D&D 5E Second guessing WOTC

[doctorhook]

I wonder about that, though. We're those people "retainable"? There are a number of reasons people play RPGs, and not all of them are common to both MMOs and TTRPGs. For folks who are playing for social reasons, MMOs might very well be able to replace TTRPGs. But if you are playing for story/sandboxy reasons, you may not be satisfied enough to switch to MMOs exclusively. What CRPGs did was fragment a market that was only a single market due to lack of options. When TTRPGs were the only game in town, it's not surprising that it had the player numbers. It's also not surprising that another option that gave gamers the part of the game they wanted would draw them away. They were destined to leave once any diversity of experience occurred.

This is off-topic, but here I go: D&D was born alongside the age of consumer electronics, and D&D's algorithmic nature was likely a major source of inspiration for CRPGs. When D&D was at the height of its fad in the early '80s, CRPGs were completely unsuitable to replace everything that TTRPGs offered: they were ugly, solo, and highly limiting. Every decade since then, new technology has allowed CRPGs to replicate more aspects of TTRPGs; big, beautiful, social games like WoW were and are a huge threat to the TTRPG market.

I used to think CRPGs would eventually just make TTRPGs obsolete as digital games became more powerful. What I hadn't counted on was TTRPGs converging with CRPGs, using digital technology to facilitate TTRPGing. My table uses Roll20 instead of miniatures; I still DM around a table, and my players still roll plastic dice into a box, but when we need to see what the battlefield looks like, we look at the flatscreen TV hanging on the wall. We do it this way because it's fast, cheap, beautiful, and powerful, and that's without using most of its features. Digital tools are making my analog game more fun and engaging.

 

[Iosue]

I'm going to recycle a post from an old thread that seems to fit this one as well.

While, in the big picture, the PFBBS and 5e Starter Set are aimed at the same audience, their approach to that audience and the intent of the products are so different as to not make them a fair comparison when it comes to content.

The goal of the PFBBS is to present a simplified version of PF, reducing the cost of buy-in to the Core Game. It is very consciously patterned after the old TSR Basic Sets, which extra-consideration to the reliance PF has on map-based play. The idea is that prospective players can get the box, play long enough to get hooked and want more, and then move onto the fuller PF rules, ready and willing to take on the additional rules burden.

The goal of the Starter Set is to go from box-opening to actual play in as minimal an amount of time as possible. No chargen, minimal rules to understand, minimal set-up. Open box, distribute characters, read through about 8 double-sided pages, and go off to the races. It's designed to have replay value: e.g., 1-5 levels, multiple adventures in a sandbox setting. But the goal is to hook the player through actual play as soon as possible. Having played the game, and gotten hooked, they can then download the Basic Rules for chargen and (later) more monsters and campaign building tools, and if they're really hooked they can then buy any of the PHB, MM, and DMG if desiring even more options.

Paizo looked at Pathfinder and said, "How can we present the full Pathfinder experience, including chargen, roleplaying, and map-play, in the smallest, easiest possible way?" The result was the PFBBS.

WotC looked at 5e and said, "How can we get players actually playing the game in the fastest, easiest possible way?" The result is the 5e Starter Set and the free online Basic Rules.

One thing to keep in mind is that WotC did their own research with newbies before settling on the model they have now. The Starter Set looks a little bit different from the hypothetical product Mearls suggested in this L&L, while one can see how their overall goals for the Basic game have been reflected in the final roll-out. Nor should the eventual full scope of the Basic Rules be forgotten. Newbies who buy the Starter Set for $20 or less never need to buy another thing from WotC.

 

[MortalPlague]

I was assuming that a big part of the strategy was to get the game onto the shelves of the big box stores like WalMart, Target and Toys-R-Us. Really hit the masses for that impulse purchase, either in the Toys/Games section, or on those separate shelves where the CCGs are kept.

But the game is not there. It's at the few local game stores in small quantities. It's at Barnes & Noble and Books-A-Million, which is big, but still just a small segment of the market and not so price-sensitive. ...

I wonder if WotC is deliberately holding back on the push for big box retailers until the core rulebooks are out?

At least, maybe they're waiting until there are monsters and DM advice available as part of basic. That way when someone sees it at Target, goes online to check out the character generation rules, they get everything they need, rather than a note that says 'check back later'.

 

[evilbob]

Small sample fallacy. Get 100 more groups of 4 brand-new players, and you'll have a meaningful result.

Didn't really read past this because this is the entire thread, summarized.

 

[77IM]

I wonder if the Starter Set will appear in mainstream retailers in November in an effort to get good placement among the influx of new products during holiday season.

 

[mechascorpio]

I wonder if the Starter Set will appear in mainstream retailers in November in an effort to get good placement among the influx of new products during holiday season.

I hope so. Perhaps the rush was to get it out for GenCon, and into the hands of "the faithful", and a bigger push will come later because of the holidays, and the three books being out.

EDIT: Whoops, just saw that MortalPlague said pretty much the same thing in reply to my post!

 

[delericho]

SO, the question is: would it have resulted in a more complete / 'better' product if WOTC had published Basic, the PHB, MM and DMG BEFORE publishing a 'get started playing' boxed set?

I don't think so. In fact, back when 4e was released without a Starter Set being available, I thought that was the mistake.

 

[Erik Mona]

Paizo looked at Pathfinder and said, "How can we present the full Pathfinder experience, including chargen, roleplaying, and map-play, in the smallest, easiest possible way?" The result was the PFBBS.

That's not actually true. The Beginner Box was designed to get people playing the game within 15 minutes of opening the box, something we tested in formal product testing environments. The directions on the cover page of the box suggest that people play with pregens in the opening adventure before bothering with the character creation stuff. That comes later.

--Erik

 

[GrumpyGamer]

What I learned from that review is that people feel that the production quality is better on a product that costs twice as much.

What matters though is if the Starter Set has a low enough purchase price to be an impulse buy (at $13 on Amazon I would say yes).

If people want higher production values Hasbro will be happy to sell them directly (PHB&MM&DMG) or license others to sell pricey products (Miniatures).

 

[Reynard]

That's not actually true. The Beginner Box was designed to get people playing the game within 15 minutes of opening the box, something we tested in formal product testing environments. The directions on the cover page of the box suggest that people play with pregens in the opening adventure before bothering with the character creation stuff. That comes later.

--Erik

Plus PFBB had a solo adventure. Open and play is a good strategy.