Necromancer Games-update by Orcus

[Orcus]

Which means, ultimately, Necro was irrelevant to the general market for what, a year before 4e?

I dont know about a year before, but definately the year after

 

[Mistwell]

It's all anecdotal. Of the 19 people I game with regularly, 2 are in ongoing 4e games. Does that mean the conversion rate is only 10%?

He said it was all speculation. But, I agree with him the rate is higher than 30-40% merely from the fact that WOTC still exists and publishes D&D. I think it's safe to say that, while we do not know the exact percentage, it's high enough to have given WOTC at least relatively "decent" sales based on all those best seller listings and the fact that WOTC continues as scheduled and appears to be doing at least "OK".

I don't understand why this issue keeps coming up however. Do people want WOTC to have failed with 4e, and are claiming the conversion rate is low and sales are low somehow a helpful thing from their world view? What is the point of that discussion?

 

[Voadam]

And the reason why (and I think many people are still not seriously considering) is the char builder. Unless a 3PP's stuff becomes part of the char builder, you're going to find many more DMs just saying "no" to 3rd party products even if the GSL had been a verbatim copy of the OGL.

That would only apply to character mechanics though.

This wouldn't affect most modules

Monster books have a separate issue as I believe there is a DDI function for monster stats and searching by type infor.

 

[Harlekin]

This is sad news.

However you slice it, I see this as bad news for 4e.

I think this is mostly bad news for any stripe of 3rd party support. If distributors are reluctant now to carry 3p support of D&D, what makes anybody think that they will be more likely to carry 3p material for the less known pathfinder?

3p products for D&D survived because a small proportion of the big market share of D&D was enough to support them. If the market has fragmented, so has that market share. It seems unlikely that pathfinder will recover more than 30% of that market share (and it will likely be a lot less), as it has competition both from 4th edition and existing supplements for 3.x.

Paizo would be ecstatic if they could get 20%-30% of 3.x's sales; that would make them the second biggest RPG company out there. But 3p (print) publishers supporting pathfinder would operate on a market that is only 20%-30% of the original 3.x market, which will make it very hard for any of them to make a profit.

 

[kitsune9]

Not sure if this is ok to post here, we thought some would want to know (Hope Clark is ok with me linking/quoting this)...

Posted by Orcus 6/17/09 Necro Update -- 4E print not looking good, but still possible - General Discussion - General - Necromancer Games - Message Board - Yuku

Sorry Clark that things aren't working out for you. I can't wait to see what you'll be releasing though as I've been a major fan of Necro's stuff ever since The Wizard's Amulet.

 

[Falstaff]

Clark:

I asked this a few pages back, but it might have gotten lost in the mix.

Are there any chances that Necromancer will produce adventures or supplements for the new HackMaster RPG? To me they seem like a good fit.

 

[Orcus]

I respect you Clark, and I really respect Necromancer products, but I'll also agree with JoeGKushner in regard to the "every edition of D&D" versus 4e comments. Haven't you been stating for about a year or more now that Necromancer wants to support "the current edition of D&D"? That's the one part of what you said that doesn't make sense to me.

If Necro is a labor of love rather than a real need to make money, why not just make the products you want to make without concern about distributors? There are options for print on demand, distribution via the web (your site and Paizo's for instance), pdf only products, etc.

I guess I don't get why WotC should support every edition but Necro should only support the current one, and it was so important that the company waited until this point (when it has unfortunately become too late) to do so.

Thats a good question.

The main reason is because I am not Wizards. I dont have the choice to do that. I dont believe I can legally support 1E or 2E (I dont want to start taht discussion again, but people know I believe OSRIC is problematic). So that gives me the only choice of supporting 3E or 4E. The only company that can support all editions is Wizards. I also dont have the real ability to do that. We are a small company with limited resources. To some extent, also, we have to follow the lead of Wizards. if they abandon 3.5 its hard for us to keep supporting it. I want to support a thriving system. And since we model ourselves on Judges Guild, we believe in the evolution of the game. That, in my view, is different than the decision of the owner of the game deciding not to support prior editions. I believe the only company that can support all systems is Wizards.

That's my answer, and I think its consistent with my prior positions. I want to support the current version of the game, phlisophically. But one of the problems I see for D&D is its abandonment of prior editions by the company that owns D&D. I cant fix that. Only they can fix that. And I hope they do. I hope they become the company of D&D rather thant he company of 4E.

 

[Shemeska]

and that's all you, or anyone posting regarding a fanbase split has, an idea. Nobody has real percentages, and pretending we do is a farce. All anyone has is their own personal experience and knowledge of other players.

Actually the 30-40% number wasn't from my own experience (I'd be prone to give WotC at least 60%) but was a number mentioned to me by a WotC employee. Mind, they were a DDI developer rather than one of the designers or business folks, so I have no way to know if that figure was something they'd pulled out of thin air, or it was a number that was in use internally. But coming from a 4e fan working for WotC, and being so low, doesn't lend itself to kind things about the fanbase solidity.

 

[Mark]

To some extent, also, we have to follow the lead of Wizards. if they abandon 3.5 its hard for us to keep supporting it.

Interesting stance. Everyone knows best what they can and cannot do, so I am not questioning this stance. I am sure it is the correct choice for you.

I also understand the trepidation regarding the retro-clones, as some call them, but wonder why WotC hasn't moved on them if they are in some area a violation? This must be something you have discussed in your many conversations with WotC personages.

I guess my question, since you are fielding them, is if there are other OGL games out there that you have played (aside from Pathfinder) that you might consider supporting (some GR game or elsewise).

 

[Orcus]

Clark:

I asked this a few pages back, but it might have gotten lost in the mix.

Are there any chances that Necromancer will produce adventures or supplements for the new HackMaster RPG? To me they seem like a good fit.

I dont think so, and that's not a swipe at Hackmaster at all which is cool.