How D&D Was Saved and Made It To 4e

[Alzrius]

I'm sorry, but it seems nonsensical to me to talk about anything having killed 3E (particularly "product glut" - which wasn't true for WotC, and not really a factor across the entire d20 market) as though trying to find some reason why that edition of the game somehow "failed," necessitating that 4E be created.

4E is what killed 3E (and maybe not even then, since it still seems to be alive and kicking quite well).

The decision to release 4E was an economic one, since a new release is a blank slate that always encourages people to buy the new Core Rolebooks. It's a sales bump that can be counted on to return brisk profits, so long as it isn't abused too often. There was no great problem with 3E that was turning people away in droves. There was no great public outcry demanding that there be various fixes because 3E was unplayable. Nothing about 3E demanded that 4E be made. 4E was made for reasons that had nothing to do with 3E, and that impacted 3E as a result, not the other way around.

It's true that the current (3E) D&D/d20 market isn't as burgeoning as it was in its early years, but that's what happens when a rapidly expanding market adjusts and slows down. Between the usual bump of a new edition, and the "blue ocean strategy" of third-party products, the market for D&D/d20 was at an unusual high, which has since leveled off. 3E isn't in a slump because people are just now discovering that it's in fact a terrible game, nor is there some sort of "glut" that is somehow driving people away. It's just coming back to Earth after a meteoric debut.

Those articles are nice, but they're wholly and completely unrelated to 4E.

 

[SSquirrel]

People like to complain that the Wii has a bunch of crappy games bloating the system shelves and then 3rd party producers bitch that no one buys any games except Nintendo's. Yet they didn't spend much time or money on their game and then see even less return on their investment.

3E is released and tells all kinds of people it is cool to produce your own game supplements and sell them. HUGE inundation of product from existing and new companies attack the shelves. Truly horrible adventures and sourcebooks hit the shelves along with very good books and versions of the SRD repackaged for sale.
Unfortunately the good:crap ratio was heavily in favor of the crap. I don't blame 3E for producing lots of crap, I blame designers who did a poor job and then expected everyone to buy them. In the end it hurt the FLGS a lot as product just sat there endlessly, leading to many refusing to stock any d20 product that didn't belong to WotC.

If all the companies had produced only good-quality, well-balanced products, it would simply be a glut of too much goodness and not enough cash. Sadly, that was not the case. I reserved my money for only the stuff I felt was worthwhile tho. Maybe that was why I skipped 3.5 entirely. I already had the core+psionics+the 5 original splatbooks and that covered a heck of alot of ground.

Wolfspider>Yes 2005 was when they first sat down and started working on things for 4E, but they had all the ways their product had changed, what was showing to be popular etc as marketing research and sales numbers from 2000 onward. 3E had this as well, which is why for 3E they severely cut back on the number of adventures they sold b/c those were some of the worst sellers for TSR. The articles do a great job for setting the stage for the coming of 3E and that leads to some ideas about how 4E likely came along as well.

 

[haakon1]

It's not really the company's fault -- it's the fact that their customers will basically only buy rules in economically viable quantities.

I don't buy rules. I stick to the Core rules, plus gods book, Fiend Folio, MM2, and MM3. All else is clutter, IMHO.

An RPG can survive on fluff, AKA good adventures and setting materials. Most folks I know don't have the time to digest tons of rules or to write their own stuff. Obviously, gamer preferences vary, but not everyone who buys stuff is into additional rules.

AD&D didn't need rules bloat Complete guides. However, a game needs to stay lean and mean to not need the rules bloat (or fluff bloat with all 2nd Edition's settings) to pay for a bloated payroll.

That's why I think Paizo will make better stuff than WOTC -- Paizo makes stuff because they think we'll like it and buy it. Paizo talks about stuff like experimenting with happens if they cross "backwoods horror" genre with fantasy roleplaying. WOTC makes stuff because they KNOW we HAVE TO buy it, and they gotta make payroll and pay Hasbro. WOTC talks about how their old rules are lame (grapple) and how the new rules are fun.

 

[haakon1]

There is no product glut at our table (virtual or otherwise), because we aren't compelled to buy everything ever published with a D20 logo on it. "Everything but the kitchen sink" is great when you are cooking up a pot of jambalaya, but not when you are playing a game.

Roger roger for truth.

 

[dm4hire]

I think if WotC adapts a similar marketing strategy like White Wolf, only releasing about 5-6 books a year for a given system, they will do just fine. They can do five books related to the Core, 5 or 6 for FR, same with Eberron and another campaign setting, then fill the remainder with modules. That would give an overall yearly production of 15-20 books which isn't a glut. Then add in the minis and other side products to top it off.

This seems to be what they are doing and as Mike Mearls mentioned it just seems like a lot after the core, but when you actually look at the product list it follows my suggestion pretty close. This list excludes Core Deluxe printings, modules, minis, and other misc stuff just listing new books only:

Core: 4
Tome of Treasure 9/08
Martial Powers 10/08
Draconomicon I 11/08
Manual of the Planes 12/08

Forgotten Realms: 2
FR Campaign Book 8/08
FR Player's Guide 9/08

That's it, so 6 books in five months. Not really a glut and September is the only month where two of them come out in one month. If WotC follows this scheduling into next year we'd see a turnout falling right around the 15-20 I mention if not a little less. There was mention that 2nd Ed d20 Modern might come out next year (keeping fingers crossed). If it does it will take away from the production of other books cutting the numbers down.

Edit: I should note that after the FR Player's Guide I will most likely stop buying FR books as I tend to do my own thing and leave it up to the players in my games to bring books they think are important. I use to buy every book then one day I woke up realizing all I was doing was collecting stuff that other people used, which wasn't bad except I never played at home and wasn't about to hull everything around the area. I know guys who bring giant suitcases to game at RPGA events to make sure they have everything on hand; I'm not one of those guys.

 

[TerraDave]

Hasbro purchased WotC in 1999, well before the E-Tools flop. Fluid Entertainment made the lowest bid on the project, got the contract, then failed to do what they said they could do.

Yes, Hasbro bought in 99. But they would license off the electronic rights in 2000/2001. There is a good history here. And Peter Adkinson has confirmed elsewhere that this move undermined their strategy, and that is why he left (they where placing a lot of hope on that software and things that would spinn off of it).

I also think a little to much weight is being given to "lowest bid". They went through multiple developers, and Ryan Dancy seem to be working full-time at some point to salvage the whole thing. At the same time, losing the licenses undermined much of the long-term point of the project.

In any case, it doesn't really change my point. Software was supposed to be a central part of 3E, and it didn't work out. Now its central to 4E.

 

[Psion]

"The changes to 4e make more sense after reading these articles. They *listened* to the players, and the new edition is meant to be fun."

Huh?

Aren't these posts about how 3e saved D&D?

I don't see what they have to do with 4e. More to the point, 3e had a much longer, more open and more thurough process of taking feedback from the community than 4e has had by a long shot. I don't really think you want to make that comparison.

Er, yeah. I was about to say.

 

[boerngrim]

I think if WotC adapts a similar marketing strategy like White Wolf, only releasing about 5-6 books a year for a given system, they will do just fine. They can do five books related to the Core, 5 or 6 for FR, same with Eberron and another campaign setting, then fill the remainder with modules. That would give an overall yearly production of 15-20 books which isn't a glut. Then add in the minis and other side products to top it off.

I agree. The 3.x products that have been the most useful to me (other than the core) are adventures. If they publish a good solid core game that's easy to run, then adventures would be the best way to support the system. They could even introduce new add-on rules and monsters in the adventures. That has worked well in the past.
Thanks.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Take Dancey's article with a huge grain of salt. Notable former TSR employees during that period, such as Monte Cook, have questioned its potrayal.

 

[an_idol_mind]

The info on the core rules CD-ROM highlights how big 3rd edition was envisioned. In WotC's perfect world, the paper rules were going to have full computer support, and the game was going to be linked to the new Chain Mail rules to cover massive fantasy battles.

4th edition has a similar opportunity, with the Digital Initiative and the ever-expanding line of D&D minis. If they manage to avoid the pitfall of poor product quality, the Dungeons & Dragons game will mean many things to many people, be they role-players, computer gamers, or wargamers.