State of the RPG Industry

[Sholari]

Now, i see a lot more people GMing, but rarely multiple campaigns; more of the campaigns fall apart more quickly (not always due to GM burnout); and a GM who has finished a campaign is less likely to want to jump right back into the saddle.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with this assessment. As a player it is great to have both rapid advancement and a lot of options both for combat and character customization, however, for a DM trying to balance it all and having to manage a whole cast of characters for every adventure it can be more of a burden. Due to this added complexity the 3.x D&D editions seem to require the most administrative overhead (though they are my favorite).

At the same time new modules which provide an important time-saving support to busy DMs are falling by the wayside due to the economics of the RPG industry. The diversity of the d20 industry has led to fragmentation of the market for modules increasing the risk that publishing one will not be profitable (especially for a smaller company). Furthermore, DMs tend to be picky and their preferences can vary quite a bit. While I really do have a strong need for a good quality module that need is very personalized to my taste. A good 80% of the modules out their I would not consider useful and would thus not purchase.

Dungeon is of course one solution. In that past, I have subscribed because maybe one in four modules would pass my personalized screening criteria and I could potentially use it in my game. Perhaps some alternative type of bundling solution might work to revive the market for modules.

Another potential would be for a game company to try to differentiate their system through better DM support on their website. The theory is that some portion of DMs would gravitate toward campaign worlds with better support. At least in my experience a couple sessions into a good campaign, players usually begin buying all the player books for that campaign world. This would require that the modules would work well with the specific campaign world but not others, otherwise people would simply download the adventures and use them in a different campaign world. The economics wouldn't be as much an issue if these free modules were provided in pdf format as the more predictable development costs are probably fraction of what the printing costs are. (I realize WOTC does provide some adventures on their website but have found them to be of inferior quality).

A third idea I had was a pdf adventure publisher similar to dire kobold that not only customizes adventures by level but also customizes them by game world. The company would take the basic characters and story arch... revising it for each campaign setting.

Anyway, just a couple thoughts.

 

[tensen]

Was Hogshead flawed, or did the owners just decide they'd had enough and wanted to move on to something else? My impression was that they were profitable enough and didn't have any problems other than burnout.

Well isn't there a new owner of the company producing d20 products now?

 

[JohnNephew]

James had been thinking of folding Hogshead before that. I think Nobilis was (at least partly) a last statement about what gaming was capable of, and where it was (and is) falling short.

Yup. I've known James since before he started Hogshead, when he was a freelancer who had shown us this cool game he and a couple of guys made called "Once Upon A Time," which was sort of like a roleplaying game with cards.

At lunch at Gen Con a year or two before Nobilis was released, he told me quite frankly that he was planning to shutter Hogshead when the time was right. I think the time was made right (1) by Hogshead doing very well near the end (Nobilis was a big success, as were other products released at long last), paying back James' financial investment in the whole enterprise; and (2) seeing problematic trends in the industry on the business side (such as the warning signs of the collapse of Wizard's Attic).

Knowing he was going to be dropping this gig, though, James felt pretty free to voice his opinions. Not that he was too shy before. (He once cut off a distributor, whose behavior had been quite egregious, with a faxed phrase that turned into the company slogan -- "Life is Too Short To Do Business With ****wits." He paid David Chart $2 per word to translate that into Latin, so it would sound classier.)

In short, I think flamewars with gamers on the net was a symptom, not a cause, of James planning to close Hogshead.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

...more then 2 million people play RPGs each month...

How many people play rpg's every month???

I'm just curious where this figure comes from - it seems grossly inflated to me. Perhaps 2 million have tried an rpg at some point, but that many are actively playing at any given time? Since the core books have only sold a fraction of this number, what game systems are all these folks playing?

 

[jmucchiello]

Perhaps 2 million have tried an rpg at some point, but that many are actively playing at any given time? Since the core books have only sold a fraction of this number, what game systems are all these folks playing?

As seen in this thread, not everyone who plays the game, buys the books.

And what fraction are we talking about? PHB sales are in the 100,000s of units, I think.

 

[Jim Butler]

How many people play rpg's every month???

I'm just curious where this figure comes from - it seems grossly inflated to me. Perhaps 2 million have tried an rpg at some point, but that many are actively playing at any given time? Since the core books have only sold a fraction of this number, what game systems are all these folks playing?

The numbers are from a number of market research efforts conducted by WotC shortly after Wizards bought TSR. Note that the number of people who play RPGs each month is not solely D&D players (though that probably is a very large percent of them).

As for sales of Player's Handbooks, it's not as small of a fraction as you might think. As noted in the previous thread, not everyone who plays D&D buys a book (many borrow from the gaming group). And not every roleplayer who has played D&D has followed the logical upgrade path that WotC would have liked them to.

So, you have lots of people who are playing a variety of RPGs (OD&D and all the iterations in between). Most of these people aren't active purchasers, though, and that's *always* been the challenge for RPGs.

 

[danir]

Actually, WotC release a PR in January 2002 stating the one million sale of D&D core rules book (the combined sales of the 3).

 

[Sir Whiskers]

The numbers are from a number of market research efforts conducted by WotC shortly after Wizards bought TSR. Note that the number of people who play RPGs each month is not solely D&D players (though that probably is a very large percent of them).

As for sales of Player's Handbooks, it's not as small of a fraction as you might think. As noted in the previous thread, not everyone who plays D&D buys a book (many borrow from the gaming group). And not every roleplayer who has played D&D has followed the logical upgrade path that WotC would have liked them to.

So, you have lots of people who are playing a variety of RPGs (OD&D and all the iterations in between). Most of these people aren't active purchasers, though, and that's *always* been the challenge for RPGs.

I'd be interested in seeing the methodology of this research, not because I think anyone is being deceptive, but because the numbers just don't seem to match my own experience. I'll understand completely if WOTC considers the information privileged, but I'd love see a breakdown by:

*location (country or continent)
*type (fantasy/supers/etc.)
*frequency of playing
*years played
*most important, number of unique players

Since many roleplayers play in multiple games, and/or in multiple game systems, I wonder if some of these players have been counted more than once. My guess is that the 2 million number is simply an extrapolation, though perhaps with a lot of hard data behind it. I'd like to see how the information was collected.
I'd also be curious to see what definition was used for rpg.

If 2M is true, I have to wonder why rpg's are not more mainstream than they are. In my experience, half the people I introduce to rpg's drop out (usually sooner rather than later). If this is typical throughout the hobby, then at least 4 million people have tried rpg's. That's a huge exposure for what is a leisure-time hobby.

Lastly, if this number was true before 3E came out, what is the number today?

 

[dimonic]

Actually, WotC release a PR in January 2002 stating the one million sale of D&D core rules book (the combined sales of the 3).

I wonder what the breakdown of books would be: I am only guessing, but something like 1 million Players Handbook, 600,000 DMG, 400,000 Monster Manual?

Perhaps posters could report in their group numbers of monthly players, and number of collective core books owned here:

My group/regular gaming contacts: 10
Player's Handbooks 3.0: 4
DMG 3.0: 3
MM 3.0: 1

Player's Handbooks 3.5: 2
DMG 3.5: 2
MM: 1.

So, 6 PH, 5 DMG and 2 MM is close to the ratios I have sited. Note that although everyone in the group games every month, only some buy books, but those who do tend to buy at least two books. Frequent player-only members often go for things like the "Arms and Equipment Guide", and DM's go for world-books.

 

[Staffan]

Since many roleplayers play in multiple games, and/or in multiple game systems, I wonder if some of these players have been counted more than once. My guess is that the 2 million number is simply an extrapolation, though perhaps with a lot of hard data behind it. I'd like to see how the information was collected.
I'd also be curious to see what definition was used for rpg.

Ryan Dancey posted some public results of the survey to the web in 2000, and it has since been archived in various places. One is http://www.theescapist.com/WotCsummary1.htm