Is it WotC’s responsibility to bring people to the hobby?

[Leviatham]

I largely disagree with this...

Though splatbooks are okay (in my book... heh) and give many options I rarely buy them.

What I NEVER buy is published adventures... because with the exception of 2 maybe 3 throughout my gaming history they all share one common thing... THEY SUCK.

From the 1st/2nd edition -crappy- dungeon crawlers to the 3rd/3.5/pathfinder uninspired plotlines.

Seriously I have not ONCE run a pregenerated campaign and not thought I could have done it so much better... I do not need pre-drawn maps and random rooms filled with monsters, crazy loot and random traps...

The 2 shining exceptions (there to confirm the rule) are the Crown of Shadows (for Midnight campaign setting) and the Red Hand of Doom.

Sure, I hear you preparing to say 'but adventure books can just serve to give you ideas, you dont have to follow all the adventure it describes or you can make it better yourself. Sure, but the same then applies for splatbooks! I once run an epic game solely focused on the entry of the super secret society on the Epic level handbook... we had a 6 month campaign inspired from 1 thing in a single -splatbook-. Same applies for other books... the 'Completes' and 'Races of' series had alot of info at the end of the books with ideas of how to use them and how to structure plots based on that!

Often enough I introduced a plotline via an NPC having a fancy class or prestige class given that in my group we were mostly doing core.

There is ONE category that I would like companies to make more off...

CAMPAIGN SETTINGs and Material.

The one thing I do buy is stuff like Forgotten Realms campaign setting stuff for example. Because I like to have a fully developed world in which to put my adventures... so I have bought quite a few of the setting books (and had done so also in 2nd where the boxed sets were really cool) set in different areas of Faerun.

I would do the same if they did a 3.5 Birthright and 3.5 Planescape for example but NOT that horrible Manual of Planes stuff...

So yea, campaign settings = yes, splatbooks = maybe, published adventures = never!

PS>

To those that have not tried it, seek out Midnight Campaign Setting... its truly a revolutionary concept (imagine a Lord of The Ring World if Sauron had won!)

Have you considered submitting your adventures for publication?

If there is such amount of crappy material out there, surely we could do with them to keep things fresh!

 

[Desdichado]

To those that have not tried it, seek out Midnight Campaign Setting... its truly a revolutionary concept (imagine a Lord of The Ring World if Sauron had won!)

I like Midnight well enough, but that's not really revolutionary. In point of fact, for Tolkien geeks like me, I think it better encapsulates the period of the First Age after Nírnaeth Arnoediad, the Battle of Unnumbered Tears, when Morgoth's forces completely defeated the combined might of Elves and Men, and started a period of brutal occupation of Beleriand. Possibly, it allows the notion of the PCs taking on the role of Eärendil--certainly that's the only forseeable way to dramatically change the situation of the setting; somehow get outside and make a plea to the rest of the gods in behalf of the lands that are suffocating under the influence of Izrador.

Anyway...

I kinda agree with your main premise, though. I always homebrew, but in general, I find campaign setting and splatbooks more useful, because they give me tons of items that I can "borrow" and adapt into my homebrewing. I never run modules--with the exception of a handful that I like doing for one-shots from time to time--and don't see much use in owning more than I already do. I probably own more splatbooks than any other type of game material, but the majority of what I buy now are setting related books--mostly by Paizo these days, but that's only because most of the rest of the companies who produced stuff I liked for d20/D&D no longer do so.

And although I almost never really run games in Golarion (or the Iron Kingdoms, or Midnight, or Freeport, or whatever) I find that setting books are still the most useful to me over all. As well as being the most fun to read in their own right.

 

[Console Cowboy]

Whose Responsibility For Bringing New People To The Hobby?

See, this is the sort of thing Dungeons & Dragons: A Documentary by Iconoscope Films/Westpaw Films — Kickstarter

that WotC should bankroll without question. The responsibility for this lies on the shoulders of the industry, and I mean WotC.

Maybe because Paizo will be mentioned, WotC does not want to fund this PR. Maybe they cannot justify their P&L if just one Pathfinder book, or free OSRIC PDF gets distributed from the effort of this film. Sort of like closing a business because the business does not like to pay taxes....

Should this sort of thing rely on crowd funding? Absolutely not.

Does it? The answer has been obvious for years.

But the responsibility still remains with the industry.

And here is my message to the industry: The hobby does not exist to serve the interest of the business. The paradigm is exactly the opposite. When the industry groks that, and takes responsibility like even small children eventually do, the market size will increase rather than shrink and profits will improve. Just try not to expand too soon and stunt the growth by blocking out the sun... if they taught you MBAs anything about controlled growth.

Individuals within the hobby are actually sensitized NOT to expand their hobby beyond their table numbers - which WOTC suggests the limit should be 4. Hobo covered that explanation in an earlier post.

 

[Rogue Agent]

[True is that no other update of a game has created an editions war. You won’t hear people moaning about 6 – soon to be 7 – editions of Call of Cthulhu. You won’t hear people fall out because of the new edition of Traveller; or the third edition of Mutants & Masterminds. Or pretty much any other game. However we are so close to D&D somehow, that whenever they’ve updated the game, there’s been a divide in the player-base.]

This isn't true. The Traveller fanbase, for example, is badly fractured and if you go to the places where Traveller players hang out you can hear some pretty hot conversations about it. It's just that there aren't enough Traveller players to form a critical mass in most places.

Historically speaking, there are two ways to have a successful new edition to an RPG:

First, don't change much and maintain virtually complete compatibility. (This is the method Call of Cthulhu has historically used.)

Second, only release a new edition when there is clear, deep, and widespread dissatisfaction with the current edition (which is then addressed in the new edition). No reboot edition of an RPG has ever succeeded unless there is clear, deep, and widespread dissatisfaction in the existing customer base. (AD&D 1E and D&D 3E both achieved this at the time of their release.)

Publishers are horrendous at taking marketing risks to promote the games. When was the last time that you saw an RPG advertised, full page and full colour, in a high-street magazine? When was the last time you saw an RPG advertised in a video-games magazine?

You understand that this takes money, right? In order for these kinds of advertising campaigns to work, you have to be able to afford pervasive advertising in the long-term.

Outside of Wizards and Paizo, I don't think there's an RPG company that could afford that kind of risky expenditure. (And I'm not even sure that WotC and Paizo qualify.)

However, I don’t feel it is WotC responsibility to bring people to the role playing games scene.

I don't know if it's their responsibility, but it's certainly the only way I can think of for them to find a path forward: There is no realistic method for them to recover a significant percentage of 3.5/PF gamers without simultaneously losing a large chunk of 4E gamers. So the only way they can recover from the disastrous business decisions of the last 5-10 years is to replenish their player base with brand new players.

So, to end this this article/rant with a cheesy quote: Your hobby needs you!

Justin Alexander made the case in "Opening Your Gaming Table" that a major part of the problem is that the default method of roleplaying is no longer memetically viral: It requires too large a commitment from new players.

And in his series on game structures he discusses how the industry's movement away from clear game structures have made it more difficult for new players to pick up and play the games.

I'd start there.

 

[Jupp]

In my view WotC should not really concern themselves with other publishers too much. The wizards should recognize their competition and calculate them into their business plans and that's it. In fact they should concentrate on their products only and spend the money they have on them as dedicated and targeted as they can. With that they can reach the goals they have with the highest efficiency and will make them stay alive and healthy as a company.

It always was the case that WotC was the big train steaming forward in terms of financial power and brand recognition. Everyone else was following in the shadow of the train and did prosper, or falter, in the niches that were not covered by WotC. I know some people might not like this picture but so far it has allowed others to profit from the success of WotC and the D&D brand. And i think that in the foreseeable future this setup will remain true. Actually I do not want to picture the scenario where WotC goes the way of the dodo. I think the fallout from that would break quite a few glasses.

At the moment WotC is supporting and bringing new people to the hobby because they build and concentrate on D&D. The rest is being fetched up by the competition with their alternative solutions to D&D. And aside from companies spending money in advertising and creating new products it is also the responsibility of the player base to promote the product of their choice. Because there is no better way of advertising than positive mouth to mouth propaganda. A company can spend millions in ads but if your best friend say that something is cool then the chances for a new customer are 1000% higher than with any kind of fancy ad campaign.

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Paying $15 out of every pay check isn't painful at all...paying $50 per pay check means I give up food, bills, etc.

I am very much an impulse buyer when it comes to RPG’s.

BUT I am forced to (for the most part) put a “ceiling” on the items I buy. I’m MUCH more likely to buy something that’s reasonably priced than I am something that doesn’t give me as much enjoyment. (And WotC’s rising prices/decreased page counts is definitely swaying me AWAY from their corner.)

There is ONE category that I would like companies to make more off...

CAMPAIGN SETTINGs and Material.

I’d like to see this as well, though not as TSR did during 2E, where they had TOO MANY cool seeting to keep up with!!

To discuss the main point of this thread..
Yes, I think it is a mixed reposinsibility of both players AND publishers to bring new people to the hobby! (It is a symbiotic hobby; without players, the companies would fold, and without the companies, thered’ be no further new products!)

The publishers [and not just WotC!!] need to put out materials that whet the fans’ appetites and fulfills their demands, and not just pointless splatbook after splatbook that no-one seems to want.

The players, on the other hand, need to spread the word about cool new producets to their friends, and get them to (legally) purchase items that show support for what the companies are trying to do.

 

[Leviatham]

Historically speaking, there are two ways to have a successful new edition to an RPG:

First, don't change much and maintain virtually complete compatibility. (This is the method Call of Cthulhu has historically used.)

Second, only release a new edition when there is clear, deep, and widespread dissatisfaction with the current edition (which is then addressed in the new edition). No reboot edition of an RPG has ever succeeded unless there is clear, deep, and widespread dissatisfaction in the existing customer base. (AD&D 1E and D&D 3E both achieved this at the time of their release.)

Agree with both points. Trying to impose a game design on a fanbase just because you (the company) have invested in it, even if the fans don't like it, it's a monumental mistake.

You understand that this takes money, right?

Ooohhhh.... sarcasm!

No comment.

In order for these kinds of advertising campaigns to work, you have to be able to afford pervasive advertising in the long-term.

Outside of Wizards and Paizo, I don't think there's an RPG company that could afford that kind of risky expenditure. (And I'm not even sure that WotC and Paizo qualify.)

Having worked in marketing and advertising, I am aware of the need for a constant advertising presence for the campaign to work. And I understand the costs that come with it. Only so well.

Both Paizo and WotC would qualify, easily. WotC because they have adversised MtG in, at least, one video games magazine in the UK. I can't tell you if they still do or if there were more magazines, but I do remember seeing that advert in the magazine I consume (Games TM).

Even if it is expensive, adversiting Dragon Age RPG in a videogames magazine would make sense, and likely render good results. Advertising GoT game in SFX would also make sense. Adversiting M&M, DC or Marvel RPGs in comics magazines would make sense.

Alas, to make money you have to spend money. I haven't done much research about it in this industry, but I would say that, if it works in other industries, targeted advertising for RPGs should work as well.

Or that's the theory!

I don't know if it's their responsibility, but it's certainly the only way I can think of for them to find a path forward: There is no realistic method for them to recover a significant percentage of 3.5/PF gamers without simultaneously losing a large chunk of 4E gamers. So the only way they can recover from the disastrous business decisions of the last 5-10 years is to replenish their player base with brand new players.

Agreed. I am not confident they have the plans to achieve that, though. I hope I'll be proven wrong.

Justin Alexander made the case in "Opening Your Gaming Table" that a major part of the problem is that the default method of roleplaying is no longer memetically viral: It requires too large a commitment from new players.

And in his series on game structures he discusses how the industry's movement away from clear game structures have made it more difficult for new players to pick up and play the games.

I'd start there.

Thanks for the references. I'll take a look at those articles. Your one-sentence summary certainly makes sense!

 

[Rogue Agent]

Even if it is expensive, adversiting Dragon Age RPG in a videogames magazine would make sense, and likely render good results. Advertising GoT game in SFX would also make sense. Adversiting M&M, DC or Marvel RPGs in comics magazines would make sense.

But, again, where's the money coming from for this? In an era where selling 15,000 copies of an RPG over its lifetime makes you a massive success story in the industry, these companies simply have no cash flow for what you're suggesting.

For example, here's the ad rate sheet for Game Informer. Let's go crazy and say that a company is making $5 of pure profit on every copy of the game they sell. (They probably aren't making that, but let's go crazy.) So they take all their profits from their insanely unusual success story with 15,000 copies sold and they spend that $75,000 on... a 1/3rd page B&W ad that runs once.

And it is extremely unlikely that such an ad would give you 15,000 new customers so that it would pay for itself. It would have to be one of the most amazing ads in the history of advertising. Direct return rates on print ads are incredibly minuscule. (On the order of 2% if you're giving something away for free.)

These companies simply don't have the capital to fund the kind of advertising campaigns you're talking about. WotC as a company probably does (although it's not clear if the D&D division does). Paizo as a company might, but probably doesn't.

Even if these companies did have, say, the $1.2 million lying around that would be necessary to run a year long campaign of 1/2 page full color ads in Game Informer, they'd almost certainly see better returns and better results by investing that money into establishing an organization for organized play.

(To put that in a different perspective: $1.2 million would mean selling 200,000+ books to recoup your costs. Although sales numbers are kept close to the vest, I'm very comfortable saying that Green Ronin isn't selling 200,000 books every year. So you're talking about 12 print ads at least more than doubling Green Ronin's sales. That's absurdly implausible.)

 

[Leviatham]

But, again, where's the money coming from for this? In an era where selling 15,000 copies of an RPG over its lifetime makes you a massive success story in the industry, these companies simply have no cash flow for what you're suggesting.

For example, here's the ad rate sheet for Game Informer. Let's go crazy and say that a company is making $5 of pure profit on every copy of the game they sell. (They probably aren't making that, but let's go crazy.) So they take all their profits from their insanely unusual success story with 15,000 copies sold and they spend that $75,000 on... a 1/3rd page B&W ad that runs once.

And it is extremely unlikely that such an ad would give you 15,000 new customers so that it would pay for itself. It would have to be one of the most amazing ads in the history of advertising. Direct return rates on print ads are incredibly minuscule. (On the order of 2% if you're giving something away for free.)

These companies simply don't have the capital to fund the kind of advertising campaigns you're talking about. WotC as a company probably does (although it's not clear if the D&D division does). Paizo as a company might, but probably doesn't.

Even if these companies did have, say, the $1.2 million lying around that would be necessary to run a year long campaign of 1/2 page full color ads in Game Informer, they'd almost certainly see better returns and better results by investing that money into establishing an organization for organized play.

(To put that in a different perspective: $1.2 million would mean selling 200,000+ books to recoup your costs. Although sales numbers are kept close to the vest, I'm very comfortable saying that Green Ronin isn't selling 200,000 books every year. So you're talking about 12 print ads at least more than doubling Green Ronin's sales. That's absurdly implausible.)

OK, granted, those rates are pretty crazy. I have no idea how much any other magazines charge for their advertising in the USA, but here in the UK the average is £200 per 5000 readers for a full page ad. Way more affordable (unless you're a newspaper, though. Those are also petty insane).

My last experience advertising in an UK magazine was when I was starting in photography and wanted to do photographic trips to Spain. I spent £1000 in a three months campaign going between March and May (time when people prepare their holidays). It was in a magazine with 79.000 readers and I only had 1/4 of a page. I got around 5000 inquiries and had to turn down people because I couldn't organise enough trips.

I am no-one in the world of photography and still managed to sell enough to keep me going and repeat the experience the following year.

If GameInformer truly puts you in front of 3.5 million people and just 1% (I believe returns estimates on advertising is 2%, but that's from the top of my head and thus not too reliable) come back to buy, we're talking 35.000 people. Pretty good odds!

I understand the RPG is different and all that, but adversiting pays off. It is there for a reason.

Spending millions in advertising is pretty crazy unless you are in a prime market. RPGs are far from it. Spending a moderate and targeted amount of money in relevant media and cheaper advertising could render good results.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Kickstarter adds something interesting to this conversation because a small company can experiment more by baking advertising costs into the kickstart fundraiser. They can even be explicit about it what magazines they will be able to place ads in when they reach different benchmarks as part of a strategy to reach a broader audience.

While I do think this is a big risk for companies, and I myself would be very cautious about spending money on such an unkown, it would be interesting to see if anyone can attract a larger audience by taking these kinds of risks. On the one hand you have the realities of the market and the existing experiences of rpg publishers, which naturally leads folks to be more prudent (and I undertsand this first hand). On the other hand aiming high and taking risks can be a recipe for success in the right circumstances (and in those circumstances optimism usually beats pessimism.