D&D 5E What would success look like for Next?

[adamc]

I was going to ask whether folks thought Next would be successful, and then I realized I wasn't sure what that would even mean...

I'm a 4e fan. That said, I'm sure Next will be a fun game, if not universally then for enough groups to declare it a success from a design standpoint. I'm sure some folks playing 4e or Pathfinder or 3.5 will switch to it, and I'm sure they will continue being able to sell D&D to newbies at some (modest) rate.

I don't have any real understanding of the economics involved or of what they'd need to sell to consider this a financial success. I presume it's probably significantly higher than what 4e _was_ selling (because otherwise they wouldn't have been in such a rush to abandon 4e). Having conceded my ignorance, I'm skeptical that they will achieve this, because of the other games I know of going on, most stick with whatever version folks already know/like/own the books for. I'm guessing that most Pathfinder folks will stick with Pathfinder, 3.5 folks will stick with 3.5, etc. 4e may be a little bit of a wild card because so many of us rely on the online tools, but even there, I expect powerfully conservative forces.

There was a lot of rhetoric at the start of this process about how fans of every version could enjoy Next. Notwithstanding my skepticism of the potential, in practice don't think Next will really have this effect. So I'm wondering: what would success look like here? Is there an achievable level of success that will matter to Wizards as a company?

 

[Incenjucar]

It's going to be whatever bar has been set by Hasbro. We're not going to be privy to it, and we'll only be able to really tell if it's working or not based on how many times they start to take desperate actions or course reversals. You could tell that 4E was struggling to meet expectations because of the introduction of Essentials and the weird packaging experiments that followed.

Basically, if the 5E roll out lacks drama and confusion after about two years, things are probably going well! A boring edition is a healthy edition.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

Realistically, if there is a sixth edition in about five years, I would say it was a success. Failure would be an "indefinite hiatus" with no new tabletop product.

I would love for the game to get off the edition treadmill, but I don't think that is going to happen unless they come up with a better way of releasing content.

 

[Jacob Marley]

I was going to ask whether folks thought Next would be successful, and then I realized I wasn't sure what that would even mean...

I'm a 4e fan. That said, I'm sure Next will be a fun game, if not universally then for enough groups to declare it a success from a design standpoint. I'm sure some folks playing 4e or Pathfinder or 3.5 will switch to it, and I'm sure they will continue being able to sell D&D to newbies at some (modest) rate.

I don't have any real understanding of the economics involved or of what they'd need to sell to consider this a financial success. I presume it's probably significantly higher than what 4e _was_ selling (because otherwise they wouldn't have been in such a rush to abandon 4e). Having conceded my ignorance, I'm skeptical that they will achieve this, because of the other games I know of going on, most stick with whatever version folks already know/like/own the books for. I'm guessing that most Pathfinder folks will stick with Pathfinder, 3.5 folks will stick with 3.5, etc. 4e may be a little bit of a wild card because so many of us rely on the online tools, but even there, I expect powerfully conservative forces.

There was a lot of rhetoric at the start of this process about how fans of every version could enjoy Next. Notwithstanding my skepticism of the potential, in practice don't think Next will really have this effect. So I'm wondering: what would success look like here? Is there an achievable level of success that will matter to Wizards as a company?

The bolded portion isn't necessarily true. It appears that the costs associated with producing D&D Next appear to be significantly lower than the costs associated with producing 4th Edition (i.e. smaller staff, no DDi development, etc.). This should translate into stronger ratios and a better profit margin for Hasbro. I'd say if D&D Next's initial sales are similar to 4th Edition's, then Hasbro would be quite happy. The bigger question is what sort of staying power will D&D Next have? Will it continue to generate a strong revenue stream 3-5 years down the line? That is a much tougher question to answer. I think that there is a model that works and I think they are taking steps in the right direction.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Success is going to look like Hasboro regaining the D&D movie rights.
Success is going to look like those Lego things flying off the shelves.
Success is going to look like Baldur's Gate clones for the iPad.
Success is going to look like more Drizzt board games.

IMO there'll be cross-promotions with the TTRPGs, especially the campaign settings which can be used to re-market the same merchandise again and again. And that's not to say that TTRPGs no longer matter at all.

But--Mearls and the rest of the D&D business team has been uncharacteristically clear about the plan going forward. I don't see any reason to doubt them on this.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

"Success" has lots of different definitions... I see - at least - three for now:

Economic success: whatever floats Hasbro's boat, but most probably includes strenghtening the D&D brand name and supporting sales of all different products: movies, video games, board games, novels, toys, ... Tha actual sales of D&D The Roleplaying Game are probably not the decisive factor.

Gamer success: reunite the fan base and provide a game which satisfies the different preferences. This goal is the hardest to meet as gamers' tastes are radically different and there's a certain tendency for, let's say, exaggereted rhetoric in the community.

My personal success: a clean interface for the different options and modules, so I can quickly and easily configure the game for a certain campaign or maybe even part of a campaign. 1e-esque Tomb of Horrors? 2e-esque storytelling, 4e-esque tactical fights? If I can run such campaigns with using switches in 5e, I'd call it a success.

 

[delericho]

$50M a year, not including the first year.

(Note: the number might be wrong.)

 

[Zardnaar]

I would say.

1. Outselling 4th ed on 4Es release.
2. Getting back to 3.5s 25-30 million a year in revenue.

 

[Halivar]

If I like it.

 

[Dausuul]

Basically, if the 5E roll out lacks drama and confusion after about two years, things are probably going well! A boring edition is a healthy edition.

I think this sums it up pretty well.