D&D 5E My Crazy Theory about 2015 5e

[PnPgamer]

What if the "open endedness so dms can rule their own games better" aspect is because this indeed is an unfinished product? Then they release rule here, a rule there (dungeon master guide hasnt expanded combat rules in previois editions) and then an errata here and another there (phb2 in 4e had some errata at the end of the book or something)

 

[Ravenheart87]

What if the "open endedness so dms can rule their own games better" aspect is because this indeed is an unfinished product? Then they release rule here, a rule there (dungeon master guide hasnt expanded combat rules in previois editions) and then an errata here and another there (phb2 in 4e had some errata at the end of the book or something)

You mean all previous editions, and generally are rpg books are unfinished products? Actually yes, they are in some way. And that's in my eyes a feature, not a bug. I don't want rules for everything, because I can't handle them and keep them all in my head. I want rules for the basics that I can use to make my own judgement easily.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm having fun tuesday nights with 5e. All this other stuff really doesn't matter to us. D&D is not going away anywhere.

I get talking about the state of the game and whatnot. But nobody here has any info on actual sales revenue other than they have sold well out of the gate, what Hasbro's revenue targets are for D&D, and any stuff like that but there seems to be people who think its already failing and unless they schedule a bunch of books that its looking bad for D&D. Maybe this version is only going to have a a small number of rule books and module support. The 3e/PF model is not the only viable one.

 

[Kramodlog]

Maybe the "technophobic" WotC licensing guy got fired recently. They're looking for applicants for that position, right?

More like they realized that they suddenly needed someone to handle licenses. Improvisation, as I said before. That they fired two people working on the RPG and hire one person who will work on non-RPG D&D stuff says a lot on what they think of the future of their RPG.

I am curious to know the relation, if any, between the firings and the new job. Is it that the budget is so limited that they needed to fire two people to hire someone else? After a supposedly successful launch that seems odd. Wouldn't they be justify to hire someone new? So it beg the question: was the launch a success? Is Hasbro in general in financial trouble? There was a New York Times article linked in the Miscelaneous section that said that Hasbro isn't going so well. So it could have been one job for one job, plus someone else fired because of restructuring.

Hopefully there will not be anymore restructuring, cause the hype of the launch of the core books is gonna go down and sells with it. Imagine, you loose two employees working on the RPG when you have a "successful" core launch, imagine when you just publish one adventure.

 

[delericho]

I am curious to know the relation, if any, between the firings and the new job. Is it that the budget is so limited that they needed to fire two people to hire someone else? After a supposedly successful launch that seems odd. Wouldn't they be justify to hire someone new?

I would be inclined to suggest a simpler explanation: the skill sets for editors is different from that for the "license guy", and so the two moves have no connection at all.

 

[Zaran]

Everyone is getting a little carried away here. Even if my theory is true, it's not a bad thing. I think everyone can agree that the game isn't perfect. We can even agree that the game works as it is. If they come out with revised books I'm going to buy them. I'd rather WotC to produce revised books than put out a huge errata document.

Thanks for the 1 star rating...Somehow I offended everyone by posting my thoughts.

 

[Kramodlog]

I would be inclined to suggest a simpler explanation: the skill sets for editors is different from that for the "license guy", and so the two moves have no connection at all.

You didn't understand. I'm talking salary. Did they fire two person to afford the salary of one person? Strange after a core launch that is supposedly successful and that supposedly brought lots of money. No?

It also highlight what they think of the future of the RPG vs t-shirts with D&D writen on it.

 

[delericho]

You didn't understand.

No, I did understand, I just don't think there's a connection.

Hasbro are a publicly-traded company. That means that they have to act in a manner that will maximise shareholder value, and that means that if they don't have work for person X to do, then person X has to be let go. (It's a bit more complex than that, but that's the gist of it.)

So, if they're in a position where they have two more editors than they need, then they're likely to let them go. It's not actually anything to do with having enough money to keep them on - the question is whether they have enough work to keep them on.

At the same time, they might need to bring in a "license guy". And if the skill-sets are sufficiently different, it's probably not an option to retask one of the editors to do the new job.

(In the same way, a football (soccer) team might let go two defenders while bringing in a new striker. They're different jobs, so you can't just move a guy from one place to another. And that means there don't need to be any salary issues at play.)

 

[DEFCON 1]

Everyone is getting a little carried away here. Even if my theory is true, it's not a bad thing. I think everyone can agree that the game isn't perfect. We can even agree that the game works as it is. If they come out with revised books I'm going to buy them. I'd rather WotC to produce revised books than put out a huge errata document.

Thanks for the 1 star rating...Somehow I offended everyone by posting my thoughts.

It's not that you "offended" anyone... it's rather that I don't think most people think your theory is right. And if it was, that people agree with you that it's "not a bad thing". I suspect most other people would feel the exact opposite because they don't *want* to buy the books again.

 

[DMZ2112]

What if the "open endedness so dms can rule their own games better" aspect is because this indeed is an unfinished product? Then they release rule here, a rule there (dungeon master guide hasnt expanded combat rules in previois editions) and then an errata here and another there (phb2 in 4e had some errata at the end of the book or something)

What makes D&D5 attractive to dungeon masters is not that it is "open ended" or "incomplete." The game is all there; the rules are all there. The fact that it is open to interpretation does not represent a lack of finish. Many complete things are open to interpretation -- this is why we have judicial systems.

If you want an example of what "incompleteness" looks like in a ruleset, take a look at Page 42 in the D&D4 DMG. That is what it looks like when a design team has phoned something in.

You didn't understand. I'm talking salary. Did they fire two person to afford the salary of one person? Strange after a core launch that is supposedly successful and that supposedly brought lots of money. No?

No. In a big corporation, profit =/= spending money. I've seen profits in the billions translate into departmental budget cuts and layoffs on the ground. It's in no way unexpected that the Wizards team may have had to eliminate two headcounts to get a director-level headcount.

It also highlight what they think of the future of the RPG vs t-shirts with D&D writen on it.

Why is this still surprsing people? Wizards has been openly saying this is the new Hasbro D&D business model for more than a year, now. As long as it works, it's not a bad thing.

If it doesn't work, well, then, yeah, of course it's a bad thing.