What would WotC need to do to win back the disenchanted?

[TheYeti1775]

Such high hopes for this thread.

How about we just sum up what things folks who are willing to spend money on would like to see?

1. MAC / Mulit-platform Support (DDI) - This is for your current edition. There are users out there that only use Apple Products. Imagine all those Iphone/MAC users being able to directly run their Character Builders and what not.

2. PDF Sales (this has appeal to users of all editions) - while it takes me less than 5 minutes to find tons of illegal copies of all editions, many wouldn't mind paying for a legal copy. Profitablity, well if it isn't just say so. No one here would be mad for a company coming out and saying it isn't profitable.
Perhaps a middle ground for it would be instead of PDF, to offer a Print On Demand only method. It would prevent the electronic copy from 'piracy' and still deliver a product you already have in house to a customer base.

3. DDI support of older editions (spefically the Builders) - This brings many (like myself) into the fold again. I've tried out the Character Builder for 4E, I liked it a lot. It helped me a heck of a lot when learning the rules for the one and only 4E game I've been in. Several in this thread have agreed with me that we would sign on for the DDI to gain this for older editions. Start with the Core 3.5E books and you might be pleasantly suprised at the results. And with the new members within the DDI you expand your base of viewers of your 'new' products that come out. Perhaps to justify the expense, the prior edition set of Builders is an additional one time cost. I think many of us would go for that. $50 for a product I'll use over and over again is fairly acceptable in my opinion. Heck the cost if it was for each edition would be minor to me as the use I would get out of it I could justify.

4. DDI support of older editions (articles/features/new stuff) - This is a little harder to justify as it is 'new stuff' for the old stuff. But again its olive branch time here, that of WotC recognizing it's roots and that of the 'grognards' coming back into the customer base again. There is a happy medium that could be found within this. Perhaps subscriber only submitted articles/features/new stuff? All of which is submitted to a fan only peer group committee. I'm quite sure there are a number of fans/subcribers out there that would volunteer to help sift through submissions to weed out the chaff. The cost to WotC in this would be the server space/bandwidth to host what the group submits to them. I think it would also all a metric to be seen by WotC management for the interest levels of various articles, and new talent. Stipulate it becomes WotC property (but with a credit given) when posted to solve your copyright issues on a montetary scale. (I'm sure Danny could lawyer that up a bit better for me.)

5. Old Module re-release - Using Tomb of Horrors for an example. Updated to the current edition but includes the old copy within it. What better way to introduce new players to the classic; old players without the old copy; and a way to show how to convert from old to new (for those that don't play current edition so they try it out) all in one product. Do it on a limited scale, see how it goes. If it flops say so, and it would be accepted. If it succeeds, enjoy the $$ of the grognards joining your ranks of customers.

6. Old Setting Releases - I think your doing good with the Old Setting releases like Darksun coming up. This could bring many back into the fold as well as their 'legacy' campaigns could be updated to the current edition. Sticking with the 3 book rule per setting is a smart move and prevent's WotC overexposure like TSR did when we were saturated with Settings.
The only thing is with this, don't blow up the world just to blow up the world. Looking at Forgotten Realms in this case. The one 4E game I played was an FR world. Nothing I knew of in the FR really survived right, it no longer felt like the Realms campaigns of past.



Perhaps one of you still has contact with guys like Scott Rouse that used to work with WotC and could get them to chime in with their thoughts. While it wouldn't be an official WotC stance, perhaps they could let us know why one thing or another wouldn't be feasible. Or even better one of you with real WotC contacts, cut and paste all the ideas of the thread and send them in. Worst that could happen is they don't respond, best case they give a little thought to it and give us their thoughts on it.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Honestly, I think 3E does a better job of supporting the 4E approach than vice-versa. But thats just my take on it.

What would you say "the 3E approach" is? Genuine question - I simply don't get it. I played 3e and enjoyed it. But wouldn't go back (losing the kinaesthetic element alone would mean a lot - as would worrying about turning up with Angel Summoner in a party of BMX Bandits (or more rarely vise-versa)).

The player is the same no mater what system you use. This conversation, is not at all about the player. It is all about the mechanics between the covers of the book.

A game that is about making the character be as realistic as possible first is different than a game that is about mechanical equity first.

And I am honestly surprised that either of these descriptions can be used to describe 3e. (GURPS, possibly. But you have fighters with dozens of hit points, mages who cast great big spells, and ten million chickens in Greyhawk). 3e is IMO larger than life fantasy with a strong nod to simulationism as long as you don't press it too far. 4e simply runs on Holywood Physics (and I see why people don't like that).

It is also just as easy to roleplay superman in a 100 point GURPS Supers game as it is to roleplay superman in a 600 point GURPS Supers game. But those two games are simply not equal in merit when it comes to actually doing a good job of mechanically simulating the experience of being superman.

100 point GURPS Superman: "I Am Superman. Faster than a speeding skateboard. Can leap..." *splat*

You can't IMO RP Superman in a 100 point GURPS Supers game at all. (You can RP an insane man who thinks he's Superman. But you can't get close to Superman himself - his abilities are essential to making him what he is. He can not worry about bullets because he is bullet proof.)

If you don't that just means you were not benefiting form the same elements of 3E that I was.

Again, which elements? Genuine curiosity.

And when it comes to elements, I have a much easier time in 4e of playing a big burly fighter who barges people with his shield and forces them backwards because the mechanical support is there to play this way. Other than Wind Blast, I have problems with 3e wizards using forceful spells - because the force produced doesn't actually mechanically move anything. 4e Wizards produce explosions that throw people into walls or off cliffs.

In 3e a weapon attack just does damage most of the time. In 4e, an attack is often accompanied by movement as part of the attack. I find the movement included much more inspiring for both visualisation and roleplay. (And a far better simulation even than standing there and trading blows.)

On the other hand, as a design decision, some of my favourite 3e characters were cut. (Artificers for one - and no, the 4e artificer doesn't come close). I can see why, much as I miss them. There's a space I enjoy that 4e doesn't try to reach.

****************************************************

Getting back onto topic, I wonder why WoTC doesn't allow Print on Demand support for the edition before last. Anyone still playing 3.0 is not going to switch now, let alone those still playing 2e or 1e. And PoD would provide advantages both ways - people who really wanted the older books could still buy them (i.e. more money for WoTC), but the price would be higher and mainstream shops wouldn't be carrying them. Bring 3.5 back after Essentials (or have a five year lag or something). Yes, it's mercenary. But who'd be interested?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd have to disagree. 3rd Edition made God himself into a D&D player. And if WotC had continued publishing it, it would have converted the entire population of invisible, phase-shifted martians into players, too. We would have been receiving first contact with alien species later this year if it wasn't for 4th Edition.

... statements which are all as unverifiable as what you just posted. We can certainly say, from anecdotal evidence, that there are some new players playing 4th Edition. But is that any more relevant than the Pepsi drinkers who started drinking New Coke?

We don't know. And we have no way of knowing it.

And although we have more evidence of the market splitting than we do of new play acquisition, it's still highly anecdotal just how severe that split may be.

We know that 3rd Edition reconsolidated the D&D player base, brought lapsed players back into the fold, and introduced new players because WotC shared (some of) its marketing research with us back then. AFAIK, WotC has done nothing like that with 4th Edition.

Actually, we know that the number of non-adopters of 4Ed is a non-trival number from the sales of 3.X products from companies like Paizo.

We know from sales figures that other RPGs in the market have not experienced dips in their sales that can be attributed to anything else but the general economic slowdown (which is to say, everybody in the market is basically retaining their market share).

We also know from sales figures that certain 4Ed releases are at least as strong in the market as 3.5 was. Those sales have to come from somewhere.

Some will be converts- we saw on these very boards early adopters of 4Ed talking about how they actually sold some of their older game stuff (including, but not limited to 3.5 stuff) to buy the new edition. Some will be people with the disposable income to support multiple systems (that would be people like me). But the bulk of the sales have to come from another source, and that would be new blood.

 

[Herschel]

The issue is what certain people want vs. what is profitable.

When they are equal, the product generally gets made. When they're not, then it's not. It's not personal, it's business. At the end of the day we all just have to deal with it and move on.

Personal demand, no matter how fervent, is not market demand. There are many things I would like (like a lot more Genasi minis and a mini of Prit ), but I'm pretty sure most will never happen.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As I understand it, recording studios get paid up front, not after the fact.

Right, they do.

But bands can't take the money they don't make from sales that are eaten by piracy to reinvest in the next album.

Recording studios are a volume business (no joke intended)- they basically get paid the same rate whether they're recording an album by Rock & Roll Hall of Famer Joe or Just Got Signed Yesterday Joe. IOW, they make a big chunk of their money from all the little bands that book their time.

If the only people who can afford studio rates are the big guys, studio rates will climb and studios will gradually start to decline in number. This is because they won't have enough clientele- not only won't the new guys be able to afford the higher rates, the big guys will increase their trend of investing in their own private home studios.

This all translates into jobs lost and opportunities lost...and new music stuck in obscurity.

Yes, recording yourself is cheaper than ever before- I own some stuff myself- but all the home recording gear in the world isn't going to get you the skills of a professional studio crew....or the services of a producer like Rick Rubin (who gets a royalty)...or a quality agent (who gets a royalty)...or a manager (who gets a royalty)...or a tour manager (who gets a royalty)...

And if you're not selling your music as a new band, you also can't afford the services of accountants and lawyers (PICK ME! PICK ME!) who help you manage your money and contracts so you can make music.

Don't get me wrong- giving away a song or 2 for publicity and marketing purposes can break a band- but when an entire album's worth of songs is being pirated, the band will be broke.

 

[renau1g]

5. Old Module re-release - Using Tomb of Horrors for an example. Updated to the current edition but includes the old copy within it. What better way to introduce new players to the classic; old players without the old copy; and a way to show how to convert from old to new (for those that don't play current edition so they try it out) all in one product. Do it on a limited scale, see how it goes. If it flops say so, and it would be accepted. If it succeeds, enjoy the $$ of the grognards joining your ranks of customers.

This would be cool. I love what they did with the 4e version I got for free...

 

[Umbran]

Right, they do.

But bands can't take the money they don't make from sales that are eaten by piracy to reinvest in the next album.

The links I posted (among other sources) lead me to believe that the band is typically making something like $23 off of every $1000 in album sales - that is a measly 2.3%! While you can argue that means that every single dollar of stolen sales means all that much more, my thought is instead that their production and distribution economic model is so broken that if you removed the piracy, they'd probably still not see that money.

Bands have been in the same basic position for a long time now - since before piracy was made so easy by the internet. They haven't been making a whole lot on album sales since the creation of the major record labels.

My point is that somehow, bands continue to survive, by selling things beyond the music itself. The producers of D&D generally have less chance to sell things other than the actual content of the game, and so have greater fears about infringement, such that their reaction may not be wise, but is perhaps somewhat understandable.

 

[WizarDru]

And if you're not selling your music as a new band, you also can't afford the services of accountants and lawyers (PICK ME! PICK ME!) who help you manage your money and contracts so you can make music.

As Umbran points out, folks like Courtney Love and others have revealed the financial details of working with big recording companies and how bands must 'recoup' the company's investment. Bands can be selling gold records and still not be putting food on the table. The system is horribly broken. But this also highlights a major difference between the RPG market and music. The Grateful Dead let fans tape their music all the time...encouraged them, in fact. Because they made their money from touring. OK GO monetizes their music in lots of ways, such as selling flash drives of the concert you literally just heard in the lobby after the show. Many other musicians make much more money by going with small, independent labels and a dedicated fanbase. When's the last time you bought an album by Thomas Dolby-Robertson, Colin James Hay or Al Stewart? I've seen each one of them on stage in the last two years and bought their albums directly from their websites or from CD-Baby. They were cheaper than the big labels and even if their sales are only 5-10,000 copies, they've made a lot more money than the big labels would give them (if they'd even produce them at all, which is unlikely).

Piracy is a problem, but the music industry's issues with it and the RPG industry's issues with it are not the same, nor are the economics.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The links I posted (among other sources) lead me to believe that the band is typically making something like $23 off of every $1000 in album sales - that is a measly 2.3%! While you can argue that means that every single dollar of stolen sales means all that much more, my thought is instead that their production and distribution economic model is so broken that if you removed the piracy, they'd probably still not see that money.

<snip>

My point is that somehow, bands continue to survive, by selling things beyond the music itself.

If you go into the music biz expecting your band to make millions, you're in for a surprise. An average 5 piece band whose album goes Gold has a take-home of about $18k per member.

That is below poverty level. There is a reason why you used to hear so much about groupies in the LA metal scene putting bands up in their living rooms.

But its the record sales that gets the record company to put its financial muscle behind tours, high-end merchandise and the like. And what gets an artist a better deal down the road. At his peak, MJ's royalty rate was close to $0.40 out of every $1.00 sold.

The producers of D&D generally have less chance to sell things other than the actual content of the game, and so have greater fears about infringement, such that their reaction may not be wise, but is perhaps somewhat understandable.

I can understand the impulse to withdraw, but it just runs counter to the realities of the IP market.

Artists like Ani Di Franco are entirely self-released. She owns 100% of her albums & merch. She still gets pirated...and still keeps her stuff out there.

D&D isn't just a game anymore- its a brand. As others have pointed out, the P&P RPG is probably the least profitable segment of its product line- they make more money from things like themed T-shirts, the video/computer game licenses and whatever TV and movie deals they work out (dreck though they may be). But without the underlying RPG, all that other stuff dries up.

The legal pdfs for such a big product as D&D should outperform illegal ones in the market (thats been the story with most major brands), which my instinct tells me should at least mean it would be a breakeven product. But even if they don't, WotC could look at them as a part of their promo/marketing budget, a loss-leader to get people to consider their merch, computer games and so forth.

But merely withdrawing from the market simply gives all the potential revenue to the pirates.

Now, I know Hasbro is a big game company, and they're used to dealing with IP issues. You'd think they'd understand the digital piracy issue. But 99% of their games & IP involve physical elements not easily downloaded and pirated- they may be completely lost at sea on this.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Piracy is a problem, but the music industry's issues with it and the RPG industry's issues with it are not the same, nor are the economics.

True. Its more like the rest of the publishing industry- I just happen to be a music guy.

But the points remain: AFAIK, no publisher has simply withdrawn their work from circulation out of piracy concerns. They prosecute pirates, they don't surrender the market to them.