D&D 5E The Printers Can't Handle WotC's One D&D Print Runs!

One of the reasons why the three new core rulebooks next year will not be released together is because D&D is such a juggernaut that the printers can't actually handle the size of the print runs!

Jeremy Crawford told Polygon "Our print runs are pretty darn big and printers are telling us you can’t give us these three books at the same time.” And Chris Perkins added that "The print runs we’re talking about are massive. That’s been not only true of the core books, but also Tasha’s Cauldron. It’s what we call a high-end problem."

 

[Hussar]

Oh yeah the UI for vtts can suck a lot. Unintuitive is a huge understatement.

Which is again why I’m utterly baffled why none of the rpg companies have ever stepped up. Yes it’s not cheap. Sure. But from a marketing standpoint it’s just such a no brainer.

 

[codo]

Oh yeah the UI for vtts can suck a lot. Unintuitive is a huge understatement.

Which is again why I’m utterly baffled why none of the rpg companies have ever stepped up. Yes it’s not cheap. Sure. But from a marketing standpoint it’s just such a no brainer.

I think the cost is the issue. Until the huge spike in players with 5e, I just don't think there were enough players to make the investment worth while.

 

[Azzy]

The issue isn't that they make a profit, ots that WotC is making so much profit they can afford to eat inflation increases and still make increasingly large profits.

This is true of every corporation. Unfortunately, we live in a world where this is rewarded and lauded. <insert rant about late-stage capitalism>

 

[Umbran]

No one called them liers on the printer shortage, just not buying they can't absorb the inflation and still increase profits because they already proved they can.

Even if they can absorb the inflation, you haven't given a good business reason why they should.

 

[Umbran]

Which is again why I’m utterly baffled why none of the rpg companies have ever stepped up. Yes it’s not cheap. Sure. But from a marketing standpoint it’s just such a no brainer.

So, the reason for that is obvious - they are game designers and publishers, not software shops. It simply isn't their technical or business bailiwick. I believe the common business phrase would be, "outside their core competencies."

This is the reason I'm still very skeptical of WotC's entry to the field. They know gaming, but I don't have confidence that they know software, or the software business, sufficiently to pull off a good offering.

 

[Azzy]

I think that "everyone" (society) pays a LOT more when we choose not to value people and labor.

That's a lesson that we learned before, but it seems that we have to keep re-learning it.

But what about those top-level corporate executives? If we start paying the workers their actual worth, those execs might not be able to buy another yacht!

 

[Dire Bare]

Oh yeah the UI for vtts can suck a lot. Unintuitive is a huge understatement.

Which is again why I’m utterly baffled why none of the rpg companies have ever stepped up. Yes it’s not cheap. Sure. But from a marketing standpoint it’s just such a no brainer.

WotC is working on one. And it's not their first attempt.

They've "stepped up" . . . . just not successfully yet!

Software development is hard.

 

[Parmandur]

So, the reason for that is obvious - they are game designers and publishers, not software shops. It simply isn't their technical or business bailiwick. I believe the common business phrase would be, "outside their core competencies."

This is the reason I'm still very skeptical of WotC's entry to the field. They know gaming, but I don't have confidence that they know software, or the software business, sufficiently to pull off a good offering.

They have had major, wild success at in-house software development recently...for Magic. And a lot of recent WotC leadership hires come from the software industry. Doesnmean they can do it for D&D, too, but...they can do software.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm sorry, but you invoked your status as an indie publisher, and ended with, "And I think it is very fair for fans to tell us when they think prices are too high." In context, the "us" is "publishers".

In the context of this thread, the implication is then that the complaints about prices are complaints to the publisher.

Which they actually are not. If we are talking about comfort, I, as someone who has to dole out the red text, am not comfortable with the idea that complaining about prices here is in any way communicating with the publisher. In that past, that stance has led people to some toxic behaviors.

So, I disabuse the notion when I see it.

My main reason for mentioning I publish indie was to say I personally don't see WOTC raising their prices as giving me space to raise mine (and even if I did, I don't think that is beneficial for the hobby overall). And I am not saying WOTC can't raise their prices if they need to (I think whether they need and ought to is something people can reasonably debate). I definitely don't think increasing prices are something to celebrate though as they represent a real cost to gamers during a time when prices are increasing but wages are not necessarily keeping up with those prices (people pay more for milk because they have to, but they don't have to buy games). Everyone's cut off point is different and based on their own budget. I know for me, games that are 60 dollars or more I am much, much more reluctant purchase (in fact I don't think I have ever spent that much on an RPG). One concern I have is I have seen arguments by people due to these price increases that 70, 80, 90 or even 100 are more natural price levels for RPG books and that it would be better for publishers, better for the hobby, if people were more willing to spend that on them. I don't think it is a matter of willingness. I think that price level is simply too expensive for most people and it exceeds the value that most would place on a premade RPG and setting (especially since this is a hobby people can make settings and systems for themselves if they really need to). Now not everyone may agree. I am sure plenty of posters have no problem spending those kinds of dollars on a book. .

And you are right I did say "us" in that sense. While I don't think what people say in this thread or threads elsewhere online should be mistaken for an official complaint department, I do think companies read these kinds of threads (I know I do). And it is fair for people to voice discontent over prices or other criticisms in them. But I do think WOTC probably pays minimal attention to this kind of thread, and what I had in mind was people expressing opinions that lots of other publishers might see (WOTC is probably too big to pay close attention to a thread like this, smaller publishers and mid level publishers are more likely to observe them). To me this is more about people voicing their concern over prices in general because WOTC is raising theirs (not so much about WOTC).

But I agree with you that some behavior crosses the line, especially if they are going after individuals who work at these publishers personally. I've been on the receiving end of that sort of thing, so I do get the concern. And I think reminders from mods can be very helpful in restoring conversations to the proper boundaries if things get too intense

Also just as a general point, I do think these threads help shape the overall hobby. The online world and offline world are certainly different, but a lot of these conversations to help set the norms so if people think prices are reasonable, they should weigh in in my view, if they think they are unreasonable they should also weigh in.

Civil discussion of the price change is fine. I was merely addressing the idea that this somehow constitutes making a point to the publisher, which again, it is not.

Fair enough. I still would argue that this is one arena where people can voice their opinion on matters in the hobby. It is a large forum with lots of active threads and quite popular. I do agree it isn't the same as directly contacting a publisher to give them feedback

History has shown me, very clearly (with attendant foul language and name calling) that, generally speaking, we do not all understand this.

I get this and agree with that aspect of your point.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think that "everyone" (society) pays a LOT more when we choose not to value people and labor.

That's a lesson that we learned before, but it seems that we have to keep re-learning it.

But there is also the question of whether people can afford it. This is always framed as people not being willing to spend over a certain price point for RPGs. But I would contend that is because a lot of people can't afford or can't justify that expense. I hear from people all the time who genuinely can't afford the print version of books (especially when things like shipping become a factor). We all want to get paid for our work, but we also can't insist people pay us if our prices are too high.

Also when we are talking about a company like WOTC, I think the calculus changes. There is a difference between an indie publisher, doing small print runs, who can't keep their cover prices below 50 (it is very expensive to print books especially if you aren't doing large volume and don't have the kinds of marketing and connections a WOTC has). But larger companies can set costs lower. And I think people would be less wary, had there not been a lot of things leading up to this (statements that D&D was undermonetized, the OGL efforts, etc). People get the feeling when that happens that there is probably a lot of money going up to the top and that it is a very different scenario from say a smaller publisher where there are a few people who are making enough money to get by. One thing people should understand though about this industry and points you and others have made that I would agree with is profit margins are very tight, and most companies are not even earning a full time living doing this: most are doing this either for supplementary income or even as a labor of love. A handful are making enough money that publishing alone puts a roof over their head.

My point isn't that inflation isn't a real consideration. Just that even if inflation is occurring, you have to consider what people can afford and what they are willing to spend, and while it is fair for publishers to explain to customers why they are setting the prices where they are (I recently put out a book that was ten dollars more than I wanted it to be and I had to explain that), that doesn't mean anyone is obligated to buy. Our costs may be going up, but their wages might not be going up. And I think publishers would benefit from examining their productions costs, the production expectations and determining if they are realistic in the present economy (and if they were ever realistic).