My Opinion of WOTC's Digital Initative and the current events

[labyrinth]

I just dl'd 5.1, and man, it could use some work. No big "Create character" button, you have to first load "sources" and then kludge through to a bunch of tabbed screens. It's... industrial design, I suppose.

Compare to NWN's character generation tool, or WoW's, or really any other CRPG. Great UI, tooltips, clean and user-friendly. That's good interface.

My sentiments exactly. Take a look at Hero Lab. It's interface is as clean and intuitive as those you mention, plus it provides a bunch of stuff that is invaluable in a TRPG but irrelevant in a CRPG.

I guess I don't understand where the difficulty lies. If you can implement the core fighter skill list ("of the entire skill list, include skills A, B, and C on the fighter class skill list") then it seems trivial to add or remove skills from that list ("of the entire skill list, include skills A, Z, and Y on the fighter class skill list").

Such a change impacts exactly nothing else--mechanically. Sure, if you remove Ride from the fighter list, you make it hard for Fighters to qualify for mounted combat PRCs. But that's a game design issue, not a mechanics issue.

Take the original D&D 3rd system. Now look at all the extensions and retrofits that have been added to it. Character creation software written for the original game would almost HAVE to be re-written in order to accommodate all of those changes. The only way to avoid that would be to write a framework that allows virtually complete flexibility to support any game system. And even then it would be quite difficult.

Then consider all of the exceptions within D&D, not to mention all of the exceptions to those exceptions. That flexibility is something that a TRPG enjoys, but a CRPG shuns. Why? Because coding it is *HARD*.

If you truly believe that it would be easy to start with a character creation tool that was built for 3rd Edition and add all the various extensions to it that have been added through 3.5 (including all the flavors and supplements), you clearly haven't really thought it through. It's a *NASTY* complex task.

And now to come back to the primary focus of this thread....

I've been playing D&D for a very long time, and I introduced my nephews to it last summer (ages 8 & 11). They and their friends were big-time WoW players, as well as lots of the other online games. After two games of D&D, six kids had lost all interest in the online games because it simply doesn't compare to a good D&D game. There's nothing like the rush of having to make a critical roll when everyone is holding their breath awaiting the outcome. Nothing compares to saving the bacon of someone else in the party by thinking on your feet instead of just repeatedly whacking a monster in WoW. They spend the game thinking, solving problems that are impossible to model in a CRPG (with today's technology, at least), interacting with NPCs that divulge information grudgingly, facing villains that also think and adapt to their strategies, etc. And the camaraderie that develops between them is priceless.

That's what good role-playing offers (D&D or otherwise). And it's something that CRPGs (local or online) can only dream of offering someday in the future.

Whatever Wizards does with the DI, those are the elements that they need to emphasize. Those are the elements that they need to teach DMs and offer to players. Unfortunately, those are things for which computers can provide great aids (i.e. WITH the computer), but which ultimately don't work very well THROUGH the computer. It sure sounds to me like they are planning to shove these elements through the computer, which will end up acting as a filter that strips them of much of their true value. If that's what the DI ends up being, then clearly the powers that be at Wizards have lost touch with the roots of the game and we can all start signing a dirge. If this is what comes to pass, all I can hope is that someone competent buys the vestiges of D&D at the fire sale in a few years and resurrects it again, just like Wizards did when TSR was going under so many years ago.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed there is a competent vision behind all this. But all indications are to the contrary, so I'm certainly not holding my breath.

 

[Najo]

I've been playing D&D for a very long time, and I introduced my nephews to it last summer (ages 8 & 11). They and their friends were big-time WoW players, as well as lots of the other online games. After two games of D&D, six kids had lost all interest in the online games because it simply doesn't compare to a good D&D game. There's nothing like the rush of having to make a critical roll when everyone is holding their breath awaiting the outcome. Nothing compares to saving the bacon of someone else in the party by thinking on your feet instead of just repeatedly whacking a monster in WoW. They spend the game thinking, solving problems that are impossible to model in a CRPG (with today's technology, at least), interacting with NPCs that divulge information grudgingly, facing villains that also think and adapt to their strategies, etc. And the camaraderie that develops between them is priceless.

That's what good role-playing offers (D&D or otherwise). And it's something that CRPGs (local or online) can only dream of offering someday in the future.

Whatever Wizards does with the DI, those are the elements that they need to emphasize. Those are the elements that they need to teach DMs and offer to players. Unfortunately, those are things for which computers can provide great aids (i.e. WITH the computer), but which ultimately don't work very well THROUGH the computer. It sure sounds to me like they are planning to shove these elements through the computer, which will end up acting as a filter that strips them of much of their true value. If that's what the DI ends up being, then clearly the powers that be at Wizards have lost touch with the roots of the game and we can all start signing a dirge. If this is what comes to pass, all I can hope is that someone competent buys the vestiges of D&D at the fire sale in a few years and resurrects it again, just like Wizards did when TSR was going under so many years ago.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed there is a competent vision behind all this. But all indications are to the contrary, so I'm certainly not holding my breath.

I agree with Labyrinth. This is exactly what is at the heart of D&D and what I have been saying about WOTC missing that key element with their direction they are taking. This is also why I feel attaching D&D to technology can be dangerous if not done well. D&D is more campfire stories than it is a video game, and WOTC seems to lost sight of that. Time will tell it seems.

 

[labyrinth]

Yes, I think DM tools one computers are great. I think that these are all good ideas. My main point was they can not be exclusive to the digital format.

Amen, brother!

The DI needs to be complementary strategy to the the traditional methods. It's way late in coming, and sorely needed. What blows my mind is how Wizards is throwing out everything that has worked through the years. They are betting the farm on an unproven approach that has glaring holes in it.

You want D&D to naturally flow to the gather the friends together or new players are less likely to get created. It is one thing to have friends get separated and then play over the internet. But new people are not likely to discover role playing this way. I think online communities like this one are people who already play and come together and then maybe discover online roleplaying options. New players rarely find roleplaying this way.

So true. So why on earth did Wizards pull the Dragon and Dungeon licenses from Paizo? Let's see now. Wizards was being paid to let someone else actively (and with great polish) market their products for them. Those two magazines are an amazing way to get new players intrigued with the game. I've seen them be enough to get someone to actually say "yes" to an intro game on multiple occasions. I don't see how the internet model will ever provide that impetus to get someone over the threshold to try the game.

I think D&D needs to find a way to get 10-14 year old kids to play it. They have time, they are face to face and if you do it online they are not going to pay attention. You have to show them how it is better than playing online. Those kids that would be playing D&D (ie all of us if we were kids now) are playing WOW and Counterstrike, or other online games somewhere between those too. Making D&D copy WOW or putting it online in a form cool to us, but not them will not get new customers.

This was exactly the situation with my nephews, who are now hooked on D&D. And this is exactly why the DI philosophy, as it is unfolding thus far, seems to be the exact opposite path from what's needed.

We are on the same page, just coming from different angles. I am looking at it as a business should...i.e. how do I get more customers? How do I get new kids playing D&D?

Exactly. So why is Wizards cutting off a major marketing vehicle that has been a pillar of the industry for three decades? Why is Wizards pulling settings from the people who created them and have been expertly shepherding them for years? Why is Wizards going out of their way to anger their customer base? And why is Wizards not saying a single word to explain things and potentially defuse the festering situation? Every one of these actions ostensibly runs counter to the goal of getting more customers.

What should we expect next? Heck, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised to hear Wizards does something ridiculous with a venerable setting like Forgotten Realms.

Everything you do to bring in more players and elevate other people's experiences and make D&D (and other games in general) faster to get into that experience the better this whole industry is for it.

Lots of companies are releasing Quick Start rules to address this issue. Many games are getting more streamlined. So progress is being made on that front. Computer-based tools are becoming more prevalent and sophisticated to help alleviate the bookkeeping and let gamers focus more on playing the game. There are great visual aids available in the form of Dwarven Forge, dungeon tiles, pre-painted figures, etc. In many ways, the entire industry is finally starting to get smarter about this stuff and improve the delivery and support for games. It just dumbfounds me to see what Wizards is doing in the name of the DI, since it sure seems counter to everything. I dearly hope that Wizards actually says something publicly soon, before things spiral further into the depths and substantial damage is done before they even announce something.

The most scary possibility is that Wizards isn't saying anything because they are worried their announcements will fail to dismiss many of the fears that are fomenting out here in reader-land.

 

[satori01]

Barrier of entry can be a bit of a silly term, as the biggest barrier to entry for D&D is Reading and the need of a DM and other Players.
Correspondingly going to a more Magic the Gathering style approach, where you need just a minimum of 2 players and the reading is in smaller batches would remove a large barrier of entry... and alienate the existing fan base.

I agree that creativity and being able to alter the existing world are the aspects that make role playing great.

Having Internet based tools I think does not impede those aspects, any more than print based tools. The D&D market is primarily in the USA, and I would imagine to a lesser extent Europe....most players are probably English Speakers.

Given that market, the Internet is not an unreasonable thing to assume people have access to .
I get the sense people are talking about design barriers of entry which means in general rules lite settings. The funny thing is, I would not say that MMORPG are rules light settings.

People I think do not mind a bit of complexity in character design as long as that complexity equates to choices, and compelling choices at that.

I also think people do not mind the square based nature of D&D combat and AoO's. I have tried to run "old school" adventures w/o graphical representation and my players, even those that were advocating a return to the old days, eventually clammered for the return of the battle mat.

Design wise I would say actions like Tripping, Sundering, Bull Rushing, grappling etc should not require feats to use those options properly. I would also leave spells a little more open ended, in terms of effects. 3.5 spells are very codified....in many ways this is a good thing as it reduces rules discussion between only 2 parties....but it also mitigates creative uses of spells.

 

[satori01]

Exactly. So why is Wizards cutting off a major marketing vehicle that has been a pillar of the industry for three decades? Why is Wizards pulling settings from the people who created them and have been expertly shepherding them for years?

Dragonlance has been under the bailiwick of Sovereign Press for how many years now? Have the sales figures for any of the successive books even matched the figures of first setting book?

I avoid game stores, I have moved my RPG purchases to the online venue where prices are cheaper, the stores are open during hours tailored to my schedule, and the products I want are available.
I also do not have to witness the Retail train wreck that is often the merchandising prowess of many RPG shops.

The main DL setting book is not available for sale on Amazon new.
The main DL setting book is not available for sale on the Paizo website, though you can pre-order a DL starter pack for $53.
To my recollection the Last Grenadier in Los Angeles, a venerable game store, did not have a copy of the DragonLance main setting book in stock the last I was there....around 6 months ago.

So can we say the Stewardship of the Setting has been the tops?
No disrespect to Sovereign Press, or Weis or Hickman. It seems appropriate that if anybody should be leading the brand it should be them, and Sovereign Press has put out quite a few products, but the company is small, and given the fact that many people have stopped keeping up with DL over the years, can one really say the company has removed any barrier's to entry?

Dragon & Dungeon have been great for the last couple of years, but I will wait to see what WOTC does online before I declare the move a failure. In the words of Grand Moff Tarkin, Wotc is taking an awful big risk.

 

[Najo]

So true. So why on earth did Wizards pull the Dragon and Dungeon licenses from Paizo? Let's see now. Wizards was being paid to let someone else actively (and with great polish) market their products for them. Those two magazines are an amazing way to get new players intrigued with the game. I've seen them be enough to get someone to actually say "yes" to an intro game on multiple occasions. I don't see how the internet model will ever provide that impetus to get someone over the threshold to try the game.

The only explaination I see is either they have plans to use the liscenses or they want the choice too. They may also feel that the books did not meet their standards (as many were in black and white or had inconsistant crunch materials).

Exactly. So why is Wizards cutting off a major marketing vehicle that has been a pillar of the industry for three decades? Why is Wizards pulling settings from the people who created them and have been expertly shepherding them for years? Why is Wizards going out of their way to anger their customer base? And why is Wizards not saying a single word to explain things and potentially defuse the festering situation? Every one of these actions ostensibly runs counter to the goal of getting more customers.

If I was Wizards I would keep dragon and dungeon going and then bring a digital alternative to my website and offer bonus material online. It makes no sense as the advertisers I am sure covered the magazine's expenses. So it is now a whole marketing avenue that they cut off from their products.

Lots of companies are releasing Quick Start rules to address this issue. Many games are getting more streamlined. So progress is being made on that front. Computer-based tools are becoming more prevalent and sophisticated to help alleviate the bookkeeping and let gamers focus more on playing the game. There are great visual aids available in the form of Dwarven Forge, dungeon tiles, pre-painted figures, etc. In many ways, the entire industry is finally starting to get smarter about this stuff and improve the delivery and support for games. It just dumbfounds me to see what Wizards is doing in the name of the DI, since it sure seems counter to everything. I dearly hope that Wizards actually says something publicly soon, before things spiral further into the depths and substantial damage is done before they even announce something.

The most scary possibility is that Wizards isn't saying anything because they are worried their announcements will fail to dismiss many of the fears that are fomenting out here in reader-land.

As far as other company quick starts, I think many fail to do it in the proper fashion. Our retail store has perfected the demo systems for CCGs and Mininature Games and roleplaying is something we are cracking into next. The easiest product right now that meets the quick demo to deep game play in our industry is Warhammer 40,000. I can teach you the basics and get you having fun in minutes and once your rolling the product line is intuitive with a little guidance. This is not the case with Magic or D&D. You would not believe how hard it is to teach basics in Magic, like tapping and mana pool. Gamers get it quicker than non-gamers, but none the less you can spend 10 minutes alone discussing that one element of the game before they "get it" That is a bad barrier to entry. For Warhammer 40,000 it is just move, shoot assault and tell them what to roll. They get the rest quickly and before you know it, they are open to being taught army profiles, point systems, planning and building an army.

D&D needs a demo like that, that use story based goals and choices, not just combat, killing and loot. The hack and slay side of D&D is just mechanics, not the heroic adventuring it can become. You got to immerse the player and get them to make personal choices based on the character's emotions and goals that they can relate with. Otherwise, why play D&D when a computer game does the combat system style of play better.

 

[Najo]

Barrier of entry can be a bit of a silly term, as the biggest barrier to entry for D&D is Reading and the need of a DM and other Players.
Correspondingly going to a more Magic the Gathering style approach, where you need just a minimum of 2 players and the reading is in smaller batches would remove a large barrier of entry... and alienate the existing fan base.

Barrier to Entry is a professional term meaning things that keep the customer from trying or using your product. It applies to video games and hobby games equally. Yes, reading can be a barrier to entry, especially when you have 30 seconds to get them to pay attention and then decide if they want to give you 3 mins, and so on. That is modern day marketing at work, so many choices that each generation is getting less and less patience for new information. So you have to make it count. Most kids now days look at D&D rulebooks and then shut it down immediately. It is possible to do the "Magic the gathering" appraoch with visuals and bite size introduction to the rules and not alienate the existing customer base as long as the game has the depth and choices that it currently has. In no way does the changes I am suggesting take away what D&D offers its customers now. If anything it gives them more, as current players express frustration with how the product is organized and show their frustration by not using everything produced. Most players only allow a selection of what is available, very few use it all.

I agree that creativity and being able to alter the existing world are the aspects that make role playing great.

Having Internet based tools I think does not impede those aspects, any more than print based tools. The D&D market is primarily in the USA, and I would imagine to a lesser extent Europe....most players are probably English Speakers.

Given that market, the Internet is not an unreasonable thing to assume people have access to .
I get the sense people are talking about design barriers of entry which means in general rules lite settings. The funny thing is, I would not say that MMORPG are rules light settings.

People I think do not mind a bit of complexity in character design as long as that complexity equates to choices, and compelling choices at that.[/qoute]

I ma not saying rules lite, I am saying rules intuitive and rules presented in the proper fashion. There is ways to make a game streamlined without dumbing it down. WOW is a perfect example of this, look at their character creation and the first three zones for each race:

1. Choose faction
2. Choose Race
3. Choose Class
4. Customize character features
5. Go to starting Quest giver, first zone teaches you about class abilities, inventory management, tasks, interacting with the environment. It also builds the story from the start for your race and class.
6. By second zone, you are learning about skills, more complicated quests, conflicts in the setting, your capitol city and the interaction with the economy/banking and your city politics and more grouping occurs here.
7. By the third zone your mixing factions, handling auctions, meeting new players, doing dungeons with 5 people in a group. During this time, WOW uses story to hold it all together.

You can see where I am going. D&D is already kind like this, but it fails to incorporate the character building elements. Heck, characters are really all machine and now soul unless you build it onto them. D&D does very little to encourage these kind of goals and rewards.

I also think people do not mind the square based nature of D&D combat and AoO's. I have tried to run "old school" adventures w/o graphical representation and my players, even those that were advocating a return to the old days, eventually clammered for the return of the battle mat.

Design wise I would say actions like Tripping, Sundering, Bull Rushing, grappling etc should not require feats to use those options properly. I would also leave spells a little more open ended, in terms of effects. 3.5 spells are very codified....in many ways this is a good thing as it reduces rules discussion between only 2 parties....but it also mitigates creative uses of spells.

I don't think players mind this at all. The heavy story based players do mind the breaking the forth wall when you go into combat mode. Some of them don't use miniatures at all. Still, adding story to the hack and slay style of play only improves it, I have seen it countless times and that is the place where D&D will beat out MMOs and video games. It will not do it by becoming more like them. The more mechanical and combat focus D&D gets, the less reason there is to play it as video games and mmos do that better. But I am not saying D&D shouldn't have tactical wargame elements in it. I think a core part of D&D's customer base wants clear combat rules and to use strategies that video games can't incorperate. But when your hero is doing what he is doing to save his sister from the evil demonic overlord instead of for the +5 sword, it is much more powerful of a game.

 

[Najo]

I avoid game stores, I have moved my RPG purchases to the online venue where prices are cheaper, the stores are open during hours tailored to my schedule, and the products I want are available.
I also do not have to witness the Retail train wreck that is often the merchandising prowess of many RPG shops.

I understand how many game stores are lacking in professionalism and are more clubhouses for their regulars. But not all of them are that, our store is one of the most professional game stores I have seen yet (though our website is no where near how I want it, but eventually it will be). Very few stores hold the standards to themselves that we do. Still, game stores are a good place where gamers can meet face to face and new people can be recruited into the hobby. Without these game stores our hobby will eventually die, plain and simple. D&D would be the last of the hobbies affected, warhammer would go first, then magic, then D&D. Because once your only interactation is over the internet (to play and buy) then the face to face element is gone. When that happens, your DMs loss interest as the pay off (player reactions, social interaction, dramatic flair, player props and mood elements like music, lightning etc) for them is not the same. Pretty soon players are getting the hack and slay play fix through games like neverwinter and WOW. Gaming as we know it would be gone. Support a game store that is clean, organized, and has places for people to play. Our hobby needs them, they are the heart of the community as much as websites like this one. They are worth the couple bucks you don't save per book, at least the good ones are. Ultimately its your choice, but your investing in the next generation of D&D players by buying from places like ours. Last I checked, most D&D groups were not bringing in new and younger players, they play with their friends. Stores like ours actively recruit new and young players.

The main DL setting book is not available for sale on Amazon new.
The main DL setting book is not available for sale on the Paizo website, though you can pre-order a DL starter pack for $53.
To my recollection the Last Grenadier in Los Angeles, a venerable game store, did not have a copy of the DragonLance main setting book in stock the last I was there....around 6 months ago.[.quote]

So tell your store. Buy from them. They aren't carrying it because peope aren't buying books from them. Although, I believe most players are burned out on standard high fantasy settings like Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance. Those who aren't have enough from what is there.

So can we say the Stewardship of the Setting has been the tops?
No disrespect to Sovereign Press, or Weis or Hickman. It seems appropriate that if anybody should be leading the brand it should be them, and Sovereign Press has put out quite a few products, but the company is small, and given the fact that many people have stopped keeping up with DL over the years, can one really say the company has removed any barrier's to entry?

The books they produced were well done. I think demand for the setting isn't there. The novels are one thing, but to actaully roleplay in dragonlance is hard as the heroics are done by the characters in the books. Even in the past, when TSR supported it, this was a problem.

Dragon & Dungeon have been great for the last couple of years, but I will wait to see what WOTC does online before I declare the move a failure. In the words of Grand Moff Tarkin, Wotc is taking an awful big risk.

I am not being doom and gloom. I am expressing valid concerns based on WOTC's track record. I want to see gaming grow and D&D become a bigger game. They have made a mistake shutting the magazines down, for the very reasons the industry names on here have mentioned. It was a strange move, and I doubt anything online can truely replace them. Time will tell if I eat those words.

 

[caudor]

I agree that a new edition is needed, relatively soon. 3.5E is pretty bloated--the Complete series added metric tons of new content. It's mostly good content, but all that stuff is beyond manageable at this point.

This is why I want to see an optional D&D, Online. By that I mean a virtual tabletop, with little minis, a turn-based battle system that can handle attacks and integrates with the online character database, terrain tiles for the DM to place, etc. etc. Compare to D&D Online, which is a D&D-flavored MMO. I'd rather play the former.

Getting together face to face is increasingly hard as your audience ages. Jobs, significant others, kids, and housework make it hard for two people to get together--let alone five. MMOs (and Xbox Live) flourish because you can get home, logon, and game with all your buddies from the comfort and convenience of your home.

To lower the barrier of entry, you've got to give a curious potential customer the chance to try D&D without requiring him to find 1) an experienced player, and 2) 3 other people. To do that best, you've got to give the potential customer a way to play the game alone, via some sort of online demo that they can try alone.

Something like this: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/mini_demo/DNDMinis.asp

A lot of the joy of D&D is derived from the face-to-face nature of tabletop: hanging out with friends, eating pizza, rolling funny dice. D&D as we've know it isn't going away. But to attract new users--in particular, the millions who play RPGs online--I think it'd be a smart move to provide an online "virtual tabletop" option for D&D.

-z

I agree. I like the complete books, races books, Tome of Magic, Magic of Incarnum, etc. I think the idea behind the digital initiative is the make the game easier to play...without dumbing it down.

Technology can help do that. Just because such an options exists does not mean current gamers have to stop rolling PCs on paper. The DI, if done properly, will allow D&D to grow without requiring it to morph until another animal.

I look forward to the day I can create a character quickly online without referring to 15 different rulebooks.

 

[Veander]

I agree with you on some accounts, but I can't agree that WotC doesn't understand their Internet medium. The breadth of information on their site could carry a DM through an entire campaign. I love WotC's free stuff and while maybe it isn't ordered well on the site, it's there and wasn't before with TSR (in any way).