D&D 3E/3.5 What if 3.5 and 4E split the market?

[delericho]

While I agree on the gist of your post, I'm left wondering if the D&D brand would survive without the rpg part of it?

That's a good question. My gut feeling is "yes", but I might be wrong about that. But then, what I think is largely irrelevant - what do Hasbro think? In any case, I suspect they would let the brand die, rather than let it go.

So, I think the only way D&D will ever not be bound to Hasbro is if some D&D fan with a huge amount of money approaches Hasbro with an offer to pay much more than it's actually worth. I'm not sure that that's actually a bad thing - I feel the current arrangement actually does work reasonably well for D&D.

They might, potentially, grant a license to someone else to develop a new tabletop RPG. I wonder if anyone would take such a thing on, though - they would have to pay licensing fees, agree to content oversight, and then face the big risk that if they make a success of it then Hasbro might choose not to renew the license five years down the line. Would it not be better, then, to just use the OGL to create your own game whole-cloth, especially if D&D is no longer out there to compete with?

 

[BASHMAN]

Y'know, there are people who still play OD&D/1e/2e. Why don't companies just rules for these?

They do! Castles & Crusades & OSRIC are both essentially for people who still like older editions of D&D. C&C emulates older editions [but with AC counting up and THACO replaced with a to hit bonus] and OSRIC downright rips off older editions [so you can make new modules & products, say they are for this new game called OSRIC, when in actuality, they are for 1st ed D&D]

 

[Dragon Snack]

I won't play a game I don't like just to support 'the hobby'. This is coming from someone who seriously looked into opening a game store and has a few friends in the 'industry' (none currently work for WotC).

I skipped 2nd edition (after 2 sessions), I didn't lose sleep over TSRs troubles. In fact, after a few years off, I got back into RPGs with different systems.

If I skip 4.0 (I don't like the changes so I won't play, but I may DM for my group) I won't lose any sleep if anything happens to WotC or 'the Hobby'. I'll play different systems (and already do). I'm sure my friends will survive and I'm sure 'the Hobby' will exsist in some form or another.

Life goes on...

 

[Monkey Boy]

60/40?

Holy cow if I thought the split was going to be even anywhere close to that I would be on that project in a heartbeat.

I cant imagine it more than 10-20%. But a very vocal and rabid 10-20%

If there was any real chance that a competing 3.75 would capture 40% of the market it would be a NO BRAINER to do it, at least in the short term.

Clark

Lets say the split is 20%. Does that make it a worthwhile activity publishing 3.75 even if only as a one off?

 

[dmccoy1693]

Considering I am one of the loudest voices in the "3.5 alive" choir and considering I was the one that started the thread reference in the OP, allow me to share some of my thoughts. First off, let me state that I am not advocating that the market infact be split nor am I advocating that those that want to buy/play 4E should not because the "cool" 3.5 products that can be released into eternity. But I do listen to my fellow forumites as well as the gamers in my local area and it is obvious that some gamers will not be changing editions. To this crowd, the options are to continue to buy 3.5 products or to not buy anything d20 related. In short, there is a market there, whether someone fills it or not.

Odds are, that market won't be big. At first (like while DMs are finishing up exiting campaigns before switching over to 4E), it will be larger, but that market will wane. Eventually it will wane down to OSRIC/C&C size, relative to the different version's popularity when they were the latest and greatest. Will 40% of the current WotC consuming market stay behind, not likely. Even if 40% stays behind initially, many will be back to consuming WotC products after they hear the reviews.

About FLGS going out of business because of dependence upon WotC RPG products, there was a thread on RPG.net in the business section a month or two ago about this very thing. Most of the posters were either FLGS owner or 3rd party publishers. The basic consensus was that any store that was that heavily dependent upon one type of product was asking for trouble. Most FLGS owners that said they were not worried abot a potential 4E flop were those that diversified their stock to include minis, CCGs, comic books, videos, manga, board game, and more.

Then again, I'm just another random guy and my thoughts are not based on anything but "my own meandering experience," as the song goes.

 

[Psion]

2) I am not suggesting it as a likely scenario. I am asking why there are people hoping for it.

I would think that would be pretty straightforward: I need people to play with.

Of course, I don't think of the "market" as being "split" as the "market" is a term that deals with, you know, actually buying and selling of product. From the sounds of things, at least 2 of the big 3 torch-carriers for D20 (Paizo and Necromancer) are moving on to 4e, which makes perfect business sense to me.

Any third party support for 3e holdouts, it appears, will have to be generated ground-up. And that's a tough row to hoe.

Nope, I see it as "split player base" or "split hobby" more than "split market."

EDIT: As far as that goes, I see a 60/40 split as being extremely unlikely. Even 20% sounds generous. WotC might lose 40% of their players/regular buyers (even that seems a bit high... 20-30, maybe), but a sale lost by one is not a sale gained by another in a luxury market. The "replacement" company or companies would have to be very well marketed to pick up even a fraction of the lost sales, and none of the companies that look to be even close to the position of doing that aren't interested.

 

[Lackhand]

The "replacement" company or companies would have to be very well marketed to pick up even a fraction of the lost sales, and none of the companies that look to be even close to the position of doing that aren't interested.

Not to mention 'timely'.

If they wait too long, inertia will set in; players will be playing their games and be unwilling to purchase a new line of core rule books.

If they wait even longer than too long, the 4e furor will die down, and it will be safe for them to release 3.75, but what they will have been doing in the interim becomes critically important. It also decides whether they have the capital to make it the year or two they'd have to wait to avoid being second-comers.

Playtesting takes time. Even if it's just a modification of the 3.x rules: especially if it's just a modification of the 3.x rules.

Which means that in the short term (like, for the next two or three years, say) the options are really to publish 4e, publish 3.5e, or perish. All three are fully workable ideas, though everyone likes the first two more than the last, for some wacky reason.

 

[HelloChristian]

Right now, based on the magical power of my gut....

This is such a good point. Basic D&D is very different from 1e, which is distinct from 2e, which is quite dissimilar from 3e, which may feel like a completely different game from 4e. There are now so many different - yet perfectly playable - versions of the game that players can settle down quite comfortably in the rule set that suits them.

The more the game is re-engineered - and made distinct from its predecessor - the greater the likelihood that fans will be lost along the way.

 

[RFisher]

Nope, I see it as "split player base" or "split hobby" more than "split market."

I suspect that the vast majority of gamers will continue to be system/edition agnostic & happy to play whatever system/edition a GM wants to run.

I know some people have trouble finding players, but I have to believe that is the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I suspect that the vast majority of gamers will continue to be system/edition agnostic & happy to play whatever system/edition a GM wants to run.

I agree, based on my personal experience. Actually, I was in a FLGS the other day and mentioned that I'm running OD&D(1974) and had several complete strangers say they'd like to try it.