D&D 5E D&DN going down the wrong path for everyone.

[DMZ2112]

No, it never happens, because as soon as someone makes the comparison, the dung starts to fly, and most of it is aimed at 4e; the red-headed stepchild of D&D-dom. Naturally, the 4e adherents come to the defence of their edition of choice, which is more or less constantly under attack. No amount of explaining our position ever seems to help, because we're "wrong," or are assured that, "don't worry, you'll get your tactical module eventually."

It's every bit as frustrating from where I sit.

It's been a long time since I posted here regularly. I think the last time I spent time here was shortly after D&D4's launch. I don't remember too many names from that time, but I do remember you, Nemesis Destiny. I specifically remember respecting your opinions.

So when I say the following, I do it with the utmost respect:

Maybe the D&D4 community needs to acknowledge that unwelcome things are going to be said about D&D4 in D&D5 threads, specifically because D&D5 is supposed to improve on D&D4, no matter how anyone felt about it. Maybe the D&D4 community needs to let it go.

I enjoyed D&D4. But if I am going to talk about what D&D5 needs, I am going to make negative comparisons with D&D4. And I do not need my thread hijacked every time I do that. It is counter productive.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

It's been a long time since I posted here regularly. I think the last time I spent time here was shortly after D&D4's launch. I don't remember too many names from that time, but I do remember you, Nemesis Destiny. I specifically remember respecting your opinions.

So when I say the following, I do it with the utmost respect:

Maybe the D&D4 community needs to acknowledge that unwelcome things are going to be said about D&D4 in D&D5 threads, specifically because D&D5 is supposed to improve on D&D4, no matter how anyone felt about it. Maybe the D&D4 community needs to let it go.

I enjoyed D&D4. But if I am going to talk about what D&D5 needs, I am going to make negative comparisons with D&D4. And I do not need my thread hijacked every time I do that. It is counter productive.

You know, I (and I think probably for the most part "we") could handle that, if it were constructive criticism. Most 4e supporters are more than willing to admit that the game wasn't perfect and could certainly have been improved upon. But it goes beyond that. There are folks who take every opportunity to take pot-shots and admin-ducking sideswipes at every mention of 4e. I don't think it is too much to ask that we get a little respect for our preferences and ideas about the game.

Quite frankly, I would love to see 5e improve on 4e. So far, even from official channels, we're not seeing that. We're seeing head of R&D as well as his lead design team, publicly crucifying 4e or elements of it, and the anti-4e community rallies around that. That, coupled with the zero elements of our version of choice that we see in the playtest, and I think we have every right to complain about it.

Some of us have "let it go," as we just witnessed Crazy Jerome do in the other thread. Neonchameleon did likewise about a month ago in a similar thread.

Don't get me wrong; I'd love to see an end to the threadjacking as much as you would, but when 5e is being discussed, as soon as a 4e-ish idea enters in as a suggestion... BAM. We are then put on the defensive and asked to justify ourselves and our desires. We can't simply ask that what we want be included as an option given equal weight, no, we have to "settle," or deal with "suck it up, your edition failed, lol" posts.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Alright, let's change that perspective a bit. D&D Next seems to be as informed by Basic D&D as Advanced, and it sounds like WotC is going to release a "Basic" version of the game as a separate product.
So, given the last Version of Basic D&D we saw ended in 1999 when the released Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition. So, from your definition of "an edition's lifetime is until it is replaced" the 4th version of Basic D&D ran from 1991 (when the Rules Cyclopedia was released) until 2014 when the Basic D&D Next products comes out?

Again, this is the same argument you made before. There is a huge difference between a game being out of print for 22 years while other versions of the same game have run parallel to it, and it has has NO support of any sort whatsoever (from WotC, who in fact have never carried the product at all, TSR is out of business), and a game that is actively being sold by WotC and for which a NEW book hasn't been added to it in less than one year. B&N, your FLGS, Amazon, etc have brand new stock and can reorder 4e books. Try that with Basic. Basic is "dead", 4e is NOT. If you can't see the huge difference between those two things, well, whatever. Clearly you have to be able to grant that my point is reasonable. If you want to by contrast postulate that there are these hiatuses between editions where there's 'no current edition of D&D' I SUSPECT very few people around here are going to buy that.

First, they printed more than a thousand copies. Anything less than 10,000 copies just isn't worth doing.

Well, when the books were announced (see here http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02410000) they were billed as 'limited edition'. I don't see in any of the pages that I googled a specific number mentioned, but I have a pretty damned good memory, and my memory says it was 1000 copies, but its possible it was 5000, it sure wasn't 10k. The other books they've released (some 2e books, etc) could well be in greater number, but who can say? I know that even the 'limited edition' 1e core books are still in stock, so draw whatever conclusions you wish from that...

Second, let's do the math for how much WotC makes off a book. Based on the Rule of Two, prices double every time they change hands. The store sells for $50 but buys the book for $25 from the distributor. The distributor buys from WotC for $12.50. Half the book goes to printing, so WotC makes $6.25 off of each book. If it cost half-a-million dollars to write, layout, edit, and do art for a book they need to sell 80,000 copies before they cut even.
But it's actually likely slightly less than $6 per book because printing costs are likely higher.

Eh, its very hazardous to put much weight in such back-of-the-envelop numbers. No doubt there are people who could give you a pretty good guess on printing costs. It has been MANY years since I ran a game store, but back in the day 50% markup was a pipe dream, the distributors back then made out like bandits. I won't venture even a guess as to what the numbers are like today, but the gist of it is as you say, the producers cut can be pretty slim.

Printing, shipping, stocking, warehousing, and marketing are static costs. They're going to be the same if you're releasing a new book or a reprint.
If you can reprint a book with a comparable print run to the first printing it is very profitable.

Yes, but you never can. Consider the 1e reprints. There are so many millions of original books out there that you can buy a mint first printing of 1e core books for less (counting for inflation) than they cost new (Monster Manuals being somewhat of an exception). If you don't care what printing you get, you can actually buy a 1e PHB, mint, for less than I paid for mine in 1978. That's what you have to compete with. WotC is pricing these books in the neighborhood of $40 each, the question isn't if they can make money, but if they can actually compete against the existing inventory from the 70's! You can print a book moderately cheaply, but that assumes you have the material in typeset form, the 1e PHB/DMG/MM had to be laid out and typeset from scratch. Even if you're reprinting some 3e stuff you have to pay to have a press set up, and then all those costs you call 'static' are what we call 'variable' costs, they are PER ITEM costs. So, the problem here is you have some demand, but a vast amount of old inventory to meet it, plus high fixed costs, plus variable costs that eat up a large chunk of the cover price. Its a low margin business basically. While I am sure WotC wouldn't eat big losses to put out reprints I very seriously doubt any of those reprints are being printed in serious numbers or that they are really viable products on their own. They're a way to keep something out there which is fairly low risk. Even if they eat a whole 10k print run of something nobody really wants badly its ONLY maybe $100k down the drain and it can all be written off as 'brand development' or something.

PF's sales will peak and drop. In fact I have no idea how you can say what they are doing, we have virtually no information, unless Paizo is releasing sales figures or you have some insider info to share.

They're pretty open. We know that the first print run for the Pathfinder core rulebook was the largest print run Paizo had ever done and they sold out before GenCon and the actual release. They did a second printing in November 2009, the 3rd and 4th in 210 (April and September) and a 5th printing - which was the largest print run to date - on November 2011. The book continues to sell well, both on Amazon and on the Paizo store, regularly being featured in the store's Top 10 list (right now it's #3).

Sure, but we have no idea what those print runs sizes are relative to what WotC has sold of 4e, or what they printed. You simply cannot say. Nor can you say if current 4e PHB1 sales are 10%, 50%, or 80% of what the PF book's sales are at this point, or if in a year the PF book will be selling even as well as the PHB1 is now (since it was released a year earlier). The truth is all you can say is that Paizo is still selling PF books, not that they have sold anything near what 4e has sold. Its hard to compare exactly either, since PF has one book and 4e has 2. (2 and 3 counting monster books). A 4e PHB1 AND a DMG1 would be the more fair comparison to the PF book. This may in fact point out a price point advantage that PF has, but I don't know.

Two years after the release of 4e, WotC was trying to bolster sales with Essentials. Two years after the release of Pathfinder, Paizo had to print more Core Rulebooks because they were selling out.

WotC never said that Essentials was to 'boost sales', they said (and in the latest interview Mike continues to say) that it was released as a way to provide a wider range of appeal, an easy entry point, and an easily stocked option for retailers. Nothing I've ever seen indicates that this related to poor sales. I mean in a sense ANY product would hopefully boost sales, but so it goes.

Googling the phrase and no luck so far. I have no doubt the 4e PHB sold very well, with many 3e players and players of other editions buying the book to see what the fuss is. But I do doubt that it was higher than 1e or 3e which were phenomenons.

Well, again, you're free to be skeptical, I don't have a problem with that. I have read it and I see no reason to reject it myself, so you can see where I'm coming from anyway. I understand that for people who weren't wildly enthusiastic about 4e and thought it was all a big mistake that it is heartening to have this narrative in which it was all just ill-advised and doomed and sank like a brick. OBJECTIVELY though it isn't quite so easy to support that narrative. IMHO, based on nothing but commentary from knowledgeable people I buy the 'product was oversold to corporate' narrative. Had they done a perfect job with every aspect of 4e they might still have been scrambling right now, but they clearly dropped numerous balls. I think some of them DO relate to the game itself. On that score I think they miscalculated their own game design chops. They tried to make a VERY revised and fairly novel RPG and make it almost flawless at the first cut. It just wasn't possible. 4e redux IMHO would be a VERY VERY good game, but I think they've managed to create such a negative aura around both WotC and 4e that they feel now like there's no hope that would work. I don't know, maybe they're right, but I'd at least give the fan base more credit and take a shot at it. DDN, meh, that's not the ticket.

 

[Jester David]

I can only assume she meant in physical stores, in which case I would not be surprised PF outsold 4e, not at all. I believe they were releasing easily x3 to x5 the 4e product on a monthly basis, compatible with three different iterations of the game with little fiddling. Now they hold almost exclusive print sway, not counting the reprints, so the numbers won't be changing for awhile.

She actually referred to distributors, as Paizo and WotC share them. And in 2010 both were still publishing monthly books. Distributors ship to both online stores and physical ones.

 

[Pour]

[MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] I think we've talked about this before, but I honestly don't trust the current design team with making us that 4e redux. I'm not sure they ever really "got" what they created to begin with, if the adventures, design decisions, overall mishandling of the edition, and direction of 5e are any indication. I can't say I honestly believe any, save Chris Perkins, ever ran a campaign through Epic. I don't think they logged nearly as many play hours as you, or I, or [MENTION=98255]Nemesis Destiny[/MENTION], or any number of the 4e fans on the boards.

As an aside boys, how about Black Sheep as the name for a 4e heartbreaker hehe?

 

[Gorgoroth]

It's the same thing for MMOs probably. I spent more time playing other games than the games I worked on, which is pretty normal. After a long day of work you don't want to come home and run an epic 6 hour journey back into your day job.

 

[Jester David]

Sure, but we have no idea what those print runs sizes are relative to what WotC has sold of 4e, or what they printed. You simply cannot say. Nor can you say if current 4e PHB1 sales are 10%, 50%, or 80% of what the PF book's sales are at this point, or if in a year the PF book will be selling even as well as the PHB1 is now (since it was released a year earlier). The truth is all you can say is that Paizo is still selling PF books, not that they have sold anything near what 4e has sold. Its hard to compare exactly either, since PF has one book and 4e has 2. (2 and 3 counting monster books). A 4e PHB1 AND a DMG1 would be the more fair comparison to the PF book. This may in fact point out a price point advantage that PF has, but I don't know.

Except... the point was Pathfinder sales have gone up. I was countering your point that sales always drop. Because they haven't, and instead have doubled.

In this particular point, sales compared to 4e are irrelevant. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 4e Core books sold more, and they almost certainly had a much larger print run.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm happy to agree brick'n'mortar stores are AN indicator, but not the be-all, end-all indicator. I really don't think you can adequately weigh DDI + WotC book sales specific to 4e against anything else (and I imagine the reprints, novels, board games, tiles, and dungeon command must be raking something appreciable), because as we all love saying we don't have the numbers. Everyone has a 'sense' for these things, it seems, except the 'senses' range from 4e tanked to 4e did just fine and the bars of expectation are what really differ between companies. I'm wondering if they saw the potential for greater gains taking from all edition groups and went for it. I kind of admire that gusto, leaning entirely on the brand strength for support. Eh, for what it's worth, I haven't bought a book from a physical store in 5 years (none by me save one really bad one), but I own over a dozen 4e books.

I believe, emphasis believe and not "know", many of us 4e players are still waiting to buy some books. I mean DDI convinced me to wait out several purchases, including Monster Vault and Book of Vile Darkness, until whichever time the Compendium is shut down. When I can not longer access their information, then I'll consider buying them (Or just home-brew, it's really that easy).

I do recall Lisa offering the outselling point (offered during that thread as a thinly-veiled dig under the guise of elation, in my opinion, but neither here nor there). I can only assume she meant in physical stores, in which case I would not be surprised PF outsold 4e, not at all. I believe they were releasing easily x3 to x5 the 4e product on a monthly basis, compatible with three different iterations of the game with little fiddling. Now they hold almost exclusive print sway, not counting the reprints, so the numbers won't be changing for awhile.

I'm not sure how much it really matters, though. 4e, PF, and now 5e all exist in the same space and their sales are all 'weaker' for it. And one or more are the wrong direction for some or all of us hehe.

And I am sad to say I buy $50 books on a whim, and pledge as much with damned Kickstarter when I see things like True Ways, Shadowgate, and Torment: Tides.

Yeah, I think out of the 25 or so 4e books I own, I bought 3 from game stores (2 using a gift certificate and one my sister paid for as a present actually), and I bought a number of others at B&N, the rest from Amazon. At this point I won't buy from a physical store again, it is just not worth the extra cost (and the hour of my time to go there and buy it vs I can get free shipping from Amazon). I'd also note that there are still a number of books I'm looking to pick up.

It certainly seems like anyone could spin sales to make whatever point they wish to make. Given the sort of David vs Goliath subtext of the Paizo vs WotC thing Lisa would be a fool not to latch onto any plausible interpretation that promotes the story of the underdog winning out over the big bad corporate giant that took away their magazine sales, etc. Lisa is ANYTHING but stupid, clearly. WotC OTOH wisely enough stays out of that fight, all they could do is come across as the big giant "hur hur hur, you haven't hurt ME, that was a pinprick!". It just can't play in their favor. In a sense if they just say nothing and everyone concludes they are on the ropes, then its that much easier to catch a break later on, Mike plays the "oh, we're so chastised, we'll serve you better now" role quite well (he's no dummy either). He figures if he plays it right and puts out a very retro feel product he'll steal Paizo's thunder. He could be right too. With a product for every niche of the whole D&D fan base he may come out OK. Maybe he won't make book trying to sell support for 5 different editions at once, but he can squash the emergence of any real competition. Eventually PF will age and Paizo will be stuck where WotC was 4 years ago, needing to bite the bullet and write a new and possible divisive game to recharge their market position.

 

[Pour]

It's the same thing for MMOs probably. I spent more time playing other games than the games I worked on, which is pretty normal. After a long day of work you don't want to come home and run an epic 6 hour journey back into your day job.

During the creation of a game, I think that approach is a huge boon. On the other hand, when it comes to a redux, a refinement or tighter treatment of the game, I believe you need to play it, study it, discuss it, experiment with it, and spend time with it, you know?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

@AbdulAlhazred I think we've talked about this before, but I honestly don't trust the current design team with making us that 4e redux. I'm not sure they ever really "got" what they created to begin with, if the adventures, design decisions, overall mishandling of the edition, and direction of 5e are any indication. I can't say I honestly believe any, save Chris Perkins, ever ran a campaign through Epic. I don't think they logged nearly as many play hours as you, or I, or @Nemesis Destiny , or any number of the 4e fans on the boards.

As an aside boys, how about Black Sheep as the name for a 4e heartbreaker hehe?

You have a point there.

I favor Heroes of Myth and Legend for mine
[MENTION=98255]Nemesis Destiny[/MENTION] , agreed. My feeling is we just stood up for what we liked and wanted. I don't understand the need some people feel to constantly belittle what I like. They have to work up theories about how nobody much really bought it, everyone hates it, blah blah blah. Its all ridiculous and at best rather mean-spirited. I'm going to keep talking about what I like and what I want, that's what most of these threads are about, everyone gives their opinions about things. It especially irks me when certain posters keep trying to tell me that its wrong for me to want X instead of Y or point out that DDN may not be able to deliver what some of us want UNLESS some things are changed a bit. That's not negative, that's just using my noggin. Fine, you like your ideas better than mine, that's life.

One thing that I would worry about in terms of DDN is the way it was born, with a kick in the face to its predecessor. Take one lesson from the 4e community experience, you don't want to start out that way. It doesn't breed success. Several years from now when the axe may begin to aim at your favorite game you'd rather there weren't a horde of people more than willing to help swing it. A smarter approach IMHO would be to listen to the 4e people and think about voting for what will make them happy too when you go fill out those surveys. I'm sure if we are all looking out for each other we'd find this process is NOT zero sum.