D&D 5E Do all the rules need to be released at once?

[Sunseeker]

I would like to see more regular, smaller expansions that are perhaps, more affordable, with larger compilation books coming out once a year or so. So release say, Tieflings, or Bards as their own mini-book, say, 20-30 pages or so giving a lot of detail on that one race or class or monster. Then have annual releases of PHB2 or MM2-type stuff that compiles the stuff into one big traditional style book. Sell the small books for maybe $5-$10, and the big books for the usual 30-40(or 40-50, whatever fits).

This way DDN will have a steady stream of content, the people who want to keep their regular expenditures down will be able to do so, and the larger books will have had enough time for their small content to get playtested and then can include errata.

 

[Raith5]

I think the goal has to be that you should be able to largely replicate any of the previous editions at launch. If it doesn't do this I am not sure what the point of it is.

For myself i just want two options 1) to be able to play as basic game as a beer and pretzel experience and, 2) play a high fantasy 4th ed style of campaign.

 

[delericho]

They're screwed. There is no good way to release this game.

Each customer has a minimum set of things that must be supported or the game will be considered incomplete. This set will vary from customer to customer, but WotC can no doubt aggregate that to put together a set of stuff 'required' by the bulk of their customers - and they'll want to get that into print as soon as possible.

However, each customer also has a point where they decide they have enough stuff - provided these items are there, I don't need anything else. And beyond that they might buy more, or not. Of course, that point varies from customer to customer, but the percentage inevitably increases as more stuff is published, and so sales of books decrease with time. Eventually, they drop to a point where it's not worth publishing any more, and then it's time for a new edition. WotC, of course, want to delay this as long as possible.

The problem is that the 'required' stuff is almost certainly considered 'enough' by a large segment of their fans. (Indeed, WotC have noted this before - the majority of players buy nothing, a very large chunk buy the PHB and nothing else, a smaller number buy a PHB and a splatbook for their class or race, and after that the numbers drop dramatically.)

It may very well be the case that 5e is considered 'incomplete' right up to the point where it supports a dozen or so races, a score or so classes, across the full level range, and with 500 or so monsters... and as soon as it does support all those things, it immediately reaches the point where it is no longer worth publishing anything else.

In theory, the way around this is to focus instead on selling 'disposable' items - publish a setting with a metaplot that regularly updates, sell adventures, perhaps sell power cards or Fortune Cards, or... but I doubt those would sell enough to sustain the line - most people seem to go to WotC for rules.

The one saving grace they have is the DDI. This may well be enough by itself to keep the game going, and in time replace the printed line of supplements. But even here there's a problem - if most of your customers have enough and you're just drip-feeding new material to your ~80k subscribers via eDragon, you don't really need a permanent staff of designers and developers; you need one or two guys to coordinate the new material and run the e-magazines.

 

[Alzrius]

As a better way of explaining, it needs to feel that I have the selection of 3e out of the gate, not constrained like 4e initially was.

It's worth remembering that for 3E, the PHB came out in August, the DMG in September, and the MM in October. So I think WotC could stagger the releases by a few months.

 

[tangleknot]

There was a time when D&D could release content rich source material and still make a hefty profit. 2nd ed, 3rd ed, both successful games and their core books were twice as thick as 4th's. They didn't require a subscription fee to play the game, nor were we forced to buy into their miniatures line. Its greedy what they have done with D&D, they took a highly successful game and decided to make more money, and give the customers less. We deserve a better, and if they choose to repeat this business practice again I'll choose to keep playing other RPG's.

I want to mention: Although not as popular Shadowrun and World of Darkness are examples of games that are going on their 2nd decade. They don't care that most players either don't buy a book or only buy the core, they care that people are playing their game. They make enough money that their business continues to grow.

 

[Umbran]

4th editions....

You know, it was entirely possible to talk about what you wanted to see in the new edition, without dumping a lot of negativity about a previous edition. Think about that for a second - you could say, "I would like to see X, Y, and Z, please!" without ever saying anything bad about another game.

Rhetorical question: Why didn't you? Why was the meat of the post more about something you didn't like?

The title of this thread is not "Please trash on other games here!" So, perhaps as we go forwards, folks can stick to the forward-looking topic, rather than the backward-looking edition war.

Thanks, all!

 

[Umbran]

I would like to see more regular, smaller expansions that are perhaps, more affordable, with larger compilation books coming out once a year or so. So release say, Tieflings, or Bards as their own mini-book, say, 20-30 pages or so giving a lot of detail on that one race or class or monster.

If they're doing only electronic distribution, that's fine. But for print material, it seems to me that the profit margins on that format would be horrible.

They're screwed. There is no good way to release this game.

Each customer has a minimum set of things that must be supported or the game will be considered incomplete.

Yes, but historically, the game has not been "complete" upon first publication. We all know there will be supplements as time goes by, and that not everything fits in the core. Thus, goal for the initial offering is not actually pleasing everyone with the options presented, but meeting their expectations. The two are not the same. Folks will, of course, be annoyed that their pet option that came along in the Nth splatbook of one of the previous games isn't present, but when honest with themselves, they won't be able to really say they *expected* to see it in the new core.

 

[billd91]

I want to mention: Although not as popular Shadowrun and World of Darkness are examples of games that are going on their 2nd decade. They don't care that most players either don't buy a book or only buy the core, they care that people are playing their game. They make enough money that their business continues to grow.

They're also not living with Hasbro's business culture, running the risk of being shelved for several years if they perform below a certain expectation ($50 million for 4e-era). We can hope that, thanks to a Magic resurgence, WotC has negotiated a little more leniency from Hasbro on whether or not D&D Next needs to make that much money. Otherwise, even if it successfully reunites some segments of the edition fan markets, I have a hard time seeing it succeed against those expectations.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

They're also not living with Hasbro's business culture, running the risk of being shelved for several years if they perform below a certain expectation ($50 million for 4e-era). We can hope that, thanks to a Magic resurgence, WotC has negotiated a little more leniency from Hasbro on whether or not D&D Next needs to make that much money. Otherwise, even if it successfully reunites some segments of the edition fan markets, I have a hard time seeing it succeed against those expectations.

I suspect the plan going forward is to make the majority of profit off of the D&D brand, not the the RPG. It'll be the breadth of board games, and especially video games, that are the bread and butter. The RPG will be there as a historical baseline, making income, but not with the kind of pressure it had in the past.

 

[Hussar]

I know I probably shouldn't, but there's a whole lot of misconception here.

There was a time when D&D could release content rich source material and still make a hefty profit. 2nd ed, 3rd ed, both successful games and their core books were twice as thick as 4th's. They didn't require a subscription fee to play the game,

There is absolutely no requirement to pay a subscription fee to play 4e. If you can play 3e without a computer, you can certainly play 4e.

nor were we forced to buy into their miniatures line.

Who forced you to buy WOTC minis?

Its greedy what they have done with D&D, they took a highly successful game and decided to make more money, and give the customers less. We deserve a better, and if they choose to repeat this business practice again I'll choose to keep playing other RPG's.

That is certain an opinion. And you are very much entitled to vote with your wallet.

I want to mention: Although not as popular Shadowrun and World of Darkness are examples of games that are going on their 2nd decade. They don't care that most players either don't buy a book or only buy the core, they care that people are playing their game. They make enough money that their business continues to grow.

Shadowrun, in it's second decade, is releasing a FIFTH edition and has changed hands how many times? White Wolf no longer published WoD books does it? AFAIK, WW no longer publishes RPG material to speak of. Not exactly winning business strategies to emulate.