Does D&D Next need to be a success for D&D to be a success?

[Mistwell]

I figure Hasbro will continue to producesomething called Dungeons & Dragons whether or not it makes money for the same reason Marvel & DC continue to print comic books even though those lose money. They are good license curators for things that make money in other mediums.

But now I'm going to walk it back...maybe not. Spider-Man is Spider-Man, and if you want to use him, or a similarly spider themed superhero in your movie, you have to pay Marvel some money to do so. But by contrast, all the really cool things about D&D? Dragons, sword fights, magic spells, dungeons, battles, fantasy creatures...D&D doesn't own those things. I can make a movie where two plucky heroes team up with an elf and a dwarf that they meet in a tavern, trek through the haunted woods, and delve in to the Dungeon of Despair to fight a Necromancer and a dragon, and not pay Hasbro/WOTC one thin dime.

That's the problem they have now. There is a market for fantasy, but nobody really cares whether it's branded "D&D fantasy". Not even tabletop roleplayers, looking at the number of people happy to play a version of D&D called "Pathfinder".

There are lots of unique characters, monsters, and stories in the D&D empire. They just need to work on reinforcing those images, and it can be quite powerful as an intellectual property generator.

Iron Man was not a household name before the movie, but it had enough of a hook to be able to sell it. Dr. Strange is going to be a movie soon...it will likely succeed, though few outside comics fans know who he is. Spider-Man and X-Men, their two most well-known properties, are not even their properties for movies and a host of other things. But Marvel's made it work even without them.

You just need to start it on a core of solid ideas and the rest can become quite profitable.

 

[N'raac]

My counter-posit would be a simultaneous release of a youth focused core with one or two module books focused on the tastes of the older audience. Or, instead of a PHB, DMG, MM, three books focused on different playstyles but with compatible core rules, but different classes and different monsters in each.

That would be preferable, however I don't see WoTC (or any other RPG producer) maintaining two or more editions of the same game simultaneously as a likely prospect. The only time I can recall that happening would be BECMI and AD&D 1e, in the days before Splatbooks. What sank TSR in later years? Splitting their market with multiple settings. I don't expect we will see that approach again, at least not without a substantial market increase.

Beginner box products seem more likely. And a "junior version" seems like it would be viable, more so than two products aimed at the same market certainly, but I don't see them likely to take that route over a single edition. Look how they cling to a single edition with modules to morph into each prior edition rather than multiple versions supporting those prior editions.