D&D 5E Some thoughts on WotC's release schedule and the OGL

[TerraDave]

Something tells me you aren't going to get any of those. You are going to get adventure paths. You are going to get an article on the website maybe once a month. ....

Absolutely, thats what they have said! Thats what I have said since that's what they have said!

It could change. If they see huge core book sales and so-so sales on their super modules, that could lead to a change.

Stranger things have happened.

 

[delericho]

The OGL for 3rd still made what Pazio did possible for that edition.

Even that was a necessary but not sufficient condition for Pathfinder to flourish. Paizo were doubly blessed in that in addition to being able to use the OGL, they started their Pathfinder line with access to the subscriber base of Dragon and Dungeon magazines when WotC took those back in-house.

Nobody else had that advantage. Nobody else produce a 3e near-clone and have it gain significant traction.

(And, as proof of that: Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved got there first, had better name recognition even than Paizo/Pathfinder... and doesn't have anything close to the same following today.)

 

[delericho]

This topic has been discussed quite a bit before, but I wanted to tease out a very specific element of it. As I see it, WotC has two non-mutually exclusive choices:

1. Churn out a slew of adventures and supplements for 5E
2. Provide an OGL to allow other publishers to churn out a slew of adventures and supplements for 5E

Sure, they could just stand pat and delay the OGL indefinitely, but to me that would be a huge--even crippling--mistake, which I will go into further.

Assuming, of course, that Hasbro/WotC care about whether the D&D RPG does well. They could well take the view that there's vastly more money in licensed products (especially video games and movie rights), and so they'll pursue those.

But, since D&D originated as an RPG, and since it remains best known as an RPG, then they need to keep a D&D RPG in print - but preferably one that doesn't 'need' lots of support be kept in print also (which makes 4e, or 3e, unsuitable due to the plethora of supplements).

 

[Mercurius]

If, over a few years, they put out 5 or so decent adventures (not APs, just adventures), a monster book, maybe 1 or 2 player books, and 1 or 2 settings, it would be enough. For quite a while.

I think that's fine as far as WotC's product schedule, but I'd like to see an OGL that allows other publishers to create more diversity. As I said, it isn't about only having enough to play but options to choose from. The products you mention would give enough to play for most groups, but it wouldn't allow for choice. For instance, what about those people who don't want to play the Elemental story arc but don't have the time or energy or desire to create their own stories? At the least I'd like to see WotC open the door--sooner than later--for other publishers to create those options.

5E in no way "needs" new setting books-- "needs" as in "required to be made because otherwise DMs have no other options"-- because we have all the setting books we "need" on dndclassics.com.

Of course not, and I completely agree with you - at least so far as my needs are concerned (although I would still like to see new options for 5E). But in a way I think there's a bit of the car mechanic problem going on - when a car mechanic is trying to explain to a layperson about why their car. A lot is lost in translation from expertise to novice (this works in any field).

What about those folks who are relatively new to the hobby, who even started playing with the 5E Starter Set? Can you see how it would make sense for WotC to offer setting options?

I actually think Tyranny of Dragons was a bit of a missed opportunity, that what they should have done was combine the two relatively sparse hardcovers into one larger book (or perhaps three softcovers) and then offer a setting guide, a "Gazetteer of the Sword Coast" for further adventures or diversions from the story arc.

So again, while I like the approach of 5E for experienced gamers I'm worried about newbies...this seems to be one of the perennial problems for WotC, which they've failed to address so far with 5E. They need a clear path and package of products that guides people into the game, from novice to beginner, intermediate, and expert. The problem is that the people at WotC are experts, you and I are experts, so we know how to navigate the waters. But can you imagine being 12 years old and trying to figure this all out? A lot of 12 year olds will be able to figure it out, but I think they need to account for the many who need it spelled out for them.

Changing gears a bit...

You've got that backwards insofar as Paizo wanted to support 4E but WotC's delaying tactics regarding continued use of the OGL made that impossible. When WotC came up with the 11th hour replacement in the form of the restrictive GSL, Paizo cut ties and started working on a replacement backbone for underneath their Game Mastery products and adventures. Of course, no sense republishing the SRD without making some revisions and filling in some holes, thence Pathfinder. PF didn't come before WotC abandonment of the OGL. WotC's abandonment of the OGL triggered all of the things that caused their current situation.

This is a very crucial point. The success of Pathfinder was a perfect storm of a variety of factors, stemming more from WotC's mishandling of the GSL than the existence of the OGL itself. I really hope that WotC sees this, otherwise they might end up in a self-fulfilling prophecy situation: that is, by trying to avoid another Pathfinder they help create another Pathfinder. What they need to focus on, in my opinion, is creating a core product line that sets the quality bar and is easy to enter into for new players, and also offer an OGL that encourages participation in 5E.

As some have said, in a way 5E was a kind of "course correction" back to earlier D&D, a retcon heir to 2E that also manages to incorporate some of the best features of 3E and 4E. I hope that WotC takes the same approach to the next OGL - that it goes back to the basic idea of the 3E OGL but evolves it, rather than the reactive debacle that was the GSL. I hold out hope, but am starting to worry a bit considering the fact that we still haven't seen or heard anything.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It could change. If they see huge core book sales and so-so sales on their super modules, that could lead to a change.

Stranger things have happened.

And I wouldn't even call that "strange". I think one of the most important points about their schedule is that they don't know yet what is going to work. So by not having a half-dozen products already being processed in the grinder, they have the flexibility to decide as they go along what is next up for them. And if something bizarre breaks through in a way no one expected, they can then say "Okay, the public wants THAT!" and they have the space to turn into that slide as it were.

Perkins has already said he's excited to show us what he's done that is due to arrive in 2016, and Mearls has said he's already onto the products of 2017... but I would hazard a guess that there's space in the schedule to go all-in on something if it turns out something worked beyond expectations.

 

[Mercurius]

Assuming, of course, that Hasbro/WotC care about whether the D&D RPG does well. They could well take the view that there's vastly more money in licensed products (especially video games and movie rights), and so they'll pursue those.

But, since D&D originated as an RPG, and since it remains best known as an RPG, then they need to keep a D&D RPG in print - but preferably one that doesn't 'need' lots of support be kept in print also (which makes 4e, or 3e, unsuitable due to the plethora of supplements).

In the end Hasbro/WotC cares most about profits, so clearly the licensed products are far more important on that level. But I think the question is what sort of leash Mearls and company have been given. The ever-shrinking size of the D&D division (now at 13?) is worrisome in that regard, and your relatively grim scenario could very well be true.

But even if that is the case, that we're going to continue to see a very minimal product line and that the focus will be on licensed products, I'm at least hoping that WotC is willing to offer an encouraging OGL so that other companies can pick up the baton and run with it. Even if that means a cut of royalties - that isn't unreasonable, I think. But something.

Perhaps I'm being selfish here as I personally could care less about just about any licensed products. I'd enjoy a good movie franchise, but I don't play video games, don't read D&D books, and only minimally play board games. To me D&D is an RPG - that's what I love, what I want from WotC.

Again, I'm not claiming that the sky is falling and, at this point, I'm not overly worried. But I am a tad worried that WotC is going to be so focused on the "two birds in the bush" (the money made from licensing) that they neglect the "bird in hand" (the RPG and community). Hmm...sounds familiar.

 

[DEFCON 1]

What about those folks who are relatively new to the hobby, who even started playing with the 5E Starter Set? Can you see how it would make sense for WotC to offer setting options?

I actually think Tyranny of Dragons was a bit of a missed opportunity, that what they should have done was combine the two relatively sparse hardcovers into one larger book (or perhaps three softcovers) and then offer a setting guide, a "Gazetteer of the Sword Coast" for further adventures or diversions from the story arc.

So again, while I like the approach of 5E for experienced gamers I'm worried about newbies...this seems to be one of the perennial problems for WotC, which they've failed to address so far with 5E.

No... I'd say the perennial problem has always been experienced players thinking new players need way more hand-holding than they do. They've always condescendingly treated the "newbie" as though they were a Faberge egg that was going to shatter at the slightest provocation. Everything's always "Have to help the newbie! Have to make it so simple for the newbie otherwise they'll quit!" When in point of fact... I don't think they're nearly that fragile and have to be "protected".

A new group can pick up the Starter Set and play the five levels of Lost Mines. After that, if they decide they like D&D and want to keep playing... the DM checks out dnd.wizards.com for more information, downloads the Basic Rules, and then either decides to pick up HotDQ and play that, or else chooses to make up some new encounters themself for the players using the monsters from the Basic Rules. And then if they go all-in one or more of them decide to buy the Holy Trinity.

I fail to see why there's anything in this that is going to confuse those players or drive them away that a gazeteer wouldn't suddenly "fix". Especially considering that if they *truly are* new players... they have had no experience in having more product available to look through. So you can't come to the conclusion that something is missing if you've never experienced having it in the first place.

 

[Mark CMG]

The success of Pathfinder was a perfect storm of a variety of factors, stemming more from WotC's mishandling of the GSL than the existence of the OGL itself.

That's the sort of half-truth assessment that led to the GSL in the first place and it would be exhibiting a special kind of thinking to move forward with that as the premise. It sets the stage for something other than the actual OGL being used. I fear the day it happens.

(. . .) an OGL (. . .)

(. . .) the next OGL (. . .)

(. . .) 3E OGL (. . .)

(. . .) rather than the reactive debacle that was the GSL (. . .)

There is no "3E" OGL, just the OGL. The GSL was supposedly "an" OGL or "the next" OGL. It is absolutely ridiculous to try and soft pedal that line of thinking a second time.

 

[delericho]

But even if that is the case, that we're going to continue to see a very minimal product line and that the focus will be on licensed products, I'm at least hoping that WotC is willing to offer an encouraging OGL so that other companies can pick up the baton and run with it. Even if that means a cut of royalties - that isn't unreasonable, I think. But something.

I don't think the royalties thing would fly - the profits from third-party products (excluding the likes of HotDQ, published by WotC themselves under the D&D title) are so small that they probably wouldn't be worth collecting. (Like the old joke about Bill Gates dropping $10 and it not being worth his time to pick it back up.)

If there's going to be a license at all, it's really going to have to be structured so that WotC don't have to take any action to administer it - which probably means things like a "community standards" clause or a recall clause won't be worth having, since they won't have eyes on the products to enforce them. But, then, would WotC really be confortable with giving up that level of control?

 

[bogmad]

When the fact is... the whole reason they built the 5E game the way they did was so that you *could* buy all the adventures and settings from the past 40 years and just spend like 30 minutes before your session making any obvious monster adjustments in the module as necessary, but otherwise run the adventure relatively as-is. And by doing so... they don't need to spend the countless man-hours basically just re-writing all of these supplements over again just in order to layer 5E stats into it.

If you want new adventures... have you tried using any of the adventures you already own and just take a few moments to tweak perhaps the quantity of monsters in the encounters? If you haven't, you should give it a try. You might find that all of this product you already own more than covers what you need for your campaign.

If this is true, then it seems to me that they're still taking the wrong approach. I agree, they have plenty of material most anyone could use for his or her campaign, but I only know that because I'm lurking on places like ENworld. They should be getting those conversion guides out and then pushing the availability of D&DClassics. Well, hopefully I'm just impatient and they have a big push for that planned when the guides come out, but right now it's hard for a newcomer to the game to go the D&D website and find any mention of 40 years of available material. Nothing at all in the products page for the tabletop game; I'm assuming because they want to push sales of newly created products.