D&D 5E L&L - D&D Next Goals, Part One

[Sunseeker]

[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION], I have purchased MTG products for years, and its biggest asset is its ability to cater price-wise to both upper and lower incomes. WOTC has even in recent years made it easier for people to get in on the fun as incomes drop and prices rise.A single pack runs roughly 5 bucks.A "fat pack" will run you between 35 and 40.A precon deck is somewhere between 10 and 12.A commander set runs you about 30 bucks(2 decks of generally higher end cards and some bonus goodies.)Other products range from a few dollars to hundreds for those folks buying booster cases.A D&D core book generally rings up between 35 and 50 dollars, putting us pretty far up on the comparative ladder to MTG products. You cannot purchase individual classes, races, powers or anything WOTC could even hope to price closer to MTGs lower end. Asking people to pay upwards of $50 for an introductory D&D product will not interest casual gamers or people hesitant about the product.The basic issue, and the reason why D&D and MTG are incomparable when it comes to pricing is that MTG asks almost nothing of a new player. $10-15 and you're in. If you enjoy the game, the choice to invest is there, but investment amounts are variable and fit many levels of dedication and a variety of budgets and playstyles. Heck "pauper" is a new legal format where you can't play with more than one rare!D&D on the other hand demands massive investment. Spending a hundred dollars on MTG cards will net you a great deal, spending $100 on D&D will get you what, 2 books? Typically you need 3 to run even a simple game! D&D cannot hope to appeal to casual crowds, limited budget players or interest new people when the basic, introductory, and core products DEMAND a hundred dollar and more initial investment.

 

[GX.Sigma]

The trouble I see is the "module of a module" problem. For example, a big part of R&D's plan for high level play is the legacy system--which is, by definition, an extra system that is layered on top of the basic rules. But the designers are seeing that as a default. If you imagine a three-core-books scenario, the Legacy system would be in the PHB or the DMG.

In the Red Box scenario, they might not put it in the core product (because it's an extra thing that isn't strictly necessary). They might put it into the DMG (which, in this system, is an "advanced" product, not part of the core). But then, what if they want to print additional legacy options in a later product? It wouldn't be useable with the core. The same problem exists with hirelings & henchmen, specialties, backgrounds, and even sub-class choices (a book with new rogue schemes and wizard traditions doesn't help unless the core has those things).

So would you then have "expert" products that you need to have the "advanced" products to use? Or would all of these things exist in the core product?

 

[Nellisir]

The trouble I see is the "module of a module" problem. For example, a big part of R&D's plan for high level play is the legacy system--which is, by definition, an extra system that is layered on top of the basic rules. But the designers are seeing that as a default. If you imagine a three-core-books scenario, the Legacy system would be in the PHB or the DMG.

I'm not following what you mean by Legacy system. Is that a particular system, or do you just mean a set of modular rules, like backgrounds? Why would a set of rules published in a later book (The Book of Trolls) not be compatible with core rules? It seems like you're saying the core rules have to have everything (rogue schemes, wizard traditions, hirelings, henchmen, specialities, backgrounds, sub-classes) because they won't work "unless core has those things". If core has everything, then it's not core.

 

[Nellisir]

Shidaku - you need two people to play Magic, so that's $30 towards a basic game. Assuming 4 players and a DM, at $15 each, that's $75 towards a basic D&D game. More options cost more, just like Magic, except unlike Magic, you can actually share books. I've never seen two opponents share a deck in Magic.

And Mearls stated that the basic game would be a "complete" campaign, so you presumably won't need 3 books and $120 to run a "simple" game. More like $50, which would actually make it cheaper per person than Magic.

 

[Ratskinner]

I was thinking of major retialers such as Target and Walmart. I have never seen any of those board games at any of those retailers. Maybe some carry them but my guess even if some do it isn't a a majoe driver in the sales of those game.

Barnes & Noble is probably the only retialer I would consider majoe that does carry those types of games on a regular basis.

I know my Target actually had a decent sample of ~$50 Eurogames for the Christmas season. I dunno if that's year-round, though.

 

[Sunseeker]

I keep seeing a floating comparison between D&D and other board games, and some extent MTG.

D&D is traditionally a product of high investment. MTG is a product of low investment.
With MTG, for between 9.99 and 12.99 you can get an MTG starter deck, there are at least a dozen of these that are considered "Standard" at any given time. Purchasing one gives you the ability to play the game. The rules are long and often complex, but time-stamp rules and layering rules aren't necessary to the majority of games, plus, you don't have to pay for them.

With D&D, in order to be able to play, you need to purchase the PHB, which provides instruction on how to play any of a dozen different race/class combos. Comparatively speaking, we could consider these "decks". This however, will cost you MSRP $34.99 for the 4e PHB1, $29.99 for the 3.X PHB. It's arguable that you get more matieral in this for a better price....but this is only enough information to make your "deck". In order to run a game, you don't simply need another player with another deck, you need two more books, each priced similarly.

So, with MTG, two people need to pay a minimum of ~$25(one deck for each player), with D&D, a minimum of two people are needed and three books totaling roughly $100.

That's a pretty serious investment to play a game. I can get 3 books, enough to run a small variety of games, or I can purchase a deck @12.99, a deck for my friend, 12.99, a "Fat Pack" for 34.99, and leave $34.03 to purchase individual cards(the vast majority of which sell for pennies) online or from my friends to get specific items I want to further customize my deck.

What makes it worse is that MTG keeps it's investment cost low. For 4.99 you can buy a booster pack of 15 cards. For the price of a D&D book, you can get a "Fat pack", containing some 8(which 4.99x8=$40, a good deal at any stretch) boosters, dice, lands and a nice box. For the same price, you can buy ONE more D&D book.

D&D is NOT going to garner favor with casual gamers and new players if it maintains this investment model. The introductory product needs to be priced in line with the initial investment required for most other games, which is between $20 and $30 USD. Not $50-$75 or around $100. It also needs to be a "complete" product. Hell I don't care if they sell a "Paladin booster pack" that only includes instructions on how to play a paladin for $10.

Honestly I thought the 4e "race guides" for MSRP 14.99 were a great idea! Yes in the long-run it's more expensive, but for a lower price a player could pick up a short but detailed book about a single race of their interest. Sure, WOTC could still sell big, heavy PHB-style books which contain 5 races and 5 classes, but at the same time, it could very easily utilize the MTG low-investment model and sell Race or Class "handbooks" for $10, allowing players a very low-investment in a specific product that pertains to their interests.

hoooieee...look at all them double posts...sorry guys, my cell phone hates the internet..

 

[Sunseeker]

Shidaku - you need two people to play Magic, so that's $30 towards a basic game. Assuming 4 players and a DM, at $15 each, that's $75 towards a basic D&D game. More options cost more, just like Magic, except unlike Magic, you can actually share books. I've never seen two opponents share a deck in Magic.

And Mearls stated that the basic game would be a "complete" campaign, so you presumably won't need 3 books and $120 to run a "simple" game. More like $50, which would actually make it cheaper per person than Magic.

I have regularly borrowed and loaned and traded-for-the-time-of-the-game MTG decks.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Why would a set of rules published in a later book (The Book of Trolls) not be compatible with core rules? It seems like you're saying the core rules have to have everything (rogue schemes, wizard traditions, hirelings, henchmen, specialities, backgrounds, sub-classes) because they won't work "unless core has those things". If core has everything, then it's not core.

So, the Forgotten Realms product comes out, and the third chapter introduces new backgrounds and specialties. Imagine I'm someone who only has two products: the core product and the FR product. That chapter of the FR product isn't going to make sense to me unless the core product has backgrounds and specialties.

Actually, the core product has to have all the standard backgrounds and specialties--otherwise I would be able to make a Calimite Red Wizard of Thay, but not a blacksmith illusionist. I would feel cheated, like WotC expected me to buy the PHB (which was supposed to be optional) to get the full experience.

Basically what I'm saying is that the core can't just be the absolute minimum basic rules. Some "optional" things are designed to be expanded upon, which means the core has to have those optional things. Whether they try to fit it all in the Red Box (seems unlikely) or have the PHB and MM form a sort of "Advanced Core" (sadly probably) is unclear.

I'm not following what you mean by Legacy system. Is that a particular system, or do you just mean a set of modular rules, like backgrounds?

The Legacy system is a rules module for high level play. It's kind of like "name level" from old-school editions, or Epic Destinies from 4th. It includes stuff like building kingdoms, having armies, etc. The idea is to ease your high-level characters away from "just fighting more orcs" into becoming more like big-name NPCs who can have a big impact on the world. Details are sketchy at this point, but they mention a Wizard being able to research new spells, or become a lich. What I was getting at: this system is clearly optional, but it has room for further expansion. Would they put it in the DMG but not the core product? If so, what if they release more options later?

 

[Li Shenron]

But I suspect that D&D will probably eschew maps and tokens (and tactical rules) in the core game, and try to keep the price under $50.

I think they must definitely do so.

They should put only what is always needed, by every gaming group, and that is (1) rules, (2) character sheets and (3) dice. That's what a pen-and-paper RPG is anyway. Dice can be sold separately, but maybe on a walmart package you can bundle a single set of polyhedral with the book, to avoid the "battery not included" effect.

Maps and tokens or minis are not used by all gaming groups, and imply a specific gaming style, although it's definitely the most popular of the gaming styles.

If they once again make a box with all this stuff, they'll be stuck once again with a sampler which is what they are saying they don't want, or they'll have a pricey tag that will keep a chunk of potential new customers away, or they'll have to sell it at too low profit.

That's a good question for Next: bargain price or premium price?

Each would draw a different audience.

But if this product will be the core, it means that PHB+DMG+MM will not include again the material of this single core book (otherwise what's the point of the article?), thuseveryone will need to buy it. The hardcore gamers won't be able to skip this.

I'm frankly baffled. Do none of you actually do any shopping?

Magic basic sets were mentioned. A Magic basic set clocks in at 50 bucks. 100 bucks for a box of boosters - probably not something the casual gamer is going to start with, but, it's there. Heck, I picked up six Pokemon boosters at Toys R Us this Christmas for my daughters and it was 25 bucks. A blister pack of 3 with a foil card was 12 bucks.

A full sized boardgame box is 50 bucks easily. Heck, video games regularly clock in higher than that. Do people not think that video games sell?

Sure, it's not Monopoly, but then again, D&D will never get sales of that scale to be able to drop the price point that low.

Settlers of Catan starts at about 45 bucks. Number one best selling game for quite a while. Never mind the expansions.

Hundred bucks might be a bit much, but, then again, the D&D name carries a fair bit of weight as well. It's not like it's an unknown name. I could easily see a D&D Game that runs in around 75 bucks though.

I think we need to ask, what does WotC means for potential new customers?

Are they thinking of people who buy other RPGs and board games, but not currently D&D? If this is the case, then 50e or even 100e might not be a barrier for them, since they already spend a lot of money in other games.

Or are they thinking of non-gamers, people who only play console games at most, and trying to market D&D as an alternative family game? That would IMHO be a very worthwhile purpose, but then keeping price max around 50e is a must.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

OK, I don't think anyone except you is harping on the $100 price tag. I said $50. Hussar said $75. For comparison, here are some "basic" board games that you should be able to find in Target, Wal-Mart, Barnes & Nobles, etc. (Except for Lords of Waterdeep)


Settlers of Catan, $42.
Carcassonne, $30
Ticket to Ride, $50
Dominion, $45
Smallworld $50
Lords of Waterdeep, $50
Forbidden Island, $17
Dungeon, $20
Monopoly, $18-$25
Risk, $30-$60

Of these, Forbidden Island is a wee little tin box with a bunch of cards, four plastic treasures, and some little people things. Dungeon is 30 years old and while it's been well-reviewed, I've also seen commentary on the low/cheap production. Monopoly is boring as all get-out. Risk - I don't know about you, but B&N only seems to carry the licensed Risk boxes, like Risk: Halo, and are usually in the $50 range. Settlers of Catan, Carcassonne, Ticket to Ride, and Dominion are all "basic" entry level euro-games that are widely popular.

I think WotC is going to make a strong push into board games, btw, so expect them to keep mining D&D for material. And expect a D&D game that will sit on the shelf next to them.

Doesn't matter if you think Monopoly is boring, It sells. Compare those prices you listed to Candyland, Trouble, Sorry and a few other titles and get back with us.