D&D 5E (2014) The RPG or the Brand?

[Mark CMG]

You mean except Star Wars?

Yes, as I have posted thus far, SW was mentioned as a jumping off point for the entire idea. Did you read my previous posts or come in mid-conversation? Maybe you're joining in without all the information and that's why this is confusing you.

Which would be benefitable to the IP holder, since that means a better deal and more controll for him.

That's one way of looking at it. Is control what you want when you get into a licensing deal with someone because you don't have expertise in a market sector in which they are absolutely the top dog and seemingly have a sense of how to properly handle valuable IP like SW?

It's not as if the D&D enginge would really increase sales of a HP RPG much beyond what it would sell with any other engine.

You don't think so, the SW folks do think so. I guess you and the folks in charge of the SW IP will have to agree to disagree. And to repeat, again, one more time, we're discussing a game engine by the same people as those who make D&D not the D&D engine per se. In further exchanges, please proceed with that understanding.

An own engine also has the advantage of being able to be customized to the IP. With the D20 versions it was a bitter pill to swallow because the D20 market was so big that using an unsuited enginge was still more feasible at the end. And even then many D20 version enventually included so many alterations as to be hardly recognizable.

d20 was a "thick" underlying engine. I was suggesting something much thinner, some core mechanics and some terminology that can crossover, something designed specifically to work with multiple IP overlays (the design idea behind the d20 system was originally that those adopting it would be specifically supporting D&D and driving D&D core book sales). You may have missed the previous post(s) where I suggested they design a specific engine for this purpose, a thin one. Could you, perhaps, go back and check out those posts to avoid raising issues already covered?

 

[Sailor Moon]

An own engine also has the advantage of being able to be customized to the IP. With the D20 versions it was a bitter pill to swallow because the D20 market was so big that using an unsuited enginge was still more feasible at the end. And even then many D20 version enventually included so many alterations as to be hardly recognizable.

Exactly!

The Farscape RPG used a variant on the d20 system.

 

[Mark CMG]

The Farscape RPG used a variant on the d20 system.

And wasn't, exactly, built for it as what I suggest would be the approach. You might have missed that part of the discussion.

 

[Mirtek]

You don't think so, the SW folks do think so.[...]I guess you and the folks in charge of the SW IP will have to agree to disagree.

Do they? Then why is the WotC version dicontinued and the current Star Wars RPG runs on it's own engine? Also was a marketing leverage due to being D&D based ever advertised with the WotC game? It didn't even show the D20 logo somewhere on the front (just small on the bottom of the back cover).

we're discussing a game engine by the same people as those who make D&D not the D&D engine per se.

Then that makes even less sense. WotC would have the TSR bloat all over, even worse because of entirely different engines that are not even compatible (even during TSR bloat you could use all mechanics from an FR supplement in a Dragonlance game and vice versa)

d20 was a "thick" underlying engine.

And it worked out because of it's market dominance, which made using a less suited engine that would reach a broader audience more viable than a more suited engine that does not already have a customer base.

where I suggested they design a specific engine for this purpose, a thin one.

It's either a one size fits all attempt or they then have to layer the thin core engine with so much that they're essentially different engines and won't need a common core engine anymore

 

[Mark CMG]

Do they? Then why is the WotC version dicontinued and the current Star Wars RPG runs on it's own engine?

I was unaware that the people at Star Wars (the ones who own the SW IP) wrote an RPG engine and insisted the WotC use it instead of one of their own design. Are you sure about this? Are you sure this isn't just a new RPG designed by WotC more dedicated to SW as a way to customize an RPG for that IP utilizing their own underlying fundamental ideas of how to design an RPG?

*edit* See Staffan's followup post, and my response to it, for clarification.

Also was a marketing leverage due to being D&D based ever advertised with the WotC game?

Those who own the big IP (like SW) don't have (or don't have nearly as much) RPG market experience, penetration, etc. It lends strength to the big IP owner's advertising to say they are teamed up with the top RPG company in the world.

Then that makes even less sense. WotC would have the TSR bloat all over, even worse because of entirely different engines that are not even compatible (even during TSR bloat you could use all mechanics from an FR supplement in a Dragonlance game and vice versa)

Just the opposite. One book and out for each IP is what I'd suggest, maybe three a year on various franchises, rotating through genres and including one extremely large one. For example, go with Harry Potter, Walking Dead, and Sleepy Hollow one year. The next year go with GoT (or similar), Elementary, and Grimm. All this dependent on which IP is available and which deals can be struck. Farm out all of the actual D&D support to specific licensees or through use of the OGL. There's no real money for WotC beyond the core.

And it worked out because of it's market dominance, which made using a less suited engine that would reach a broader audience more viable than a more suited engine that does not already have a customer base.
It's either a one size fits all attempt or they then have to layer the thin core engine with so much that they're essentially different engines and won't need a common core engine anymore

What you're missing is that, in the d20 Era, 3PP needed the thicker engine and the d20 logo because they were outsiders grafting material onto D&D. Where this differs is that this would be WotC taking top IP from other outsiders and grafting it onto a thinner and customized RPG engine. It's the other way around, it's not for a single system (just some underlying fundamentals), and it's the RPG team with the most muscle in the market doing the designing. It's really night and day between the two ideas you are trying to use in comparison.

 

[Staffan]

I was unaware that the people at Star Wars (the ones who own the SW IP) wrote an RPG engine and insisted the WotC use it instead of one of their own design. Are you sure about this? Are you sure this isn't just a new RPG designed by WotC more dedicated to SW as a way to customize an RPG for that IP utilizing their own underlying fundamental ideas of how to design an RPG?

Wizards lost the Star Wars license (or more likely, decided that they had picked all the low-hanging fruit and quite a bit more, and decided renewing it wasn't worth it). Fantasy Flight Games then got the license, and made a new game engine (similar to, but not identical to, the one in Warhammer FRP 3rd ed) for it. Wizards has nothing to do with the new Star Wars games (Edge of the Empire, Age of Rebellion, and the upcoming Force and Destiny).

FFG seems to be going in a very different direction from Wizards. Where Wizards provided a lot of support for different Star Wars eras (KOTOR, original movies, prequels, in-between, Legacy), FFG has it all set in the original movie-era (between A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back), and focuses on different RPGs for different campaign types (Edge for Firefly-style games, Age for Rebellion-focused, and Force for Jedi-based stuff), splat books for more player crunch, and adventures (the latter being pretty much completely absent from Wizards' products).

 

[Staffan]

Marvel led with Spiderman and DC led with Batman and Superman, whom most non-geeks know. Once they had established that they could make movies worth watching they moved on to the minor characters. This was good marketing, not much luck. D&D doesn't have any characters of such stature.

Marvel did not lead with Spider-Man. They don't have the rights to make Spider-Man movies. Sony did Spider-Man, which showed that you can make good super-hero movies.

Marvel themselves led with Iron Man in 2008. At the time, many people questioned the wisdom in this, but it seems to have worked out pretty well for them.

 

[Mark CMG]

Wizards lost the Star Wars license (or more likely, decided that they had picked all the low-hanging fruit and quite a bit more, and decided renewing it wasn't worth it).

Ah, I see what's being said here. This is a separate issue than what I am discussing then. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

That's the point. People didn't watch GotG beause of Starlord, they couldn't care less about whoever was the lead. They watched it because they liked the last movie enough, that they gave credit to Marvel no matter who they had put in their new movie

I think GotG's success had little to do with previous Marvel movies: I know I haven't really liked most Marvel movies and wasn't initially planning on watching it. What GotG did have was a fantastic trailer, and a movie that turned out to match the trailer, so all the people who watched went and told their friends, "It's The Princess Bride In Spaaaaaace! You'll love it!"

 

[Redthistle]

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.

Agreed. Big action movies move between cultures with relative ease. We all understand "Monster smash!"

Humor, on the other hand, is so specific to culture that comedies rarely find success when seeking an international audience. Even slapstick, the most basic and broad-based form of humor, can experience difficulty being accepted by a culture outside of the one that produced it.