Has 3rd Party Material Helped (!!!) WotC ?

[GVDammerung]

I think 3rd party material helped Wotc initially and in the first 2 years. I'm not so sure thereafter.

At first, for me, 3rd party publishers provided content to supplement Wotc's rather thin and rather pedestrian releases, but 3rd party materials were often of uneven quality.

As Wotc products improved in the middle to near term, so did the 3rd party materials. In fact, the 3rd party materials, IMO, not just improved but surpassed Wotc quality, except in terms of art, color and paper.

Presently, I think the quality of content and innovation is clearly with the 3rd party publishers, not Wotc. I buy perhaps 4 times more 3rd party products than Wotc products. I own at least that many more 3rd party products. Wotc can still hit the ball over the fence but 3rd party publishers do so more often with more releases and get more of my money.

If Wotc's theory that a rising d20 tide will lift D&D's ship is true, they should be rolling in money. I'm not so sure that is the case but I do not know. I do know that in my gaming circle, Wotc releases are not what is talked about and not what is bought 4 times out of 5.

We also _use_ the 3rd party materials. Extensively.

There is a cant that says "3rd party products aren't "balanced" as well as Wotc products." First, I do not believe this to be necessarily true. Second, 3rd party materials are often more fun. And you know what? "Balance" does not necessarily equal fun. I'll take fun any day of the week and I find 3rd party publishers deliver the fun more often than Wotc.

In one sense, 3rd party publishers have been a disaster for Wotc, I think. It let the kids in the hall in and they showed that Wotc does not have a corner on the market for cool ideas and great games. Wotc once had a cachet born of its D&D monopoly but that lightning is out of the bottle. Wotc has marketing power and the D&D brand name but more often than not its a 3rd party publisher who has the fun designs. Wotc still makes the most money doubtless but is it enough for Hasbro and to what degree has being shown up by innovative 3rd party publishers hurt Wotc's bottom line from what it might otherwise have been? I don't know. I bet Wotc knows. And, despite whatever may be said, 4E will tell the tale - OPEN or CLOSED content? We'll see in a few years.

IMO

 

[tadk]

What I use WOTC related

For me: I only own of WOTC the 3 main 3E books. My best friend gave me the Bards book as well as the new Temple of Elemental Evil

Everything else 3E related I own is 3rd party

Privateer Press
Bastion Press
Sword & Sorcery
Guardians of Order

I have thumbed some of the other books. Wont get them.

Tad

 

[delericho]

There is a cant that says "3rd party products aren't "balanced" as well as Wotc products." First, I do not believe this to be necessarily true.

Agreed. With so many of the 'big names' from the early 3e design period now working freelance, there's absolutely no reason to think that a WotC product is better balanced than a non-WotC product. These guys had a direct hand in putting together the 3e rules, and that experience shows in their work.

Second, 3rd party materials are often more fun. And you know what? "Balance" does not necessarily equal fun. I'll take fun any day of the week and I find 3rd party publishers deliver the fun more often than Wotc.

This I disagree with. I'll take balance over (more) fun, since poorly balanced material can destroy a game, and that's no fun for anyone. But, your mileage obviously varies, so I'll say no more.

Wotc still makes the most money doubtless but is it enough for Hasbro and to what degree has being shown up by innovative 3rd party publishers hurt Wotc's bottom line from what it might otherwise have been? I don't know. I bet Wotc knows. And, despite whatever may be said, 4E will tell the tale - OPEN or CLOSED content? We'll see in a few years.

Sadly, I don't think that's necessarily true. I suspect that decision may well be taken by 'suits' who might well not understand the true value of the d20 license. "We're giving away the core of our game, and letting others make all this money from it? Let's stop, and make the money ourselves." Frankly, I'm amazed at the sheer lunacy that Wizards demonstrated in opening the 3rd edition mechanics in the first place. I think it was a work of genius, and am very grateful for it, but I think it was also mad genius at work. And I doubt that the powers that be at Hasbro will see it as an advantage, and I'm not convinced that the folks who remain at WotC have either the clout or the understanding of the issue required to force them to reconsider.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

It's interesting that so many people have such negative things to say about WotC, yet WotC kicks every other company's butt when it comes to sales. I realize that EN World is a niche of fandom, but you can't ignore the facts.

I mean, let's be realistic. That vast majority of players (IMHO) are going to turn around and walk away when you tell them how you've rewritten D&D to make it the way it's "supposed to be" and how everything WotC puts out is crap but your own stuff is golden. Sure, niche market products are great for niche market consumers, but the average gamer isn't a niche market consumer. And that's what you need to be a major player in the RPG market, IMO.

 

[kolikeos]

i don't like wotc one bit, their prices are high and they sell all kinds of crap (imo) apart from dnd, but it is true that 3rd party dnd stuff is just trash when you look at how unbalanced it all is (or at least most of it), apart from the core rule books, wether 3.0 or 3.5, you don't need anything else to play and most of the extra stuff wotc has to offer is just not worth it (imo).

 

[Kunimatyu]

My policy is this: All WotC books(sans exalted deeds) are allowed without my immediate approval, 3rd party stuff is possible, but on a case-by-case basis. All classes/PrCs/feats/spells can be subject to removal -- if I feel that X is throwing off the party balance, then I'll ask that player to remove the offending X and choose something else.

Generally, though, I have a much more extensive knowledge of the books than the players, and will work with them to come up with a character that works with their concept and remains balanced. No problems so far!

 

[Wombat]

It's interesting that so many people have such negative things to say about WotC, yet WotC kicks every other company's butt when it comes to sales. I realize that EN World is a niche of fandom, but you can't ignore the facts.

Not to utterly denigrate your point, but this is like the Vanilla Ice Cream Argument.

In the U.S., vanilla ice cream outsells all other flavours combined.
This means that vanilla ice cream must be the most popular flavour in the U.S.

Actually what it means is that vanillia is both more readily available, used as a base in places for other flavours, and if you ask enough folks you will find that vanilla is not their favourite flavour.

WotC is in a similar position. Unlike many other games, D&D (and by extension many, but far from all, WotC D20 products) is available in major bookstores and even some other non-book, non-gaming retailers; this means it has greater positioning. As the first rpg, many people (non-gamers or proto-gamers) view it as the only rpg available. Also (as I have seen and heard first hand on far too many occassions at game stores), many people think that anything made by a company other than WotC will not actually work with their D&D/D20 game. Sad, but true.

I have nothing personally against WotC. While I find many products put out by other companies that I prefer, I could certainly have a fine game simply using the core books. But saying that WotC products are the best simply because they sell more, especially given the deep pockets and marketing available to Hasbro, something that no other gaming company has, is to make a highly simplistic argument. There are a lot of other factors involved here.

 

[Campbell]

It's interesting that so many people have such negative things to say about WotC, yet WotC kicks every other company's butt when it comes to sales. I realize that EN World is a niche of fandom, but you can't ignore the facts.

I mean, let's be realistic. That vast majority of players (IMHO) are going to turn around and walk away when you tell them how you've rewritten D&D to make it the way it's "supposed to be" and how everything WotC puts out is crap but your own stuff is golden. Sure, niche market products are great for niche market consumers, but the average gamer isn't a niche market consumer. And that's what you need to be a major player in the RPG market, IMO.

The truth of the matter is that WotC produces some very solid material, and as of late they have taken to including more context for their crunch. I'd however question the validity that WotC has a monopoly on solid rules development, espicially in comparison to some d20 companies who have fairly solid reputations themselves.

 

[GVDammerung]

This I disagree with. I'll take balance over (more) fun, since poorly balanced material can destroy a game, and that's no fun for anyone. But, your mileage obviously varies, so I'll say no more.

Just to elaborate, not argue -

This may sound silly or what have you but as the DM I figure I am game balance and I have never had a game get away from me because of unbalanced material. I have had a session get away from me because of unbalanced material. In such case, between sessions, I will either devise a fix or simply address the matter with the players, if I have no fix. In the latter case, I've never had a player pitch a fit over modifying things. When the unbalanced material is really fun "as is", short of a DM fix or agreed to modification that will retain the "fun," I find it is often possible to "let it ride" for awhile. Solutions seem to then suggest/present themselves in due course.

Totally my opinion, but I think the overwhelming importance some people place on "balance" tends to overlook the DMs ability to control the game and that the game is a non-competitive group exercise in having "fun." I would not advocate for intentionally "unbalanced" material but I don't see unbalanced material as the horror some people do. And if unbalanced material is fun, well, D&D isn't a war game or chess. With reasonable players (I don't do convention tournaments where I don't know who I'll be playing with) and a DM willing to exercise his or her authority (in hopefully pleasant and creative ways), fun but unbalanced material is just fun material awaiting balancing, which can mean different things in different games and can be achieved in fluffy or crunchy ways.

IMO, its almost all good, to one degree or another. The only material I have ever disliked is unimaginative material that is not "fun" because it just plods along or sits there. I buy "ideas" and "fun" in RPGs. I buy "rules" in Napoleonics etc.

But to each their own.

 

[Psion]

It's interesting that so many people have such negative things to say about WotC, yet WotC kicks every other company's butt when it comes to sales. I realize that EN World is a niche of fandom, but you can't ignore the facts.

Neither can you assign this factoid significance which it does not have.

Market presence is not a measure of quality.

As much as I rue those who invoke this counterpoint in a denigrating manner, it does illustrate the difference between market presence and quality: McDonald's is the most pervasive restraunt in the world. Does that make its wares the nummiest or the highest quality?