Third Party: If So, Then What?

[jmucchiello]

If you detail a forest, that doesn't prevent people from picking up your product. After all, there's plenty of room for forests! and plenty of wilderness areas described in existing 4e WOTC products and modules.

The more detail you add to a forest, the more likely it contains elements that don't mesh with the forests the party has already encountered. The DM can't drop a new forest into an existing campaign willy-nilly. If his forests are bugbear infested your adventure with formians controlling vast forest areas will be out of place.

Now, granted, in 4e, you could easily run the adventure using the formian statblocks but calling the monsters bugbears, but I don't think that is why the DM bought the adventure.

A setting is not .... you can insert your own mini setting?

You missed the point of this sentence. In the front of the sentence you said you don't need a whole new setting to make your adventures diverse. In the end of the sentence you suggest that creating a mini-setting helps with diversity. This was a WTF moment for me. Which is it? Make a setting or don't make a setting?

Also, please don't take my stance as an absolute. I get the sense that you feel I think it is impossible not to create a whole setting in order to create an adventure. That's obviously false. It is entirely possible to write hundreds of adventures with no implied setting. I just say that doing so would be (potentially) boring, that it would be hard to differentiate them in the market.

The point is that 3pps are not flocking to 4e and writing a lot of adventures. Why? Ultimately they've decided to either do something more appealing (where appealing could range from monetarily more valuable to intellectually more valuable) or do nothing at all. Writing 4e adventures puts has restrictions that other RPG writing does not have. Apparently these restrictions are significant enough to impact the number of adventures being written for 4e.

 

[Mark]

3pps can't write for FR, Dark Sun or Eb. None of that stuff is in the GSL.

That's the bottom line in this discussion and the reason why most people won't buy 3PP adventures. WotC's isolationist stance, restrictive GSL and policy of driving everything toward their DDI has created a near-impossible task for a 3PP that wants to be tied to D&D. (Oddly, that policy might also be why non-core WotC books seem to be having trouble selling.)


To the OP, have you seen anything in this thread yet that gives hope to 3PP's sales? I've yet to read something new or potentially effective. A site like EN World has a huge amount of 4E support and barely 150 people (out of a needed 1000) have signed up to spend a measly $3/month (and there's no real telling if that's all 4E resource users). Honestly, I think the whole 3PP community has to reinvent itself completely separate from 4E if it wants to flourish (not just even survive, which is in question). As to EN World, it would appear that it will either close its doors at the end of the year or need to move away from depending on (reporting on? supporting at all?) 4E, as well, and find a way to garner support from a segment of the community that is willing to step up and pay for the resource of having her around.

 

[Jack99]

(Oddly, that policy might also be why non-core WotC books seem to be having trouble selling.)

Based on..?

 

[AllisterH]

I always thought WOTC wanted 3PP to make adventures....nt so much things like Conan and Monster guides.

 

[ggroy]

(Oddly, that policy might also be why non-core WotC books seem to be having trouble selling.)

By "non-core WotC", are you referring to books like Open Grave, Draconomicon, Dungeon Delve, Manual of the Planes, Divine Power, Martial Power, etc ...? At several local FLGS, the owners have mentioned that these particular titles were not particularly hot sellers, compared to the original core books and PHB2.

Or is there something more problematic going on, such as these "non-core WotC" books only selling 2 or 3 copies at many popular FLGS?

Honestly, I think the whole 3PP community has to reinvent itself completely separate from 4E if it wants to flourish (not just even survive, which is in question).

Do you envision seeing something like what happened in the 80s and 90s, with different publishers doing their own thing independently of one another? Some of the d20 veterans have already been moving that direction and away from d20, such as Mongoose and Green Ronin.

 

[ggroy]

That's the bottom line in this discussion and the reason why most people won't buy 3PP adventures.

The only 4E 3PP adventures I have purchased regularly over the last year, are the Goodman Dungeon Crawl Classics modules. I haven't really bought many other 4E 3PP modules. (I did pick up the first two Lands of Darkness modules by Expeditious Retreat Press, but didn't find them particularly useful for my campaign. I don't think I'll be buying any more of them anytime soon).

If there is another upcoming 4E 3PP company publishing adventures in print, they would have to be at least as decent as the 4E Dungeon Crawl Classics modules released so far, for me to more than just skim through them.

Recently I skimmed through the "Scarrport: City of Secrets" book at a local FLGS, but found that it would be almost next to useless for my present campaign due to the presence of new 3PP classes, races, etc ... (I didn't buy it, and put it back on the shelf).

Mongoose Publishing : For All Your Gaming Needs ...

The players in my 4E game are not receptive at all to any new non-DDI 3PP classes, paragon paths, etc ... About year ago, I even offered them the use of some 4E 3PP books like "Forgotten Heroes: Fang, Fist, and Song" (by Goodman) and "Advanced Player's Guide" (by Expeditious Retreat Press) before the 4E PHB2 was released, but there were still no takers.

A year ago back in the summer and fall of 2008, I was more receptive towards 4E 3PP books whether they were adventure modules or crunch heavy splatbooks. With the DDI character builder achieving such a huge dominance very quickly over the last year or so, today I don't even bother anymore with 4E 3PP crunch heavy splatbooks which are player specific.

To the OP, have you seen anything in this thread yet that gives hope to 3PP's sales? I've yet to read something new or potentially effective.

I'm not the OP, but so far not many announced 4E 3PP titles in the pipeline look all that compelling to me. At this point, I'll be taking a "wait and see" approach for the upcoming announced print 4E 3PP titles like: Freeport, Nevermore, Amethyst, Age of Legend, Scarred Lands, etc ... If any of these books have too much stuff that my DDI character builder "addicted" players will object to, I don't think I will be buying many of them.

I simply won't buy any more books which will sit on my bookshelf collecting dust, which have very little to no use in my game (beyond just reading the book once). The crappy economy isn't helping much either, where I've been spending less overall in general.

 

[BryonD]

That's the bottom line in this discussion and the reason why most people won't buy 3PP adventures. WotC's isolationist stance, restrictive GSL and policy of driving everything toward their DDI has created a near-impossible task for a 3PP that wants to be tied to D&D.

I really don't think not being able to publish FR or Ebb material has anything to do with it. You couldn't do that under the OGL either.

The GSL (even the "improved" version) certainly is a problem. But the bottom line is that a viable market isn't there.

 

[jmucchiello]

This ended up pretty long and rambling... using s-blocks to avoid the Wall of Text effect.

Perhaps this is why I missed this when it was posted. Thanks for answering....

A few over half of 30 Living FR players use DDI and a little over half buy 3pp products and the split between those that do both or one is relatively even. This implies that 3pp purchasing is orthogonal to DDI usage. But I doubt the sample size is statistically valid (nor the data collection statistically sound either).

You pointed out that a flaw with this group is they can't use 3pp products in the LFR game. I think the other flaw with this group is they all play LFR so they are not representative of "normal" gamers. It probably takes a bit more dedication than average to the hobby to join a living campaign. But I admit that is just a guess.

It would be interesting if we could get sample data outside LFR to support or disprove that DDI versus 3pp purchasing is orthogonal.

 

[JoeGKushner]

A site like EN World has a huge amount of 4E support and barely 150 people (out of a needed 1000) have signed up to spend a measly $3/month (and there's no real telling if that's all 4E resource users).

What does 4e have to do with supporting EN World, which also has a large Pathfinder/OGL group? Or people who play both? Or neither and prefer Burning Wheel?

 

[Ariosto]

It is entirely possible to write hundreds of adventures with no implied setting. I just say that doing so would be (potentially) boring, that it would be hard to differentiate them in the market.

I think you mean "explicit" setting, at least as I understand the terms; the 4e core books give an implied setting (with notable bits of explicit detail in some areas).

If your scenarios depend on variant character classes or the like, then you're effectively binding people to your game (e.g., Empire of the Petal Throne or Metamorphosis Alpha rather than just "D&D").

I understand that has had some success for TSR and WotC -- but the more generic, implied-setting approach has been successful as well (and maybe more so in terms of units sold, profits, and/or years sustained). Even TSR's Forgotten Realms modules did not necessarily require departures from baseline AD&D.