Is built-in customization bad for sales?

[Mercurius]

Think about: Wizards of the Coast makes a ton of cash on supplement books that offer more options: classes, feats, races, etc. If the 4ed DMG offered guidelines on class-less characters, class and race creation, etc, would this not potentially lower the sales of later books that offer ready-built classes and such?

Remember the class-building guidelines in the 2ed DMG? I remember being disappointed when the 3ed DMG didn't offer something like that, or at least only in general outline. I hope that the 4ed DMG gives stronger guidelines for "open-ended" play: both in creating classes and in playing class-less characters (which could also be done as a customizable class called something like "Adventurer" that is effectively classless, but I digress).

So my question is whether including customization guidelines from the get-go--even built into the core rules--can potentially negatively impact Wizards's profit, and therefore not be included. I would hope not, but the thought crossed my mind reading the Mearls/classless thread.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I don't think it will that much, since not everyone wants to make custom classes or are not as good in making classes so they would prefer professional balanced-classes.

I think we can look at the new Vampire: The Requiem game to see that having the option to create your own things doesn't mean it will harm supplements. In Vampire they give you in the corebook the mechanics and text describing how to make your own Bloodlines. Now even still though, they bring out new Bloodline book that sale quite well.

Also with new classes, come new class-abilities. Unless your good at making your own class-abilities your hindered by what we already have in the corebooks so people would be the supplements for the abilities as well.

 

[Imban]

Yes, built-in customization to the extent you create a one-book point-based system is probably bad for sales. There's much less space for designing Mutants & Masterminds splatbooks, for instance, than Dungeons & Dragons splatbooks.

Providing guidelines - not hard, point-based rules, but good suggestions and examples for class and race creation will only serve to help those inclined to tinker with things, not cost you sales. Likewise, any attempt at working a classless system out of 4e D&D would still allow strongly for splatbooks to mine new abilities from. So no, I'm not seeing a loss.

 

[Generico]

I don't think it will have much impact on their sales. People have always made their own rules and classes for D&D, regardless of whether or not WoTC provides explicit guidelines. It's still a lot of work to create and refine an entire class, and most people would rather pay $20-$30 to have that done for them, rather than spending their own time to do it, and in most cases, ending up with something that's not as good.

 

[micr0c0sm]

They are gonna make money selling three things:

Stories, characters, and settings. Since the mechanics cover so much easily (and not just the mechanics but philosophy of 4e), I predict lots of awesome, easily written encounters, campaigns, etc that will just be fun and easy to run, with sidebars on how to integrate rules, instead of the other way around. Basically the content will shift from rules appendages and options to 'heres an awesome villian and tons of backstory, oh and to use his secret breath weapon that he got by grafting blah blah blah just treat it like a green dragons'.

I am pretty sure 4e will promote creativity in classic d&d. Also, since the rules system is so flexible they will be licensing it for all sorts of games (see nwn) and miniatures, board games, etc. I wouldn't worry about wizards business model - it seems that this cycle thier business end finally clicked with thier player-end.

 

[Lizard]

(Looks at Hero System Fifth Edition, surely the most customizable game on the market)
(Looks at nearly three feet of Hero System Fifth Edition supplements)

Nope. Don't think so.

Seems to me the 4e model is tailor made for splats -- new power sources, new talent trees, and the monster creation system means ten million different kinds of orcs. (Orc Archer, Bigger Orc Archer, Orc Archer With Cool Special Power, Orc Archer With Cool Special Power and Spam, Spam Archer Spam Spam and Spam, etc)

 

[GreatLemur]

Think about: Wizards of the Coast makes a ton of cash on supplement books that offer more options: classes, feats, races, etc. If the 4ed DMG offered guidelines on class-less characters, class and race creation, etc, would this not potentially lower the sales of later books that offer ready-built classes and such?

Nah. A classless, modular D&D would still benefit from more spare parts from which to build more characters.

However, I actually fear that classes sell better than classless systems for other reasons: Quite simply, a lot of people aren't all that eager to come up with their own character concepts. Having a bunch of pre-made archetypes they can select from a list (and maybe personalize a bit through mechanical options and good, old-fashioned roleplay) is a lot more attractive to people who don't want to spend a bunch of time making their own thing.

Yes, built-in customization to the extent you create a one-book point-based system is probably bad for sales. There's much less space for designing Mutants & Masterminds splatbooks, for instance, than Dungeons & Dragons splatbooks.

There are point-based systems, and there are point-based systems. M&M and Hero System are both so utterly flexible that they don't really require suppliments. But then look at the hundreds upon frigging hundreds of GURPS books out there. That's not just genre emulation advice; that's more delicious crunch that you can't just make for yourself with the core book.

If the PHB just gave me a unified character system where I pick a feat or power from a big list every level, I'd damn well still buy splatbooks just to add more goodies to that list.

 

[Jinete]

People who don't mind spending time and effort on creating new classes/races/feats will probably buy anything WoTC publishes anyway. I know I will

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

(Looks at Hero System Fifth Edition, surely the most customizable game on the market)
(Looks at nearly three feet of Hero System Fifth Edition supplements)

Nope. Don't think so.

Seems to me the 4e model is tailor made for splats -- new power sources, new talent trees, and the monster creation system means ten million different kinds of orcs. (Orc Archer, Bigger Orc Archer, Orc Archer With Cool Special Power, Orc Archer With Cool Special Power and Spam, Spam Archer Spam Spam and Spam, etc)

You beat me to it. I reference the Hero supplements to either help stimulate my own creative thought process, or when I'm not up to it, avoid needing to use my creative thought process.

I don't see customization being bad for supplements at all. The people who wouldn't buy them because they do their own customization are probably the type of people whow would also avoid supplement books, prefering to create their own classes and things.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Yes, they can't go far down the HERO route cause they have to sell books of new classes, feats, magic items and monsters. What can I tell ya, capitalism doesn't always benefit the consumer.

For 4e I would have liked to see a D&D front end - ease of use through classes, limited powers and so forth - coupled with a HERO/GURPS-style back end - rules for building everything: classes, feats, magic items, monsters, the lot. The HERO-style section *must* be well hidden, maybe even in a separate book. That's HERO's fatal flaw incidentally - even users who don't want it can't avoid the complexity.