Is WOTC/Hasbro mismanaging D&D?

[Sir Edgar]

No, I don't think they are missmanging D&D.

Lets take your example of monsters. To my group all of the old monster that we liked have been published in the first book. That is a matter of taste. Most of the grips about what they have published or not is a matter of taste.

Second when you have a hobby like ours along with something like the D20 license you want your main company to do the bland middle of the road stuff. It makes it easier to go from one group to another. It helps aviod the entire line catering to a small but vocal minority and destroying the market. With the D20 system the small companies can handle the unusal and the expermental. Not only can they do it better but need a small response to break even.

According to this poll, it appears that you and others like you are the "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market" for the rest of us. Most of the posts here have been people vehemently denying that WOTC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D and carrying on about how great their products are. And yet, nearly two-thirds of the people who voted think otherwise.

 

[Sir Edgar]

Let's analyze this logically, shall we? I'll take the first statement first.

A=The majority of people who voted voted "yes."
B=The majority of people who voted believe that WotC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D.
C=People who want the leprechaun and the neireid included in either MM or MM2 are a "vocal minority" that is destroying the market."

Your assumption:

If A, then B. Fair enough, but you leap immediately to
Therefore, ~C.

Woah! That's quite a leap of logic! I'd be very interested in seeing the logical proofs that went into this argument. If there was any possible way that it could be valid, that is.

Okay, next:

A=The poll is evenly split.
B=Half them voters believe that WotC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D and half believe that WotC/Hasbro is not mismanaging D&D. (B is only implied in your statement, but I'll give it to you).
C=This [presumably that WotC/Hasbro is or is not mismanaging D&D] is a matter of your personal taste.

If A, then B. This works, let's continue.
Therefore, ~C.

Huh? Once again, C has no business being in this argument, as it was never introduced in an assumption.



P.S: I like your list of names for the MM3.

Before you make any comments, maybe you should read posts more carefully. Those comments were made at different points of the poll. In the beginning, voters were evenly split, then "yes, WOTC/Hasbro is mismanaging" became the majority, and now they comprise nearly two-thirds of those who voted.

Anyhow, it wasn't I who said that the people who want the leprechaun and the nereid are a "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market". So, your analysis of my logic is faulty. Go back and re-read the posts, if you need to.

P.S. As for my joke list of names for Monster Manual 3, I'm not surprised at all.

 

[Dinkeldog]

According to this poll, it appears that you and others like you are the "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market" for the rest of us. Most of the posts here have been people vehemently denying that WOTC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D and carrying on about how great their products are. And yet, nearly two-thirds of the people who voted think otherwise.

Sir Edgar, polls at this site are fun, but don't be fooled into thinking that they're scientific, or that the results are valid. The wording of the poll self-selects for those that think that Hasbro is mis-managing D&D, and at any rate, would exclude those that have no strong opinion one way or the other (like myself). Also, you don't have a representative population, and you haven't gotten nearly enough results even if the population were representative. Also, internet polls are notorious for ballot-stuffing.

 

[Henry]

...I liked the idea of running a few Darksun games then maybe switching to the arabian one. The stranger and more different the settings were the more i liked then, and the less they sold apparently.

Hasboro I feel is killing the DnD creativity.

I have to disagree, but I feel I should point something out here.

The OGL was the best thing ever to happen to D&D settings as a whole. Ryan Dancey and All other individuals who were instrumental in bringing the OGL and d20 STL to fruition should be praised for this reason.

As opposed to lamenting the settings you have lost, I would urge you to look at the settings you have gained, all at no loss of money to the creators of D&D:

Want a pirate-based setting? Try Green Ronin's Freeport setting.
Want a post-apocalyptic setting? Try RPGObject's Darwin's World d20 Game.
Want a world that has fantastic yet consistent flavor? Try Kenzerco's Kalamar setting.
Want a historical setting? Try Earth 1066 by Earth1066, LLC.
Want something totally off the wall? Try Oathbound by Bastion Press.
ENWorld's d20 resource pages contain dozens of campaign settings compatible with D&D for our gaming pleasure. All of these are fully fleshed out, designed by gamers like you and me, and best of all are all perfectly legal to be on the market.

It has never been a better time to be a D&D player, in my opinion. I strongly urge you to check out some of the alternatives to WotC's handling of existing settings and products. Even Dark Sun and Planescape had to start somewhere.

 

[Alton Baldirk]

Hasbro

You know, I agree with points on both sides of this arguement, but I have a question. Does it even matter? The game is designed with flexibility in the first place. You can have it any way you want, as long as your willing to put the work in, though anyone that has been playing the game for so long knows that the last few years have a seen a drop in the creativity and quality of the source materials for D&D.

Most of the problem is that Hasbro doesn't consider the TSR intellectual license an important part of their business. This would be proved by the fact that they have informed both WotC employees and hinted to the general public that they have been discussing the idea of discontinuing the D&D line altogether. I'm not particularly worried, since I'm sure they'll sell the license and make a ton of money. But right now, they don't care, and it shows in their marketing and production.

 

[Alton Baldirk]

Correction

I agree that the D20 sources are wonderful. They give gamers so many options it's crazy. When I mentioned that the quality and creativity have been decreasing, I was referring to the ones published by WotC, not the additional 3rd party sources.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

The problem is, you give no specific reasons as to why you think any of these are so bad, besides broad generalizations. How could you immediately tell Deities & Demigods was completely useless? Why was Book of Challenges pretty dull (what were you expecting, specifically)? Now, you could simply say that these are your opinions, and you don't want to detail them, but it's hard to discuss the matter on such terms.

Well, I didn't give specific examples about those 4 products I had mentioned (namely Deites & Demigods, Book of Challenges, ELH, and Stronghold Builder's Guidebook) because the only one I've actually purchased was the ELH.

Just looking at Deites & Demigods, I immediately saw that I would never have any use for it, and I realised that (I'd guess) 95% of the people who bought it would probably read through it once, admire all the pretty pictures, and then shelve it, never to be used. All it is is stats for gods; nothing too useful about that, really. Not even useful information about the gods' religions! If it had had such information, I would have bought it myself, most likely.

The Book of Challenges, I said, "seemed" dull or whatever. I don't know, because I never bought it, seeing no need to as I already have Traps & Treachery I and II, both of which I think are excellent, and provide the same kind of thing (not the exact same thing, but close enough for me).

The ELH seems generally OK for me. I have read it through once (basically skimmed over it a few times, seeing no need to get in-depth yet because I won't be using those rules for a while, if ever).

I said the Stronghold Builder's Guidebook "failed to inspire." Basically, it seems like something I would buy, but I wasn't inspired enough to actually buy it. There is nothing wrong with that product; but seeing how (relatively) few products WotC is putting out these days, why couldn't they put out something more generally useful than that?

It seems to me that WotC's main problem is what kind of products they are choosing to release. A lot of them seem fairly useless and/or boring to me. It's nothing more than my opinion, of course! Just like it's my opinion that for these reasons, they are mismanaging D&D. But keep in mind, that's not to say that I thought they were mismanaging D&D during the release of the core 3! My belief is that when the stock market crashed and they fired all their talent, (or whenever they were releasing the splatbooks), the quality went down significantly. In fact, other than the Manual of the Planes, Masters of the Wild, and probably the Psionics Handbook, I think the WotC product line has gone downhill the entire time since the release of the Core 3.

 

[JeffB]

Re: It's good to be... ah nevermind!

As for Dragon 300, it's the best Paizo run issue so far, despite Tracy Hickman's ill-advised rant. It has far less typos and production defects. The "vile" content is tastefully presented (acknowledging the younger members of the audience), but interesting and makes for a great October/Halloween issue. As for design and art, they've remained top-notch. The page count is a little slimmer than, say, issue 275, but only by 14 pages. The magazine is worth the subscription, for sure.

Good Comments for the most part in your post, but I cannot agree with the above. Dragon 300 might have had less typos, but overall I think that's like saying " This is the least smelly pile of dog-poopy I've stepped in lately"...

I think the general concensus on this board (in the least) is that 300 was hardly a great issue, let alone a decent anniversary issue. It had it's bits and pieces taht everyone liked, but overall was no better or worse than what Dragon has been like from about mid 2001 on.

3 issues under their belt does not neccesarily make the sub worth it...espcially since it's probably those issues were done before the sale went through or very near that time period.

That being said, I'm not sure Dragon could get worse, so I guess at that rate WOTC did us a service (and made a good management decision) by putting the ball in someone elses court.

Your other points while I do not neccessarily agree with, were well thought out, and good food for thought

 

[jasper]

I still have used all the monster from MM1 the first edition
nor the fiend filio or mm2
Or all monsters from 2nd ed
Or all the monster from 3 rd Monster Manual.

Why?
manner of taste or I thought monster was stupid can you say tween!

Also it appears dear brother (your name is my brothers) you have a major taste manner with second manual and some of splat books.

Well I know most people here are smart enough to grab the 1 st edition brownie and adapted to 3 rd. What stopping you?

I know some of us old smarts are mean enought to say NO! Core books only or Core books plus splat books x, y, z.

If you want all the monsters from 1 ed in 1 3rd edition book find people who convert monster for 10 cents each and then a printer who will only charge you $1 per book printed with no min or max number printed.

As for lay offs. The suck but a business has to be profitable. And if not it must create new product or cut out people.

If you don't want layoffs to occur buy the company and run your way.

 

[Khur]

What's that on my shoe?

I understand that Hasbro is all about the bottom line, and I still maintain that because that is their total mantra, and in some ways they are very short sighted about the bottom line, that will result (and is resulting) in mismanagement.

You're right, at this time Hasbro/WotC seem to be inconsistent in their application of their normal business policy. I think what we're seeing are steps towards consistency.

And yes, I have used e-tools, one of my gaming group rushed out and bought a copy. He's very upset. Had I bought it, I would have drove to Seattle and gotten my money back. I do better with PC-Gen and stuff I wrote awhile back.

Thanks. I just wanted to know. It irks me when people post and don't know what they're talking about.

I didn't mean to sound all X-filey on you with the last statement. Sure, they probably did it as a PR stunt, but so what? If someone publically slanders you does that mean you should say: "Aww, it was a PR stunt." When they want to be your friend, or should you always remain a little suspicious?

You can disagree all you want, that's your right, but I still feel that Hasbro is mismanaging WotC.

Actually, I agree with you on both these points (I did vote yes on this poll). My other points are merely trying to show people how the direction WotC is heading could be good for the industry. If they follow their money mantra to its nirvana, they get out of the way for people who do want to make games, and D&D lives on as a prettier critter. You get better product as a result too.

They worry about the bottom line, how to make inferior products and still get top dollar for them. Do you think that we as the consumer will reap any of the savings that they get for canning these top level people? If you do, more fool you.

You're right again. But this is the mantra for many corporations, such as: Microsoft, Quark, and etc. Many companies cut corners on quality, sitting on their loyal (entrapped) consumer base to ensure success. Consumer choices, like electoral ones, are more often popularity contests than quality contests. The consumer won't see savings, but he may see an improved marketplace in general. (On a tangent, RPGs are an incredible entertainment value, even at current prices.)

Hasbro makes crap video games. They did with Microprose, they did before that. They are still doing it. What that shows me, is when it comes right down to it, if it isn't a board game, the board of directors, thier marketing, and thier R&D section probably can't comprehend it too well. While WotC understands the gamer mentality, I serious doubt that Hasbro does.

You're right again. Hasbro did make crappy games with Microprose. My point wasn't about that, it's about the fact that Hasbro doesn't care about making games, they care about the dollar. Hasbro doesn't make video games any more, BTW ... Infogrames owns what Hasbro used to (which is one of the reasons Master Tools became E-tools). Hasbro understands one thing: money-making. They don't care about the gamer mentality; they care about margins. They're gonna cut WotC down and down, until the margins are where they want them. The'll license and use the OGL to make the money they want.

And remember, just because Hasbro bought the game, doesn't mean things will get better or worse. There is no real "Mr. Hasbro" just a bunch of people sitting on a board, figuring out how to stuff their pockets full.

I think you and I agree almost completely with one another.

Originally posted by Sir Edgar
I was going to say pretty much exactly what Rounser said. Don't get me wrong, I think 3rd edition is great. But the focus has shifted a considerable deal from creative ideas about plots and character development to stats-building for npc's. Think about how much time it took to do a stats block during 1st edition (a few minutes) vs. 3rd edition (30minutes-1hour).

I can agree with the spirit of this argument, but not its application. The time it takes to create a character has no ramifications on the creativity involved in creating said character. That's like saying you can't create a beautiful work of art with a difficult technique. The only thing in 3E that does have ramifications on character creativity are the limited choices created by the rules, such as monks not being able to multiclass. One of the reasons 1E took a few minutes is because so many things were alike (and more restricted). And, I'll assert that it doesn't take that much longer to create stat blocks at all, while it does take longer to create creatures and characters themselves.

As for what Rounser said, he's right ... 1E was a lot easier to run on the fly.

Originally posted by Sir Edgar
According to this poll, it appears that you and others like you are the "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market" for the rest of us. Most of the posts here have been people vehemently denying that WOTC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D and carrying on about how great their products are. And yet, nearly two-thirds of the people who voted think otherwise.

Seriously, I voted yes to this poll, yet I wrote a lot of stuff defending WotC's current course according to Hasbro's overarching policy. That doesn't mean I think that all of WotC's stuff is golden. My opinion was based more on their business policies, than any personal feelings about the quality of their output. Maybe I was a little off topic, considering the first post in this thread only mentions production and design issues.

I did say that the core material has to appeal to the widest audience (that is, has to be generic) and does serve a decent role of catering to a beginning player (who doesn't have any idea what a Fiend Folio is, and doesn't care). On the flip side, I will say that some of the work is below my standards and useless to me personally. Further, I think some of the material is a bad example for new players.

And, I'm not trying to insult you, but come on ... do you really think 200 people equals any kind of majority, or even a minority? And the fact is: if you dislike WotC's non-core books, you don't need them to play the game ... in any fashion. Whoever said anything about destroying the market in the first place was wrong ... it can hardly be destroyed by even a vocal majority (barring political action usually forbidden in the US). That said, you have a wide variety of product to spend your change on, and the opportunity to make your own, if you're bold.

Originally posted by Alton Baldirk
Most of the problem is that Hasbro doesn't consider the TSR intellectual license an important part of their business. This would be proved by the fact that they have informed both WotC employees and hinted to the general public that they have been discussing the idea of discontinuing the D&D line altogether. I'm not particularly worried, since I'm sure they'll sell the license and make a ton of money. But right now, they don't care, and it shows in their marketing and production.

Exactly one of my points. Thanks. Hasbro won't discontinue D&D, the OGL, or anything else like that. At worst, D&D will be sold to someone else for a large bucket o' change. Chances are, if that happens it'll be better off, other than the OGL might go "poof".

Good Comments for the most part in your post, but I cannot agree with the above. Dragon 300 might have had less typos, but overall I think that's like saying " This is the least smelly pile of dog-poopy I've stepped in lately"...

hee, hee! That was good, I laughed out loud ... thanks. Okay, so I admit that Dragon has been faltering a bit here and there, but most of my gripes would be with production, not content. I liked this issue, and I've liked others. I think the extraplanar dragons were pretty cool (more interesting than typical D&D wyrms), the "hag" items were inspiring adventure ideas as I read them, and the undead templates are indispensable (that is, should have been in the MM to begin with). I've felt that way about most of my Dragon issues ... they have enough good stuff in them that it's worth $3.16 a pop (considering the subscription rate and the fact that it's delivered to me). I guess you and I just disagree on this point.

That's okay, with a sense of humor like that, you're still welcome at my gaming table!