D&D General Kobold Press Going Down a Dark Road

[Micah Sweet]

It is a problem that affected both sides. The creative side could run wild and create settings that sold next to nothing and come up with products where the manufacturing cost exceeded the sales price.

The business side failed at both giving directions about what to create and about reigning in the creative freedom when it conflicted with basic economics and market research (because the business side sucked at both too).

The downfall of TSR can be blamed on the business side, but it is an example of an unchecked creative side running free, without the direction and checks and bounds the business side should give / impose. So it is a good example for prioritizing the design side over the business side and failing as a consequence of that.



sure, short term thinking is a big problem in corporate America. It is much easier to increase profit by cutting investing in the future of the company (research for new products, etc) than to actually grow the business, and in 5-10 years when it comes back to haunt you, that CEO has left with a huge bonus from that decision



I see this more as measuring the wrong thing. If the CEO bonus were tied to the share price in 10 years instead of the one in the next quarter, such stupid short term decisions would be far less frequent, which is why family owned businesses make them at much lower rates

And we're back to the problem with publicly traded companies.

 

[Imaro]

Were the design goals, "we want to design something that as many people will buy as possible"? Because if they are, I would appreciate a heads up from the company.

Or we want a game of D&D that is robust enough, easy enough and captivating enough that it serves as a vehicle to not only bring back old D&D players but to introduce new players to D&D and retain them for 10+ years or more while being enjoyed across the widest possible selection of TTRPGers...

 

[Micah Sweet]

we have no idea what 1DD will look like. So far they asked for feedback, but we do not know that they will just go by whatever that was. Going by D&D Next, there is a good chance it will not just be based on popularity (I expect that to play a bigger role this time however, ‘thanks’ to the 5e compatibility mantra)

I don't know. Based on the playtests, and the new monster and heritage format, I think we have a pretty good idea of what 1D&D will look like.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, I don't remember what there current stance is, but they have previously said the playtest responses and feedback are one of the things they consider, not the only thing they consider.

Have they actually gone against anything the public voted up yet? Results matter.

 

[Imaro]

And we're back to the problem with publicly traded companies.

I thought TSR was a privately owned company... am I mis-remembering?

 

[Micah Sweet]

So as long as WotC is following their internal creative vision and design... you applaud them, correct? Now let me ask... how do you know if they did or didn't? How do you know they did with 4e, especially seeing as there were reports it's initial design was scrapped and re-done. So now, since you don't even like 4e I'm totally confused, without inside information how can you determine if design is following from creative vision or not??

I don't know. But again, if their creative vision amounts to "whatever the most people participating in our popularity poll want", I think that's a problem.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or we want a game of D&D that is robust enough, easy enough and captivating enough that it serves as a vehicle to not only bring back old D&D players but to introduce new players to D&D and retain them for 10+ years or more while being enjoyed across the widest possible selection of TTRPGers...

That was 5e's original goal. It is decidedly not their current goal. I told you, I like the 5e we originally got.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I thought TSR was a privately owned company... am I mis-remembering?

You're right. I apologize.

 

[Imaro]

I don't know. But again, if their creative vision amounts to "whatever the most people participating in our popularity poll want", I think that's a problem.

So there literally is no basis for what amounts to the following creative vision you are arguing for beyond... not what most people would like...

 

[dave2008]

Have they actually gone against anything the public voted up yet? Results matter.

I believe so, but it is really hard to tell. Definitely from the Next playtest to 5e there were things that were never playtested. Similarily, things that were liked in UA throughout the years are often changed a bit before they appear officially. I don't know the numbers (they haven't always made them public), but UA stuff I liked definitely hasn't made it into official releases.