quickly.

 

[SkidAce]

Good article...thank you.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

Most interesting to me was the line about how surveys are showing them that the D&D audience is the youngest it's ever been (well, since WotC acquired the game, I take it), which tracks with my own anecdotal observations and also bodes well for the game (and larger brand) as a whole.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Most interesting to me was the line about how surveys are showing them that the D&D audience is the youngest it's ever been (well, since WotC acquired the game, I take it), which tracks with my own anecdotal observations and also bodes well for the game (and larger brand) as a whole.

Yep. Now they just need to come out with the movie and cartoon, and improve that even more

 

[Mercurius]

"The biggest message I want to get out is this idea that D&D is doing very well, but we’re not resting on our laurels. We see every year as starting over. It’s up to us to win back everybody. We’re never going to assume that if you liked what we did last year, you’ll like what we did next year. That’s a recipe for complacency and complacency is the first step toward undermining all the success we’ve had in the past." ~ Mike Mearls

What I find interesting about this is that it implies that there is no set pattern of products. Yes, we saw (will see) only Princes of the Apocalypse, Out of the Abyss, and Sword Coast Adventurer's Handbook this year, but that doesn't mean they'll be doing the same type of products next year. Now chances are we'll see story arcs and similar stuff, but it gives the line an open-ended feeling - like surprises could be in store.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

Yeah, but honestly the repeated "starting off slow" and "determine what the audience wants before we put out a product" quotes from Wizard have been consistent for close to a year now - none of this is really that shocking, they've never said that things are set in stone forever and that they'd never vary from or expand upon the existing schedule.

I don't expect them to start putting out monthly splats ever again, mind you, but I've said all along that short of cancelling books for the pen & paper line all together, there really isn't anywhere for them to go but up, in terms of output.

 

[Mercurius]

Yes, agreed. In a way I'd be surprised if we didn't start seeing a bit more than we did this year. I could see 2016 being the same as this year, plus a splat book (psionics) and maybe something else, so 4-5 books rather than the 3 we've seen in 2015. Or maybe they switch it up and do a couple story arc box sets, I don't know. But regardless, I don't see them veering so much from tradition that we don't see a psionics or planes book, or a second Monster Manual or Fiend Folio. But I think the point is that whatever the future out-put is, it will be slower than in past editions.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Most interesting to me was the line about how surveys are showing them that the D&D audience is the youngest it's ever been (well, since WotC acquired the game, I take it), which tracks with my own anecdotal observations and also bodes well for the game (and larger brand) as a whole.

I don't know how he reached that conclusion. So he's getting more data than he used to: with that, you can figure out the average age of people responding to your surveys, now. You can't compare that to past data if you didn't collect data in the past, so you can't conclude 'younger.' You can certainly conclude it anecdotally, and, compared to the 90s when CCGs and LARPs were sucking away the new generation of potential RPG fans, it certainly seems plausible. Likewise, "selling great, but we won't share any numbers," is what WotC has said every time.

I guess, as someone who works with data, I'm just suspicious of those kinds vague claims and conclusions. But, in spite of there being nothing new to the marketing speak, I really do get the impression that D&D has recovered from the Great Recession and the rift of the edition war. For one thing there isn't this cloud of negativity surrounding it, it's own fans are no longer actively trying to wreck it, instead there's a relatively united front of support for the game (Pathfinder notwithstanding). That was a major 5e goal, and it looks to have been successful. The point about using the right technology this time around instead of heavily investing in the wrong technology is also a cogent one, for instance. It's not just picking the right horse this time, it's not betting more than you can afford to lose. WotC has just had a much less risky, more realistic, business plan for D&D this time around, and it's paying off, even if it does mean a slightly lower profile at GenCon.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't know how he reached that conclusion. So he's getting more data than he used to: with that, you can figure out the average age of people responding to your surveys, now. You can't compare that to past data if you didn't collect data in the past, so you can't conclude 'younger.' You can certainly conclude it anecdotally, and, compared to the 90s when CCGs and LARPs were sucking away the new generation of potential RPG fans, it certainly seems plausible.

Also worth questioning is how or if they self-limited their data collection. Example: that now-legendary customer survey done by Ryan Dancey and WotC in the run-up to 3e's launch excluded all answers from anyone who self-identified as being over a certain age (I think 35); giving them a skewed view of how the game was played and ultimately leading, IMO, to a worse game design.

Likewise, "selling great, but we won't share any numbers," is what WotC has said every time.

Yep, that's been their party line for ages.

I guess, as someone who works with data, I'm just suspicious of those kinds vague claims and conclusions. But, in spite of there being nothing new to the marketing speak, I really do get the impression that D&D has recovered from the Great Recession and the rift of the edition war. For one thing there isn't this cloud of negativity surrounding it, it's own fans are no longer actively trying to wreck it, instead there's a relatively united front of support for the game (Pathfinder notwithstanding). That was a major 5e goal, and it looks to have been successful.

Anecdotally, I agree with this assessment. 5e's big-tent approach seems, thus far, to be working as intended. Good on 'em!

The point about using the right technology this time around instead of heavily investing in the wrong technology is also a cogent one, for instance. It's not just picking the right horse this time, it's not betting more than you can afford to lose.

As long as WotC realize that not everyone plays the game online, meaning their market for online products will at best be a subset of their overall D&D market, all is good.

WotC has just had a much less risky, more realistic, business plan for D&D this time around, and it's paying off, even if it does mean a slightly lower profile at GenCon.

"Slightly lower profile" is a rather massive understatement. They were non-existent, which from a business standpoint might not be relevant except Pathfinder was *everywhere*; and in competition for such new players as there might have been WotC got flattened.

Lan-"and farming their D&D games out to a third-party group at GenCon seems to have been something of a failure"-efan

 

[aramis erak]

Most interesting to me was the line about how surveys are showing them that the D&D audience is the youngest it's ever been (well, since WotC acquired the game, I take it), which tracks with my own anecdotal observations and also bodes well for the game (and larger brand) as a whole.

My daughter's D&D group at school is 18-strong. 6 from last year, and a dozen more new - not an official club, just a bunch of enthusiastic players.