The D&D Business Model

[Reynard]

It seems to me that you should market "big" books to players -- the Complete Books -- and little items to DMs. Why?

Well, players like options. people that are perrenial players like lots of options. Whether it is to twink out a single character or come up with a million different possible combination, they like having a whole bunch of stuff at their disposal with which to work. Now, i am not sure whether it is a better idea to go the Complete route -- focused -- or to go a more general route -- PHB, PHB II, etc... -- I am not sure if a) people tend to play the same type of character and if they do, b) it means they wouldn't buy a book with only 1/4 of the info directed at their particular choice/niche.

Perennial DM's on the other hand tend to be the sorts of people that are perfectly capable of making up their own settings, adventures and house rules. But what they really need it items that reduce their workload -- particularly in the areas of DMing that the individual isn't so fond of, which is different for everyone -- so they have more time to do the things they like to do. If a DM hates working up stat blocks but loves designing adventures, a box of Encounter Cards or a slim book of "CR 5 Abyssal Encounters" or somesuch is going to be a godsend. Same goes for maps, adventure locales, towns, and the like. The problem is, of course, that you don't know what DMs don't like doing and why they do like doing. Even if you have the money to burn to experiment with different kinds of products to see what sells the best, there's no garauntee that it is going to stay that way (especially if you end up providing enough of one type of product to fill the need).

All in all, it appears to me that the current model makes a lot of sense. Players are as likely to buy Stormwrack or Lords of Madness as a DM because there are PrCs, feats and such in them. DM's are as likely to buy the Complete books because they, too, use those resources and in addition each of those books has ready made NPCs, organizations and other DM friendly stuff. Ultimately, only adventures and related items are "DM only" and I think WotC would be better served to produce free PDF adventures on their website that references the newest, coolest book. I mean, if the free adventure related to Dragon Magic is just badass, and makes me want to run it for my group, I am much more likely to get off the fence on that particular product and go get it.

On Minis and Randomness: The idea that selling minis in prepackaged sets of whatever, as opposed to randomly, somehow helping sales just doesn't make any sense. I want 8 orcs. If I can buy 8 orcs, you made 1 sale. If I can only buy a box that may or may not have any orcs in it, you probably made 4 or 6 sales by the time I either get my 8 orcs (or approximations thereof) or give up. And chances are, i got a few other minis that I want duplicates of, as well. It is fine to say that one doesn't like the fact that the minis are random -- it irritated me before I decided to drop the minis and battlemat, too -- but saying it is a bad business model is just silly. Oh, and I think people are way overestimationg the importance of the RPGers on the DDM market. First off, only a DM needs a lot of minis (see above). Secondly, when I was origins I saw a whole lot of 14 year old kids sending warbands at each other that couldn't be bothered to roll up an actual character and sit around for 6 hours for one fight if their life depended on it.

 

[sullivan]

Sell the DM version at a loss, recognizing that DMs are the ones who drive players to your products, and make up for it on the volume of selling to players. And to take it a step further, maybe there aren't two separate books, maybe it's a single hardcover plus a softcover "DM's notes".

The DM driving players to products? Why? Are you making that assumption based on the current model? Although in my experience this isn't entirely true anyway, and in the group that it is much moreso there are some fundemantal issues we are having that we are likely to address by making much less true.

 

[Mark]

The DM driving players to products? Why?

I'm guessing he is assuming that if a DM allows certain supplements in his game then some of the players will be prone to pick them up.

 

[Reynard]

I'm guessing he is assuming that if a DM allows certain supplements in his game then some of the players will be prone to pick them up.

Not a very good business model and more likely it works the other way. Play buys Shiny New Toy and wants to use it in the game. DM must either a) disallow it, b) allow it and require to be furnished with copies of the specific rule/class/etc.., or c) allows it and oges out and buys the book.

EDIT: Player empowerment, like in D&D 3.x, costs money.

 

[sullivan]

I'm guessing he is assuming that if a DM allows certain supplements in his game then some of the players will be prone to pick them up.

I suspect so too. And in my opinion it is in WotC's interests to change this attitude. Why? If you have a high percentage of the gamers that either prefer your game or are willing to 'default' to it then it actually increases the odds that they will play your game if it is a roughly democratic selection instead of a selection made by one person!

And then they get to market more DM sized portions of goodies to everyone and spread that spending around.

P.S. Besides Adventures I suppose, for the spoilers, I highly question that there is anything that really needs to be the domain of the DM only over players in general. When I'm in the DM seat I'm personally glad to have another set of eyes and grey cells to help out with rules and specs references. I've got plenty of other things to be taking care of.

 

[mmadsen]

Which books that Wizards produces appeal to everyone? Past the core books, it's pretty much the Complete books. After that, sales drop off.

Yes, and those other books probably aren't worth producing. The money that went into them could probably be used more productively elsewhere.

However, it is possible - and desirable - to produce niche products as well. The trick is to produce products that, even though not everyone wants them, enough do so that they hit the necessary profit margin.

Why would you ever produce niche products when they cost as much as the core books to produce, but they bring in much, much less revenue (and bring it in less reliably)? Spend your money producing products that can benefit from the tremendous economies of scale in this industry.

I tend to think that any strategy that automatically discounts certain products as "not selling to enough of the market" are flawed. Rather, research and - that best bit of research - actual releases can tell you far more about whether there is a viable market or not.

Research isn't free, and it's not necessarily accurate.

 

[Bardsandsages]

Yes, and those other books probably aren't worth producing. The money that went into them could probably be used more productively elsewhere.

In a perfect world, publishers would automatically know which books are worth producing and which ones are not. And in a perfect world, consumers would instinctively be able to identify said books and would buy them.

The fact is, publishers DON'T know. The reality of publishing (not just RPGs, but in general), is that you will make your money on about 10% of your products. The balance are produced because:

a. Some editor made it a pet project and honestly thought it would be big. Editor was wrong.

b. The product was created for public relations reasons. Poetry chapbooks don't make money for a publisher, but producing them keeps the good will of universities and libraries that often are key to driving sales of other products. A publisher accused of only publishing misogynistic work might suddenly publish a feminist collection of essays to show they support women's rights, even if they know it won't make money. Or a product that has high artistic value that will receive nods for awards and create the perception that the entire line is that good. In short, you produce a product not because it will actually generate a lot of revenue, but because it will give you a positive boost in the eye of the public you.

c. You need to produce new products in order to sell backlist. I can tell you right now that whenever we release a new product, sales of our backlist items spike briefly as well. You can product one reallllllllyyyyyyyyyyyy good product a year, but if you only product one nobody remembers you by the time you get around to the next one. New products get the prime shelf space in stores. New products get the push in magazines and websites. New products remind people who you are.

 

[Glyfair]

Why would you ever produce niche products when they cost as much as the core books to produce, but they bring in much, much less revenue (and bring it in less reliably)?

With D&D the reason has always been that they drive the sales of the Core Books. Without support, the Core Books sell much less. Yes, they have always been the best sellers. However, they sell the best when they have strong support.

 

[rgard]

They should sell non-randomized Orcs swordsmen, Orc Archers, Orc spearmen, and Goblins (in different varieties), Hobgoblins (same), Skeletons, Zombies, etc. in packs of 24 or so without cards for RPG usage.

This may be difficult for WotC to pull off (make money doing it):

1. While the sculpts are already done and the molds already made, producing a box of orcs in varying poses would involve using molds from several different releases. I don't know for certain, but I bet there are several different figs with each mold. So the Harbinger orcs may be in the same mold as the Harbinger hellhound or crested felldrake or some other less desireable mini sculpt. When you inject the mold with the plastic you will fill all the fig cavities. Then you are stuck with minis that nobody has an interest in buying. It is possible to re-melt the unwanted minis, but that does drive up your production costs as somebody has to be paid to pull the unwanted minis. Also, your electricity costs per figure go up as you are now producing half the figs for the same amount of electricity used. Also wear and tear on the injection molder increases per mini actually sold and the wages cost per mini go up.

2. You can drop the minis cards from the set and that would reduce some of the costs, but I personally would be less inclined to buy the set without the cards as I use them. That wouldn't be an issue for some, but it is a balancing act for WotC to determine which way to go with the minis. They could provide the cards on line as a free download. That doesn't cost much to post it there, but it is money spent with no measureable return on investment. Some staffer has to compile the specific images in the file and DASD does cost money too.

I'd bet somebody at WotC has or will work up the business case for doing this. Similar work was done when they produced/published the Basic Game (16 minis from 2-3 different series) and the same has been done for the new Basic Game coming out this fall.

I'd buy some of the sets if produced, mainly orcs, hobgoblins, skeletons and the like.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[rgard]

I'm looking for a business answer that would also be acceptable to gamers. Is there one? I'm thinking it has less to do with how long between resets and more to do with the assurance that the reset represents a significant improvement. How does that come about?

I think their are two answers and they may be mutually exclusive:

1. The designers have to produce a superior version of the game to get the current players to shift to the new system. I can't see making the move unless it is a better system.

2. It should be backwards compatible with the 3.5. Again, from a personal stand point, I have too much $ invested in 3.5 books and minis (I use the cards during RPG sessions) to justify having them gather dust on the shelf while I spend more money on the new version.

A bit of a paradox for those already heavily invested in the current version, yes? That said, it is not an issue for those who currently don't own or play 3.5.

Thanks,
Rich