D&D General The Retro Edition Market

aco175 · Dec 24, 2019

I could go for a best of Dragon Magazine. Even with the old article and the updated article for 5e. I don't think a reprint of 2e would work. Maybe at a convention you can have a throwback game.

Lanefan · Dec 24, 2019

Samloyal23 said:
How many people would buy products for previous editions? How many people are playing them?

Doesn't matter, as long as they're playing D&D at all*, because...

Should WOTC produce things for more than one edition?

...yes they should; for all editions at once.

How, you ask?

With every adventure or module, include a conversion guide for each previous edition. That way, regardless what edition you're playing you'll get equally good value from the product; and WotC will thus sell more of them...provided the product itself is any good, of course.

* and collectively there's quite a few people still playing one or more of Basic-1e-2e-3e-4e.

Tony Vargas · Dec 24, 2019

Samloyal23 said:
How many people would buy products for previous editions?

Yes, there are people who do. There's a thriving market for old books, there's old-edition stuff on DMsG & DriveThru RPG, and there's significant 3pp products targeting 1e/0e and 3.5, as well...

Should WOTC produce things for more than one edition? Discuss...

WotC made 3.x Open Source, and it turned out 3.x was close enough to prior eds that it was possible to cobble together an arguably-legal version for OSRIC.

So 3.x, AD&D, "B/X", and even 0D&D all have substantial 3pp support either out there, ongoing, or at least possible at any time. So there's little point in WotC doing anything more than offering pdfs of the older stuff.

As always, the sole exception us 4e, which cannot be cloned under it's much more restrictive GSL. Even so, it's make more sense to move it to an OGL, than to resume support, themselves.

Umbran said:
No, because splitting your own fanbase has already been shown to be a bad idea, multiple times.

Actually, D&D was spilt, in that sense, from 1977 on, with 0D&D, AD&D, and B/X all being published simultaneously, and that strategy rode the boom-and-bust of the fad all the way through.

In the current environment, there's likely little risk to quietly supporting past eds a bit.

Morrus · Dec 24, 2019

There’s a whole movement called the OSR, whose origins were in early editions of D&D. It’s evolved and spread over the last few years, but the market for older D&D material and compatible material is there. There are companies which do just that.

Weiley31 · Dec 24, 2019

I still like getting older edition adventures and modules. I totally want to do City of The Spider Queen. The whole "Silence of Lolth" would be a good background/plot details for my 5E games.

Umbran · Dec 25, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Actually

You figure that's a great word to start with?

D&D was spilt, in that sense, from 1977 on, with 0D&D, AD&D, and B/X all being published simultaneously, and that strategy rode the boom-and-bust of the fad all the way through.

Right. Because TSR actually had "strategy". Sure. And the market today is remotely similar to the 70s and 80s? Does that really seem lie a plausible posit, to you?

When they started with a bazillion settings, flooding the market with content aimed at segregated niches for each setting.. it all went to the outhouse, and the game only survived by WotC buying the thing.

And, when WotC deviated from some of the basics of the game design with an edition, causing a Pathfinder/4e split... not the best plan either. Disaster was averted, but the impact on business was pretty clear.

In the current environment, there's likely little risk to quietly supporting past eds a bit.

This is the internet age, sir. There is nothing "quiet" any more.

And, "in the current environment" there won't be another buyout. If they tank it, Hasbro will not sell. They will shelve it, and then outsite what can be done under OGL, it'll be done.

Zardnaar · Dec 25, 2019

Three editions were only published in a very brief window then two and one from around 1994.

I love me older edition stuff. Keep doing what they're doing with maybe a special rerelease every decade or so. Basically repeat what they did 2012-13 once in a blue moon.

Some 50th anniversary rerelease in 2014 for example would be nice even a boxed set perhaps.

Tony Vargas · Dec 25, 2019

Umbran said:
Right. Because TSR actually had "strategy". Sure. And the market today is remotely similar to the 70s and 80s?

They called it an 'Aproach' rather than a strategy, IIRC.
The sales are remotely similar and the game remotely similar, sure. OTOH, there's no BADD or Jack Chick this time around, among many other differences.

Does that really seem lie a plausible posit, to you?

TBH, TSR had me wondering "what are they thinking?" back in the day as much as WotC does now, and they were far less communicative... but...

When they started with a bazillion settings, flooding the market with content aimed at segregated niches for each setting.. it all went to the outhouse, and the game only survived by WotC buying the thing.

...we do know that TSR's failure was not driven primarily by post-fad D&D sales dropping even more, right? I mean, it's complicated and a lot was going on, M:tG creating a fad of its own that TSR bet on with spellfire and dragondice, novels being returned by distributors, etc...

And, when WotC deviated from some of the basics of the game design with an edition, causing a Pathfinder/4e split... not the best plan either.

Which wasnt a split of official offerings - there were fewer settings, and only one version of the game, not even a basic set. Nerdrage is as unpredictable (yet inevitable) as fads & flops in the first place.
That time, D&D didn't thread the needle between accessible to new fans & acceptable to old, and the old fans nerdraged the edition war into being.
And, I suppose ironically, the strategy, or reaction, anyway, was to split out Essentials.

I guess it might be fair to say that so long as the flagship line keeps growing rapidly, any strategies or decisions will look good, until that growth falters, then the last set may be called into question.