D&D 5E So what exactly is Wizards working on?

[Manchu]

If you're happy selling to just the core group of 'dedicated', then by all means put out multiple books, including very specialised ones.

I think this is more of a retail issue than a publisher issue. Go to a box chain book store and you are not likely to find enough PF product to create analysis paralysis. Go to your LGS and you will probably find a wider selection. Go to an online retailer website and it really opens up. Paizo did not lose its #1 spot on IVc2 to D&D because they produce too many books or because WotC produces so few D&D books. Rather, this issue is that D&D as a brand speaks to a far, far broader audience.

 

[Kramodlog]

PF jumped on the 3e fanbase, and had to compete against 4e. That gave them an advantage. But that's really not too terribly relevant anyway, because it doesn't prove that too many PF products never turned away any customers. It just means PF is popular enough keep a customer base of dedicated fans. You have no idea if there were customers who walked into a store and saw a ton of PF products and just decided to walk out again because they had no idea what to buy.

And yet they are still in business. Why can't D&D, a brand with more recogniton and more fans, stay profitable with more products?

Heck, who is to say people do not walk away from D&D because it doesn't support its edition? There is a thread about that.

 

[Manchu]

I'd wager it's not just about being technically "profitable" for Hasbro. That's what a smaller company like Paizo is up to. The owners of Paizo want to make money but they chose to try doing so by running a company that principally makes TTRPG materials. In addition to their profit motive, there is an important motive of personal interest. Can the same be said for Hasbro investors and execs? I don't think it is likely. Certainly, neither Hasbro or WotC was or is organized around a passion for TTRPGs.

 

[Trickster Spirit]

Funny. I look at the releases so far, the online discussions with Mike Mearls, etc. the amount of time spent playtesting and working with the RPG community and I come to the exact opposite conclusion. There seems to be a real excitement from players new and old, and from the team at WotC who are putting this together.

Ilbranteloth

Heh, I know it'll sound like I'm contradicting myself, but I actually quite agree with you.

I do believe that they've turned their focus away from just the tabletop game and are looking at the larger brand as the way to make a profit off of D&D, but they did spent a lot of time and effort getting 5E right. They reached out to the players and listened to their feedback during the playtest. The game has been really well-received and there is a lot of excitement all around.

I'm really very hopeful for the future of D&D - a future where the game is evergreen and new players can walk into Target or Walmart and pick up a Player's Handbook, having already played their first couple of games using the free Basic rules. A future without copious splatbooks hindering accessibility for newcomers or an edition treadmill continually fracturing the player base. A future with a continuous infusion of new blood into the hobby because successful D&D movies and video games and toys on the shelves at Toys R Us are introducing more people to D&D than any time since the early 80s.

None of that is guaranteed, of course. A hundred factors could doom it all to "what might have been". But it's a compelling vision of the future and I'd rather Wizards give it a shot than stick with what hasn't worked in the past.

I think the argument that more products turns off more players is absurd. Pathfinder would be dead in the water long ago if that argument held any scrap of truth. In fact I find myself wandering over to the pathfinder section in hobby stores all the time, meanwhile I don't even notice small product selections of other RPGs and never bother with them.

I also hate the lack of products for D&D, I especially hate the "DIY" mentality behind the DMG, and general lack of crunch and support for the game. But I acknowledge 100% that too many books have diminishing returns, and that WoTC cannot make money out of it.

Pathfinder I would guess makes money out if their hugely successful societies system and subscription pricing models. They also get more content out through PDF (lower cost), and they sell direct. They also have a reputation of creating great APs which people probably buy just for the sake of owning them. WoTC do not have that brand reputation.

This crosses over more into the ethos of the two games, rather than just their respective product schedules. 5E very much is the "DIY" edition of D&D. "Rulings not rules" is not everyone's cup of tea, but of course neither is Pathfinder. Some people actually prefer the less-imposing rules of 5E and and the fact that there's very little beyond the core books on the horizon.

Respectfully, it's a bit like preferring Pepsi to Coke. Rather than urging Coke to make their formula more like Pepsi's, perhaps you should just drink Pepsi.

In terms of the overall branding strategy, you don't have to be an active D&D customer to help the brand. Merely having enjoyed playing D&D once ensures you're more likely than the average Joe off the street to drag your friends and family to the theaters to see a D&D movie, buy a D&D video game or play a D&D board game. As long as you're in "orbit" of D&D, it doesn't actually matter if you're actually buying 5E APs or not - those are an on-ramp to the brand, not where they're actually turning a profit.

 

[Manchu]

It's precisely because the PHB is so good that I am eager for more stuff!

Point of order - although 5E is far "lighter" than PF, it is still at heart a rules not rulings game like B/X, etc. (Frankly, I think this is necessary for a product directed at the widest possible audience in 2014 on.) That said, if you run 5E as a rulings not rules games you are foregoing much less of its system than you would forego of PF trying to run PF the same way. (People tell me 3.X can be run as rulings not rules, I believe them but don't see the point.)

 

[delericho]

And yet they are still in business. Why can't D&D, a brand with more recogniton and more fans, stay profitable with more products?

Partly because Hasbro aren't about "being profitable", but rather about maximising profits. So if path A is profitable but path B is more profitable, they'll probably go for path B.

But also bear in mind that they're not just looking at the profit from the game, but also the value of the brand. And that brand might be worth more if they can say "we have 10 million regular players" than if they can say "we have 4 million regular players". Indeed, it's not impossible that it's even worth giving away a version of the game for free in order to increase that number.

(Note that I'm, once again, just speculating - I'm not saying that is the case, just that it might be.)

 

[Bluenose]

Reading this thread, and I feel like I'm the only person who doesn't need a bunch of splatbooks to keep me playing the game. I like it. All I need are the core books (and I don't even really need the DMG). They could stop printing right now and I'd still play because I enjoy it. I get this impression that without new material being churned out constantly, their ability to play the game will suddenly end. And that just seems really odd to me.

As someone who played RuneQuest through the years after Chaosium and before Mongoose (and now Design Mechanism), I entirely agree with the premise. Whole years went by when the only product was fan-made, and it hardly stopped people playing. Slow product schedules doesn't seem to have stopped a whole lot of games being and remaining popular, so I don't see why it should for D&D - the fanbase is hardly entirely incapable of creativity on it's own, I would assume.

 

[Iosue]

It's precisely because the PHB is so good that I am eager for more stuff!

Point of order - although 5E is far "lighter" than PF, it is still at heart a rules not rulings game like B/X, etc. (Frankly, I think this is necessary for a product directed at the widest possible audience in 2014 on.)

B/X is very much a rules not rulings game, provided you play within the narrow scope of exploration. It's only when you break out of that that it starts to depend on rulings. With 5e, OTOH, as you say they've got 34 years worth of non-exploration gameplay to account for, requiring a wider scope of rules.

 

[Manchu]

I guess I am using a "played best when" standard. B/X, etc, are played best as guidelines for rulings. 3E and 4E are played best "by the rules" whether those rules are published or homebrewed.

 

[Kramodlog]

Partly because Hasbro aren't about "being profitable", but rather about maximising profits. So if path A is profitable but path B is more profitable, they'll probably go for path B.

But also bear in mind that they're not just looking at the profit from the game, but also the value of the brand. And that brand might be worth more if they can say "we have 10 million regular players" than if they can say "we have 4 million regular players". Indeed, it's not impossible that it's even worth giving away a version of the game for free in order to increase that number.

(Note that I'm, once again, just speculating - I'm not saying that is the case, just that it might be.)

That makes sense. WotC's business model holds up... if we ignore the elephant in the room. Paizo.

If it is about maximizing profits, than you issues licenses for various products and produce a robust RPG line. D&D is first and foremost PnP RPG. Your fan base, the players, are the first who will buy you other products. You need them to be interested in your brand. Sure, maybe some people get intimitated if their are too many books. But are more put off because they feel the brand isn't supported?

More maximizing? You also sell PDFs. Books made of paper are in decline while the dematerialized ones are more and more popular. Store are more important? Paizo sells PDFs and it still managed to become the number one seller in stores. You also lower the price of your core books. Those are the gateway drug to players buying other books. That is Paizo's model. Their core book is 50$ and it is the DMG and PHB put together. Half the price in other words. For 10$ you have the PDF of the core book. Cheaper also means more players.

Just having more players is good? Make an OGL and a SRD. All of Paizo's crunch is open content. Just go to d20PFSRD and you have if all for free. The Adventure League modules, once the new season begins, just sell the old one as PDFs. 2,99$ a pop. Very low cost for you, you draw people to the game and make money. Win win. A lot of people do not have access to stores with AL games.

I understand the arguments people are putting forth to explain D&D's business model. I really do. They make sense. In a vacuum. When you compare to what other businesses do and it doesn't hold up. Either WotC is making another mistake or they just do not want to support D&D. If that is the case, I won't support them. The energy put into the AL tells me they want to support D&D. Maybe with their limited resources they have to prioritize. Obviously, I have doubt about their priorities.