D&D 5E The RPG or the Brand?

[FormerlyHemlock]

$150K? I doubt they get that much. I expect the average WotC staffer (and Linkedin lists WotC as 200-500 employees) makes maybe $30K, with the top few making $60K... $41K, by the way, is roughly $20/hour, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. At present, over twice the poverty line, and lower end of middle class. Union Journeymen often make more, but not always.

They're based in Renton, right? Anyone in the Seattle area who is making $30K per year is basically in poverty. All the houses seem to cost upwards of $400K. Right now WotC has a bunch of software development positions advertised on their web site, and if they're paying their guys only 30% of the going rate for this area they're not going to retain them for long.

You could be right about the wage levels, but the original guess of $150K seems more plausible to me. Note that that's not $150K in pure salary, that's the cost to the employer per employee, which includes things like health insurance, taxes, office space, administrative support staff, etc.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I think they leave a lot of money on the table not using Magic: the Gathering as a gateway game to D&D.

Agreed. Maybe Chris Perkins is working on a M:tG setting for D&D.

 

[samursus]

$150K? I doubt they get that much. I expect the average WotC staffer (and Linkedin lists WotC as 200-500 employees) makes maybe $30K, with the top few making $60K... $41K, by the way, is roughly $20/hour, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. At present, over twice the poverty line, and lower end of middle class. Union Journeymen often make more, but not always.

I think he was referring to the income they generate for the company, not what they make.

Edit: At least that's how I took it.

 

[delericho]

It did that. I was all zeitgeist. 35 years ago. Thats why many of us are here.

Can zeitgeist strike twice?

Yes, but the news isn't good.

Most of the things that were fads back in the day seem to have a "second coming" about 20 years later - that's the point where the kids who enjoyed it then are young adults with relatively high disposable income and relatively few responsibilities. (Note: 20 years isn't an exact number.)

Most of these things have a few years back in the limelight and then disappear back to being niche concerns. (Examples include Thundercats and Battlestar Galactica.) It's not clear yet whether they'll get a third bite after another 20 years - my guess is that some few, but only very, very few, will get another shot.

A few properties, however, are able to leverage that resurgence into lasting popularity. They become a permanent part of the zeitgeist, unless and until something comes along to kill it. The first example of this I can think of is ST:TNG, but other successes have included Star Wars and Transformers.

The reason it's not good news is that D&D has already had its second coming - it started just before the release of 3e and ended with the release of the first movie.

 

[Sailor Moon]

Elminster, Raistlin, Drizzt, Vecna, von Zarovich, Tiamat, Lloth, Soth ... there's plenty. Lots of D&D books hit the bestseller charts over the years; people read them. Who knew about about Star Lord before GotG? I didn't! I didn't even really know about Iron Man before Marvel lucked out with Robert Downey Jr., which is what launched their current trajectory. I'd never heard of Black Widow or Hawkeye.

And those are pre-existing characters. It's perfectly possible to launch and succeed with a brand new character. All characters were new once. Jason Bourne was brand new. So was Jack Bauer. Felicity Smoak is a new DC character launched by the Arrow show, and now in the comics.

Luck and marketing. Though I might have said that a few times already....

Those characters have a meaning to us gamers, not the general public.

My mom, who is far far far from a geek of any kind, knows who the Hulk? Spider-man, Superman, Batman, and Optimus Prime are. These characters have years and years of mainstream coverage. Non geeks may not be able to tell you their history or anything, but they know who they are and what "specialness" they have.

 

[Sailor Moon]

I don't see luck having much to do with building brands. Can you give an example of the kind of luck you are talking about?

Marketing doesn't always ensure success. There have been just as many failures from marketing as successes.

When it comes to luck, that's basically acknowledging that somethings catch on while others don't. Harry Potter became an absolute successes on a scale that was almost crazy. What made Harry Potter so popular? Wasn't marketing for sure. There really is no answer as to why this product became such a success. Same for Twlight and 50 shades.

It is a bit of luck.

 

[delericho]

They really don't. Have you seen Michael Bay's movies?

They have a lot of explosions; I'll give them that. Strong narrative and developed characters? Not a chance!

The Transformers movies do exceptionally well in the international markets, largely because of those explosions, the big action scenes, the semi-exploitative shots of the female lead, and the cars - lots of cars. And it actually helps that the plot and dialogue are nonsense - it means that they translate easily, being largely incidental to the film.

The same formula also works for the "Fast and Furious" movies, by the way, and for much the same reason.

So, really, the best hope for a successful (and, if we're really lucky, watchable) D&D movie is probably for them to hire Vin Diesel and The Rock to star and make, essentially, "The Dungeons and The Dragons".

Unfortunately, what F&F and the Transformers have that D&D doesn't is cars. But perhaps a suitable alternative would be to recast Tiamat as, essentially, Godzilla.

 

[Sailor Moon]

The Transformers movies do exceptionally well in the international markets, largely because of those explosions, the big action scenes, the semi-exploitative shots of the female lead, and the cars - lots of cars. And it actually helps that the plot and dialogue are nonsense - it means that they translate easily, being largely incidental to the film.

The same formula also works for the "Fast and Furious" movies, by the way, and for much the same reason.

So, really, the best hope for a successful (and, if we're really lucky, watchable) D&D movie is probably for them to hire Vin Diesel and The Rock to star and make, essentially, "The Dungeons and The Dragons".

Unfortunately, what F&F and the Transformers have that D&D doesn't is cars. But perhaps a suitable alternative would be to recast Tiamat as, essentially, Godzilla.

Just give them cars to drive around in anyway.

They could be closely associated with the Apparatus of Kwalish.

 

[Morrus]

Those characters have a meaning to us gamers, not the general public.

You didn't read my entire post. You stopped after the first 8 words and then replied. That's really frustrating, because now I have to type out the same thing again.

Star Lord, Black Widow. Jason Bourne, Jack Bauer. Not one of these meant anything to the general public before their respective movies/shows. Every one was incredibly successful.

Same can happen for Elminster & co. With luck and marketing.

 

[Sailor Moon]

You didn't read my entire post. You stopped after the first 8 words and then replied. That's really frustrating, because now I have to type out the same thing again.

Star Lord, Black Widow. Jason Bourne, Jack Bauer. Not one of these meant anything to the general public before their respective movies/shows. Every one was incredibly successful.

Same can happen for Elminster & co. With luck and marketing.

And you may be right, but it really is a shot in the dark. What makes Elminster any different than Gandalf or Dumbledore in the eyes of the general public?

The Bourne Identity movies touch on a topic that has already had no trouble finding an audience so those movies had a bit of a head start.