D&D 5E Does 5E avoid the overloads of previous editions?

[Yora]

You don't consider WOTC talking directly about this topic openly and frankly, and saying outright they will not be doing that with 5e, to be "any indication" they will change?

I didn't know they said that. But even if they did, I don't actually believe it. Many things that were proclaimed semi-offically never became reality. I don't think this will just change now.

 

[fjw70]

5e could see story/fluff overload.

 

[Mistwell]

No, not at all.

And that's because the other part of their business model requires getting rid of staff 1-2 times a year and, as they haven't done that for a while, I would say that this Christmas is going to see quite a few people leaving, including people who may have said such things in public....

Scriv, when is the last time they did a mass layoff? The answer to that question gives lie to your claim about 1-2 times a year. Also, it's Mike Mearls saying it.

I didn't know they said that. But even if they did, I don't actually believe it. Many things that were proclaimed semi-offically never became reality. I don't think this will just change now.

"ANY" indication is a pretty broad claim. Even if you doubt the claim...it's still SOME indication. Neither of you can achieve 100% certainty on your doubting of their claim, so how can you guys say you have not seen "ANY" indication at all? They've never once before said they would stop the splat book spiral - it's definitely a new claim they are making, and they've said it repeatedly now and explained why they think they can do it this time (that the RPG is no longer the focus of the line, and instead the broader brand is the focus of the line, including non-rpg products, giving them the room to not have to depend on publishing rpg books).

 

[DMZ2112]

I largely agree with this except that I reckon Next will end up like the 2E Player's Options era within a year or two.

Yes, please.

We will be offering an online matching service for a small fee, allowing you to fine-tune your game and print out a handy QR Code you can attach to your game shop's blackboard. With our premium service you will also recieve the QR code on a button or even a T shirt!"

Yes, please?

5e could see story/fluff overload.

Yes, please!

 

[Iosue]

"ANY" indication is a pretty broad claim. Even if you doubt the claim...it's still SOME indication. Neither of you can achieve 100% certainty on your doubting of their claim, so how can you guys say you have not seen "ANY" indication at all? They've never once before said they would stop the splat book spiral - it's definitely a new claim they are making, and they've said it repeatedly now and explained why they think they can do it this time (that the RPG is no longer the focus of the line, and instead the broader brand is the focus of the line, including non-rpg products, giving them the room to not have to depend on publishing rpg books).

Agreed. A while back Mearls had an L&L where he said they would not pursue the continuous splat model, but I was skeptical, given it's the typical RPG sales model. But with the recent Dancey panel, I'm convinced that they are looking for alternatives to that model.

Now, sure, Mearls could be let go, and some other person and/or suit could take the game in a different direction, but that's true of any company, big or small. No one can predict what a company, game, or market will look like in the near future, but to make the jump that their announced plans can't be accepted as their announced plans because of that strikes me as throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Scriv, when is the last time they did a mass layoff? The answer to that question gives lie to your claim about 1-2 times a year. Also, it's Mike Mearls saying it. (snip)

Hmmm, it's a couple of years at least since the last one. And Mike can always be replaced. Bill Slavicsek was, and Bill held a much more senior position.

(snip) "ANY" indication is a pretty broad claim. Even if you doubt the claim...it's still SOME indication. Neither of you can achieve 100% certainty on your doubting of their claim, so how can you guys say you have not seen "ANY" indication at all? They've never once before said they would stop the splat book spiral - it's definitely a new claim they are making, and they've said it repeatedly now and explained why they think they can do it this time (that the RPG is no longer the focus of the line, and instead the broader brand is the focus of the line, including non-rpg products, giving them the room to not have to depend on publishing rpg books).

I've observed many US corporates over many years - as others have, no doubt - and the major thing I have learned is that strategies change. Frequently. Back during my days in banking I had a firm rule that I have never broke: never work for a US bank. Why? Because you can be a key part of their strategy one day only for that strategy - not tactics: strategy - to suddenly change the next day and suddenly you are surplus to their requirements.

Sure, WotC people are saying that they have this new strategy and they're not competing with Pathfinder etc... (or "blah, blah, blah" rather than etc) but none of that matters. Strategies change. People change. And the WotC team have not yet demonstrated an ability to deliver on a strategy that is completely new to them. Even something as relatively simple as the online tools was utterly botched with numerous false starts and whatnot: if they cannot manage the online tools then what hope do they have of managing a comprehensive change in their business strategy?

Let's assume that this D&D-the-brand strategy is either delayed or botched - or both - and the pressure will then be on to squeeze some more out of the RPG. And what has worked in the past? Splat books. Overload. Bloat. And this time the edition has been created from the beginning to almost need those extra products - like the tactical combat module - if people want to recreate something of the experience of 3.xE, Pathfinder, or 4E.

Anyway, this is all academic because we don't have any real data to play with. Next has not yet been released. The movie rights have not yet reverted to Hasbro. None of the new initiatives have appeared on the market (except for that fake Hasbro version of Lego). For all I know, I could be very wrong and D&D could become a veritable gold mine for Hasbro in the next year or so.

And I hope it does because I still want access to my 4E online tools.

 

[Mistwell]

Hmmm, it's a couple of years at least since the last one. And Mike can always be replaced. Bill Slavicsek was, and Bill held a much more senior position.

So if the claim is "They do 1-2 layoffs each year", and it's been at least 2 years since it happens...we can conclude layoffs do not happen 1-2 times each year.

Sure, WotC people are saying that they have this new strategy and they're not competing with Pathfinder etc... (or "blah, blah, blah" rather than etc) but none of that matters. Strategies change. People change. And the WotC team have not yet demonstrated an ability to deliver on a strategy that is completely new to them.

To be clear, you said they had a strategy to lay people off once or twice a year. And then you said they have not followed that strategy for at least two years. And now you are saying they have not demonstrated an ability to delivery on a different strategy.

I think it's pretty clear you understand they do deliver on different strategies, as in your own words they did just that.

Even something as relatively simple as the online tools was utterly botched with numerous false starts and whatnot: if they cannot manage the online tools then what hope do they have of managing a comprehensive change in their business strategy?

You mean the strategy interrupted by a murder suicide and locked code? That one? That's what leads you to believe that they cannot change their plan for what products to sell?

Let's assume that this D&D-the-brand strategy is either delayed or botched - or both - and the pressure will then be on to squeeze some more out of the RPG.

No, let's not assume that, as that is exactly what we are debating - if that is an assumption someone can make with 100% certainty.

And you can't. You don't get to just fiat over what others are saying here - I think your assumption is bunk, and I think you pretending it's a certainty when it's not, is also bunk. You can decide to not answer that, but you cannot pretend "My assumption is correct so let's all just talk about that" is itself a valid strategy

For all I know, I could be very wrong and D&D could become a veritable gold mine for Hasbro in the next year or so.

And I hope it does because I still want access to my 4E online tools.

OK, so finally now we've gotten to the point where we agree. You're not certain of that assumption - which is the only friggen thing I objected to, to begin with! I never claimed "I know you are wrong" I've only been saying all along "I don't think it's fair to say we don't have any indications at all that they will do that." And I emphasized the word "any" and made it clear I was talking about that we have some reason to think it could happen, not that it definitely will happen.

Damn, it's like pulling teeth in here sometimes.

 

[billd91]

So if the claim is "They do 1-2 layoffs each year", and it's been at least 2 years since it happens...we can conclude layoffs do not happen 1-2 times each year.

We'll see if the practice reasserts itself. It usually lies dormant in years they are gearing up for a new edition release and then comes a-calling once that release is out the door. Things were quiet between about 2005 and the release of 4e then the budget trimming scissors came out late 2008 and ran through 2011. Now, things are relatively quiet again, but as soon as 5e is out the door, I (sadly) expect 2014 to end with layoffs again.

 

[Haffrung]

Agreed. A while back Mearls had an L&L where he said they would not pursue the continuous splat model, but I was skeptical, given it's the typical RPG sales model. But with the recent Dancey panel, I'm convinced that they are looking for alternatives to that model.

Now, sure, Mearls could be let go, and some other person and/or suit could take the game in a different direction, but that's true of any company, big or small. No one can predict what a company, game, or market will look like in the near future, but to make the jump that their announced plans can't be accepted as their announced plans because of that strikes me as throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Agreed. Cranking out splat books keeps the hardcores happy, but eventually makes the game less accessible. I assume the decision to pull back from hardcore char-op as the money-driver comes higher than Mearls. The choice to focus on making D&D more accessible in order to broaden the player-base is a big-picture market strategy for WotC, and was probably reached by someone higher than his pay-grade.

 

[Ichneumon]

Is there a doomsayer overload? Can't say we've reached supersaturation yet, but if we stir just one or two more in...