D&D 5E D&D Next not planning to compete against Pathfinder, Splatbook Hints

[Jan van Leyden]

Consequently, either D&D 5e will be released and then quickly cease ongoing support, or there will be something published for it regularly - the game designers want to stay in a job after all!

Yes, but does it have to use the classic publishing model? When Mr. Mearls wants to feed you something for the ten minutes you spend at the bus stop, a small snippet of information, rule, or fluff may be the way to go.

Be it via subscription model (DDI 2.0) or micro payment, you could call up today's menu on your smartphone and decide what you want to read right now. You might be able to flag the item as "accepted" for your game and be given a view of all the single items you want to use in your game.

 

[delericho]

Yes, but does it have to use the classic publishing model?

No, that's a fair point. But I'm afraid I'll believe the alternative when I see it.

 

[Mistwell]

Two things:

1) Hasbro won't pay game designers to sit around doing nothing.

Agreed. However, game designers can write non tabletop rpg games. Games which expand the brand, but which don't necessarily expand the quantity of rpg books.

2) Game designers are, in general, a poor fit for writing novels, coding video games, making movies, handling licensing, or otherwise doing the whole "multimedia" thing.

Game designers write the story and adventure for video games, and coders code what they wrote. The video game industry is rife with "retired" rpg writers. Indeed, Green Ronin's Chris Pramas got back from doing that not so long ago. They're also good at writing board games, and apps, and other multimedia things. All of these things use game designers. It's a mistake to think coders are the ones writing the ideas that go into the stories of those games - those are different skill sets, and they employ writers for them. These writers already frequently use former or current RPG writers.

Consequently, either D&D 5e will be released and then quickly cease ongoing support, or there will be something published for it regularly - the game designers want to stay in a job after all!

I think we will see both magazines ongoing, and I also think we will see some setting and adventure books. But I think you're mistaken to think RPG writers only can write for RPG books.

Assuming they do choose the "publish something" route, then when faced with the choice between an adventure selling some units versus a splatbook selling many more, they're likely to choose the latter.

I do not think they will, much like Pathfinder didn't choose that route (much) either. I think we already have proof of concept aplenty.

 

[delericho]

Game designers write the story and adventure for video games, and coders code what they wrote.

Good point.

How about this, then: WotC won't be doing the MMO/video games in-house - they simply don't have the expertise for it, and will therefore license out the property. So, no need for in-house RPG writers for that.

I think we will see both magazines ongoing...

I really don't share your confidence on that one. Though I'm entirely prepared to be wrong about it.

I do not think they will, much like Pathfinder didn't choose that route (much) either. I think we already have proof of concept aplenty.

Sort of. Pathfinder got a massive boost in the early days because of the subscriber base they inherited from Dragon/Dungeon, and that subscription model is pretty key to its ongoing success. It's not so much adventures that have proven to be successful, it's subscriptions to adventures.

Now, if WotC do indeed revive the magazines and switch to using in-house rather than freelance authors (or, equally, they start rolling out their official adventures through the DDI mechanism), then that subscription mechanism comes into play. But for physical products, WotC just aren't set up to follow Pathfinder's lead - they don't do direct sales, they're not set up to handle subscriptions, and they don't have a subscriber base to inherit.

(And, as I've said up-thread, I doubt whether there will be a set of 5e DDI tools, without which the value of the rest of the package becomes questionable. Once again, I'm entirely prepared to be wrong about that one. )

 

[DMZ2112]

I think you guys are thinking down the wrong line of "multi-media". It isn't just movies and TV.

1999 was before smartphones, tablets, and World of Warcraft.

You guys are way too focused on the random number I threw out there. Fellowship of the Ring opened on December 19, 2001, so yes, I should have said 12 years, 3 months, and 5 days. Apologies.

It's not about the types of media, it's about the timing of that media.

2) Game designers are, in general, a poor fit for writing novels, coding video games, making movies, handling licensing, or otherwise doing the whole "multimedia" thing.

Truer words never spoken. Writing is not an easily transferable skill. RPG writing is essentially technical writing with vignette fiction thrown in. There is nothing else like it in the world, that I am aware of. Maybe video game manuals. It certainly won't help with screenplays or game scripts and it obviously doesn't help with novel writing, much as it pains me to say so.

I think Hasbro understands that the tabletop game is the core of the brand, at least for now. If they didn't they wouldn't have waited for two years while the new edition was playtested.

To be fair though, Paizo has shown that you can go the adventure route.

Paizo goes all the routes. Their release schedule is unrelenting.

It's also worth noting that, per Dancey's old Escapist interview, a key part of WotC's motivation for doing the DDI was that they couldn't do a full-on MMO due to licensing reasons. Since those reasons no longer apply, and if they're now following their multi-platform path, doesn't that suggest that they're more likely to go for the full-on MMO rather than a new DDI?

I have so many opinions about this paragraph. Sigh. Here's the least angry one: D&D already has two perfectly serviceable MMOs, made by two of the most successful developers in the genre (which is not saying much), and the second one is actually a fun /game/ even if you hate multiplayer like I do. If they announce a third MMO, I might just have to fly out to Seattle myself and start slapping faces. The only people an MMO is good for are the shareholders.

Video game wise, D&D needs exactly what Shadowrun needs, and what the CRPG genre in general needs. Not an MMO, but an open world action RPG with five-player co-op, a nice long story, a robust system for procedurally generating random quests, and Steam Workshop support. Neverwinter comes /so close/. Another few months of development and it will be even better, but it will always have to deal with the MMO baggage, so it will never be perfect.

 

[Lord_Blacksteel]

My point, which was made in line with @Mistwell 's OP theory and the general theme of the thread, was that the time to realize that D&D was marketable as a multimedia fantasy franchise was 15 years ago, just after Hasbro had bought Wizards of the Coast and when the Lord of the Rings movies and Star Wars prequels were all anyone could talk about and the world was desperate for knockoffs like the Golden Compass and the Chronicles of Narnia. Not now, when there's one Hobbit movie left and the world has once again collectively moved on to moralizing, empty-headed Will Smith and Tom Cruise action sci-fi.

D&D RPG's, novels, and video games were popular before all of those things, from the gold box games and Dragonlance in the 80's on through the Drizzt books and the Baldur's Gate games in the 90's. Game of Thrones is pretty popular right now, zombies are a big deal, pirates have occasional movies and a TV series. I think there's plenty of room left for D&D to continue doing that and be successful. I think it will depend more on what they do than any general fantasy fatigue.

It does surprise me that they keep emphasizing this "new approach" - they've been doing it for 30 years in one way or another now. Not always well but they had the RPG-Boardgame-Cartoon-Videogame-Novels-Coloring Book-Action Figure-T-shirts-3-Ring Binder thing going back then and I can't recall it ever completely dying away since then.

Sort of. Pathfinder got a massive boost in the early days because of the subscriber base they inherited from Dragon/Dungeon, and that subscription model is pretty key to its ongoing success. It's not so much adventures that have proven to be successful, it's subscriptions to adventures.

Well, WOTC does still have DDI subscribers, and that was the way to get full access to Dragon and Dungeon for 4E so there were adventures involved. I have no idea what the numbers are but it has and does continue to exist.

With Paizo, the Dragon/Dungeon/AP subscription switch happened 6 years ago. While I agree that it probably did help them for a time, I'd say the continued success is due to their ongoing efforts rather than any inertia from that time.

 

[delericho]

Well, WOTC does still have DDI subscribers...

To be fair, I addressed that in the paragraph immediately after the one you quoted.

With Paizo, the Dragon/Dungeon/AP subscription switch happened 6 years ago. While I agree that it probably did help them for a time, I'd say the continued success is due to their ongoing efforts rather than any inertia from that time.

Looking back, it appears I wasn't too clear on this one. Basically, two separate things got stuck together in my head, and then confused when I wrote the post.

Firstly, Paizo got a massive boost when first setting up Pathfinder, due to inheriting that subscriber base.

After that (including now) the subscription model itself (not that initial boost, per se) remains hugely important - to the extent that I suspect if every PF subscriber cancelled their sub and instead bought exactly the same products from their FLGS, Paizo would run into massive problems. The subscription model lets them know that that next AP book will sell enough to be worth printing and they know ahead of time exactly how many copies to print.

That's why I don't think anyone else could replicate Paizo's approach - they don't start with the inherited subscriber-base needed to get started, and they're not (generally) set up to handle subscriptions the way that Paizo do.

 

[tsadkiel]

Personally, I'm thrilled, because this could mean the return of the official Dungeons and Dragons Woodburning Set!

 

[DMZ2112]

Game of Thrones is pretty popular right now, zombies are a big deal, pirates have occasional movies and a TV series.

Oh, man, I have less than no desire to see D&D generate a Game of Thrones clone or a zombie vs. pirate anything. Sad face.

It does surprise me that they keep emphasizing this "new approach" - they've been doing it for 30 years in one way or another now. Not always well but they had the RPG-Boardgame-Cartoon-Videogame-Novels-Coloring Book-Action Figure-T-shirts-3-Ring Binder thing going back then and I can't recall it ever completely dying away since then.

Well, not completely, but other than video games and novels, I am completely unaware of any such tie-ins being produced in quantity between 1990 and 2010.

 

[Warskull]

I am not sure this panel amounts to much when it comes to D&D Next. While Mike Mearls may not be concerned with topping the charts he is ultimately beholden to forces higher up in the company than him. If the suits demand the first spot in the chart, he has to try and go for it. Mearls is a smart guy, but the real question boils down to how much the businessmen are on board with his philosophy.

Ultimately, Paizo has a distinct advantage in this area because it is a smaller company with a CEO who is immersed in the culture. "The sales charts don't matter as much as you think" can be hard sell to an outsider with big profit in his eyes.

The whole "not planning to compete" is a stretch too. Many Pathfinder players are potential 5th edition players. There is a lot of overlap between customers.