Jeremy Crawford On The Dark Side of Developing 5E

WotC's Jeremy Crawford spoke to The Escapist about the D&D 5th Edition development process and his role in the game's production. "There was a dark side where it was kind of crushing. The upside is it allowed us to have a throughline for the whole project. So I was the person who decided if what we had decided was important two years prior was still being executed two years later."


You can read the full interview here, but below are the key highlights.

• Mike Mearls started pondering about D&D 5th Edition while the 4E Essentials books were being worked on in 2010.
• There were "heated discussions" about the foundations of 5E.
• Crawford is the guy who "made the decision about precisely what was going to be in the game".
• Crawford considers D&D's settings as an important pillar.

For another recent interview, see Chris Perkins talking to Chris "Wacksteven" Iannitti.

 

[Nellisir]

I think I differ from a lot here in that I don't really care about getting a detailed release schedule. Doesn't do anything for my game at the table. If I go on Amazon or walk into the store and see a new book I'll check it out, but until then as long as I'm having fun with what I already have why care about that stuff?

A lot of it is personal preference. I love getting Marvel Previews. Heck, that's almost the best thing I get at the comic book store nowadays. It helps me budget ahead and I like the anticipation. I go on Amazon to find specific things, and the suggestions it throws at me aren't very deep. If I look for shampoo, the next time I go to Amazon it's all shampoo. Never mind that I bought 3 graphic novels before that, it's all shampoo now.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

I think D&D will functionally do away with itself if the current trend continues. The books might be in print, and there will be two or three people working the phones and contracting designers to write adventures, but there won't be a strong continuity of design, a sense of purpose, or much carry-through. The focus will be on short-term campaigns, and anything beyond that will be outside of WotC's remit. That material won't go away - it'll migrate to companies that understand the tabletop RPG market better and have a stronger attachment to it, like Paizo, Green Ronin, and Frog God Games.

THAT SAID, I'm still betting on Mearls. I don't think this spring has been what was intended. What surprises me are the number of people that think this is as good as it's going to get, and are actively accusing or implying others of laziness or ineptitude for wanting more*. The acceptance is disappointing, and the behavior is really disappointing.

Eh, I'll respectfully disagree in that I do think that what we've seen so far has been the plan. They only have the manpower to work on a project or two at a time - maybe we would have had conversion docs already, or a hypothetical in-house hardcover to be released later this year would have been announced by now, if they hadn't lost one of their number to jury duty. But we were never going to get all that much more than what we are now.

I'd never accuse anyone who wants more D&D content of laziness or ineptitude, primarily because I myself would love to see more. But I don't need more to enjoy the excellent game that exists in front of me. In my view, 5E is complete, and any other material that comes out for it is gravy. I just got some new races and some bonus spells, and I'm an EN5ider patron so I've got more than enough to play with. While I don't begrudge anyone for wanting more from WotC, I also don't have any problems with WotC continuing on their present course.

I do have a problem with folks arguing that because their personal preferences aren't being satisfied, that the game is doomed or that WotC is mismanaging it. They're managing it fine as far as I can see.

Well, part of my problem is that so many people are, as I said above, willing to accept what's come out so far. I don't mind the Unearthed Arcana column as a way to do exactly what it says it's going to do - float out new ideas and mechanics for some feedback and playtesting. That's totally cool. What's troubling is the idea - primarily, insofar as I can tell, promulgated by online commentators - that this rough draft material is sufficient and acceptable as a way to put forth "official" campaign setting material.

I don't think WotC has said that. I think that's something the internet has come up with all on its own, but it's become gospel along with the idea that WotC is only going to do Adventure Paths (unless it's convenient for the poster to posit something else, like a hardbound Unearthed Arcana book).

I actually agree, in that I do think we'll see other properly playtested material than the APs come through eventually. But the emphasis is on "eventually". The pace is going to be much slower with such a small team. The Unearthed Arcana stuff is going to be rough and unpolished, but having the work done properly means waiting. There's no way around that that I can see - if they're not currently working on and playtesting an Eberron specific resource in secret for release some time in 2015, it means we've got a long time until we have something other than the rough draft to play with.

Again, even at the current release rate, I've got more than enough to occupy my attention, so I'm fine being patient. No setting-specific material until 2016? I can wait. 2019? I can wait til then, too. Etc.

I don't engage in games of Gotcha on online message boards, for one. People keep talking about how splatbooks don't sell, and setting material doesn't sell, and too much material doesn't sell, and D&D can't support anything except the core books and an occasional AP...and then I look at Paizo. All this furor and fervor dedicated to defending the idea that WotC can't do exactly what Paizo is succeeding at.

*I am not accusing anyone in particular or specific.

It's not that they can't sell the products. They could, and probably make a decent profit off of them.

It's that they could invest that same budget into Magic instead, and see ridiculously higher returns.

 

[Kramodlog]

Again, that's not in reply to the asking,

I so, like, totally disagree on that.

but to the constant complaining that comes after WotC doesn't comply with fan requests after having been asked nicely.

Not sure people are asking. Well maybe some. There are complaints too, but there are a lot of people who just share their disappointement and hopes. These people get the same response than so called complainers get: "Shut up!" to paraphrase.

Forums are there for many reasons, sharing disappointements and hopes are some of them. Right now some people are telling others to shut up because it bothers them, not because it will amount to nothing. In his interview, Crawford does say he is working on books. It sounds like he is adressing those who are disappointed with the release schedule. Sharing impressions on forums to other forumites might not be as pointless as some might suggest.

Asking nicely doesn't magically make a product offering viable.

I'm tired of that argument. It is a slippery slop. WotC pubishing one campaign setting book a year or source book a year, won't make it go bankrupt. Especially if it is a FR book. Given the FR's popularity, I have trouble conceiving it would make less money than say PotA. I'm not even sure APs are the optimal book they can release if we strickly stick to maximizing revenues. Modern APs are uncharted territory for WotC.

Heck, their new video game is called Sword Coast Legends and so far all their APs have been set in the Sword Coast (I think). Why not make a Sword Coast source book that comes out when the video game is release? It fits in a cross-branding business model.

 

[Shasarak]

It's not that they can't sell the products. They could, and probably make a decent profit off of them.

It's that they could invest that same budget into Magic instead, and see ridiculously higher returns.

I do not think that they can, an unlimited budget does not result in unlimited profits.

 

[Nellisir]

They only have the manpower to work on a project or two at a time - maybe we would have had conversion docs already, or a hypothetical in-house hardcover to be released later this year would have been announced by now, if they hadn't lost one of their number to jury duty. But we were never going to get all that much more than what we are now.

I don't think we would have necessarily gotten a lot more, but whoever they've lost to jury duty seems to have been a real lynchpin to a number of projects. That sort of bottleneck is one of my concerns (note: I'm not saying it's mismanaged or anything else; I don't have enough information. The information I do have is enough to raise a concern, though.) Also, I don't think WotC's staffing level is particularly small for the industry. If anything, they're probably a little on the large side. It's WEIRD that they're smaller than Paizo, but that's like comparing two elephants standing in a flock of sheep. And, I'd be curious to know how WotC's current staffing compares to Paizo's at the launch of Pathfinder. I've been under the impression that Paizo has been adding staff for a number of years, so comparing Paizo then (staff & release schedule) to WotC now (staff & release schedule) might be a more valid comparison to assess capability.

These are observations and my own hunches, though. I'm not privy to WotC's budget or staffing details.

I'd never accuse anyone who wants more D&D content of laziness or ineptitude, primarily because I myself would love to see more.

I honestly don't know if you have or not. Plenty of people have, unfortunately.

Again, even at the current release rate, I've got more than enough to occupy my attention, so I'm fine being patient.

I'm OK with monsters and spells and class options (well, sorta. A few more would be nice). I was really surprised at how few magic items were in the DMG. Many of the DMG chapters seem scant to me, actually. And yes, I could and go through and convert what I need, and doubtlessly will, but I prefer to avoid duplication of effort when possible.

It's that they could invest that same budget into Magic instead, and see ridiculously higher returns.

I've been under the impression that revenue from Magic and D&D are somewhat segregated. Or why invest in D&D at all if the return on investment from Magic is that much higher?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've been under the impression that revenue from Magic and D&D are somewhat segregated. Or why invest in D&D at all if the return on investment from Magic is that much higher?

To keep the IP alive. For instance, to use outside of the TTRPG market. It's not strictly necessary, but when you point to the well-known D&D name, it's nice to also be able to point an in-print product or few.

Or, it could be a microeconomic calculation (I kinda doubt it, but I suppose people may still be doing that kind of analysis) to maximize their production possibilities. A handful of talented RPG designers can put out a new edition of D&D in 3 years, and a book or few a year. Re-tasking them to M:tG already flush with talented CCG designers wouldn't add that much to M:tG, but taking them away from D&D would leave it nothing but a shell to be licensed out.

Or not. They presumably have a reason that seems good to them from where they're standing. Not a lot of point second-guessing it.

 

[pemerton]

WotC pubishing one campaign setting book a year or source book a year, won't make it go bankrupt.

You writing a $1000 cheque to WotC to help subsidise the publication of that book probably won't make you go bankrupt either, but I'm guessing you're not doing that.

They're a business. Their goal is to make returns on investment. "Avoiding bankruptcy" is an important threshold, yes, but it's not their barometer for success.

I think D&D will functionally do away with itself if the current trend continues. The books might be in print, and there will be two or three people working the phones and contracting designers to write adventures, but there won't be a strong continuity of design, a sense of purpose, or much carry-through. The focus will be on short-term campaigns, and anything beyond that will be outside of WotC's remit.

Then Table-Top D&D is effectively dead. I'm all for letting Neverwinter, Sword Coast Legends, and other digital content run with the D&D name, but I don't want at the exclusion of a thriving game. Two modules a year is not thriving, its legacy support.

<snip>

I don't want to see it fall to neglect with only a twice-annual AP as its only support. If that's what TT D&D is, than perhaps its time to pack the whole thing in.

I don't understand these posts.

If D&D is in print and books are selling, in what sense is it "dead", "not thriving" or "functionally done away with"?

If more people are playing D&D on a regular basis than every other RPG put together, in what sense is the game dead, or not thriving?

What is the "carry-through" that would be missing? (Or is "carry-through" just a synonym for "more books being published"? In which case the claim that few publications means little carry-through becomes a tautology.)

Here's my take. The D&D RPG is a hobby game. If it is being played, it is thriving. If not, it's not. What's the correlation between books published by WotC, and sessions of D&D played? I don't know, but I'm guessing that WotC has some idea, and we can draw inferences to what they think based on their publication schedule.

 

[pemerton]

So nobody bought the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, or Dark Sun books for 4e?

The threshold isn't "no one".

I really don't know what WotC's financials look like. I can only guess based on my very limited knowledge of book authorship in another field. But let's think about a 128 page hardback. That's in the neighbourhood of 100,000 words, maybe more depending on font and artwork. (I think it's around 500 words per full column.)

Between authoring, development, editing, art etc, how much labour goes into that? To make the maths easy I'm going to call it an even year, at salary plus on-costs of $100,000. (I don't know how much WotC's designers and editors get paid, and I don't really know US salary structures in general. For their sakes I hope that my estimate of a year's salary plus on-costs is low rather than high!)

If WotC sells a book for $50, presumably around $12.50 makes it back to them, and after printing and distribution costs let suppose they see $10 (that seems a bit generous, but I'm rounding wildly in any event).

That would set the break-even point at 10,000 books sold.

I gather that the Menzoberranzan book sold fewer than 1000 (I think [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] has the source for this). I don't know what the sales were for the 4e books you mentioned.

WotC literally is throwing money away to discuss old settings?

See my maths above. What evidence do you have of the likely demand?

Give me a web article, or the oft-mentioned "Worlds of D&D" book. Don't tell me D&D's strength is its settings, then say "but we're not touching that strength, you're on your own."

When they say the settings are a strength, they mean that the IP in the settings is a source of wealth and revenue for WotC, because D&D customers have a fondness for that material.

But as Perkins explained, in a round-about way, they are still trying to work out how to leverage that IP, and setting books are not intended to be a big part of that.

It'd be nice to have that info in one place, rather than scouring the internet for nuggets dropped.

Sure. For me, it would be nice to have a copy of my 4e PHB fully errata-ed, plus power books with all the information from Dragon and the supplements compiled, etc. But I won't be getting that either!

Ah yes. The time-honored "do it yourself" Well thank's WotC. I guess I don't need to buy another book from you since I can just "make it up myself."

Correct. This is already the situation. It's why they're cutting down on the number of books they publish, because most of their customers don't buy books beyond the core.

Except for the fact that their stuff is playtested (at least somewhat) and has some of the kinks worked out.

Do you really think your mul conversion (from 2nd ed AD&D or 4e) is going to break your game? If so, run it by the eyes of ENworld!

Its never a good sign that 10 months after a major release we have no idea as to what support this game is getting beyond a monthly pseudo-playtest document and two annual Adventures

<snip>

I just want to know what, going forward, is the status of non-Realms D&D settings: occasional name drops, web support, printed, or silence.

The answer is probably "not much"! They haven't exactly been coy about their lack of intention to publish many books.

On settings, Chris Perkins has told you that you'll be getting stuff in a surprising format/medium. Given that sourcebooks and UA wouldn't surprise many people, we can probably rule them out.

Clearly, you set a very low bar for what you consider "support". All of these products have been available on the used market since they were published. Before WotC started offering the PDFs on DriveThru, would you have considered WotC to be supporting Greyhawk just because I could get the used copies from Crazy Egor's or on ebay? I don't think I would. Putting PDFs out on DriveThru is a step above that

It's a huge step above that: it's putting the products back into (digital) print. Which is precisely what counts as supporting a setting, or a game line. A few years ago these boards were full of threads saying "Bring back PDFs". Now WotC has done so. That's support!

Yes, the DriveThru indexing could be better, so you can see what's available under various product lines, settings, authors etc - but perhaps someone online has already done that (I don't know, I haven't looked).

it's still hard to call it very active support - certainly nothing like when they were publishing sourcebooks with new content filtered through the assumptions of the new edition or even farming out scenario writing through the Living Greyhawk campaign in the 3e era. Ultimately, I think those are what people want when they talk about seeing their favorite campaign setting supported - new content to get excited about, inspired by, work into their campaigns. It may be that WotC can't swing that because the D&D team has been so badly gutted and the company has been so sluggish about allowing 3rd parties to license. But it sucks that they're in that position and no amount of dismissals around "do it yourself based on the old stuff" from you is going to change that or how people who want active support feel.

I'm not trying to change how anyone feels. I'm just pointing out that settings are supported: if you want to start playing your game in Greyhawk, or Dark Sun, at least - those are the two I've looked at on DriveThru - it's cheap and easy to do so.

I know about the internet landscape. I was on TSR/AOL - in fact pretty much the whole reason I was online at all - to network with TSR staff and get my foot in the door (we were all young and innocent then, but it kinda worked*), and primarily frequented the Greyhawk board, as did Roger Moore, Erik Mona, Gary Holian, and others.

<snip>

*My timing was off, though. I got an article** into Dragon the same time they announced 3e, so my 2e proposals were all scrapped**, and I wasn't up to speed on 3e until 2001 or so, by which point the OGL had exploded all over everything. Erik Mona did let me know about a job opening at WotC after he started there, and suggested I apply, but I was an idiot and didn't.

** One acceptance and two rejections. One of the rejections had three different people go at it with a red pen (Roger Moore, Harold Johnson, and someone else.). I still have it somewhere, along with the check stub for the accepted article.

This suggests to me that you are a very atypical WoTC customer.

I'm sure if there were 10,000 or 100,000 Nellisirs out there ready to buy books, the publication schedule might look different!

 

[HobbitFan]

They could be supporting the game in several ways via their web site and online content and they choose not to.

That kind of support has nothing to do with hardbacks and the like.

Once they decided to do hardbacks and adventures, it's not a given that the form they are in now is necessarily the best or only way to go.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I gather that the Menzoberranzan book sold fewer than 1000 (I think [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] has the source for this). I don't know what the sales were for the 4e books you mentioned.

I've only got reading between the lines here. The State of the Mongoose 2012 said that:

The current RPG market is miserable. There really is no other word for it. I was talking to the owner of a certain well known RPG company just a little while ago, and he mentioned that he had sold a few hundred of his latest release. We agreed it was a good total in this day and age for the average RPG product (not saying his book was average but… oh, you get the point!). Then he dropped the bombshell; he had reliable information that his book had outsold the latest supplement of a very well known, not to mention market-leading, game.​

Market-leading game at the end of 2012 of course meant either D&D or Pathfinder (Onyx Path wasn't on the radar, Star Wars was just getting started and isn't market leading, Fate was holding its kickstarter so you wouldn't describe it that way; there were really no rivals). I'm guessing that that wasn't Paizo; I expect them to be smart enough to make a profit and they also publish fast. Menzobaranzan came out in August 2012 and nothing came out subsequently in 2012, so "a little while ago" combined with "latest supplement" is almost certain to be that. We also know it bombed (it simply didn't have an audience as it was systemless WoTC fluff so no one bought it, and if it had done adequately they'd have brought more books out).

So it's only inference here. But the triangulation is excellent.

On the other hand people bought the player side books for the Realms, Eberron, and Dark Sun. For one thing each of them had a class in - and they produced another one for Neverwinter (also containing a class, of course). I don't think either the Realms or Eberron DMs books sold well enough to be profitable which is why Dark Sun got a Creature Catalogue as its second book instead of a DM fluff book, something repeated for the excellent Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale. The other problem the DM books had for the Realms and Eberron is that 3.X Realms and Eberron material is of course dirt cheap and there's a lot of it. So if it wasn't offering mechanical integration (which you got out of the player books) it didn't add that much.

And remember they moved the Dark Sun books over from Players' Guide + DMs Guide to Players Guide + Monster Book (swimming with plot hooks) before the entire Essentials fiasco.

This suggests to me that you are a very atypical WoTC customer.

Most of us on these boards are either dolphins or whales. And I've pointed out before that WotC seems to be passing on both those markets for 5e.