Who Makes WotC's Adventures?

There are now three large hardcover adventures for D&D 5th Edition. There's the two-part Tyranny of Dragons campaign produced by Kobold Press; there's Princes of the Apocalypse, from Sasquatch Game Studios; and there's the imminent Out of the Abyss, from Green Ronin publishing. All of these are official, hardcover adventures produced for WotC by third party companies. But how does that actually work? What is the relationship between the company producing the products and the company publishing them? WotC's Jeremy Crawford told me yesterday that the term "outsourcing" is innacurate when it comes to describing this arrangement.

​

If we go back a bit to when I asked Kobold Press' Wolfgang Baur about the process, he told me that "the 5E adventures are produced as a combination of studio work and WotC oversight." He went on to describe it in a little more detail, highlighting a to-and-fro between the companies -- "we'd do some portion of the work, then we would get feedback from WotC on Realmslore, or story beats, or mechanics. Then we did more of the design, and got feedback from swarms of playtesters. Then we turned over another version for feedback on the art and layout. And so forth. It was iterative..." So collaboration clearly takes place all the way through the process.

He describes Kobold Press role as "the heavy lifting in design, development, and editing" with WotC having "crucial input and set the direction for what they wanted".

Moving ahead to now, WotC Jeremy Crawford observes that "It's bizarre to see a few posters on ENWorld mistake our [D&D 5E] collaborations as outsourcing. Each book has been a team effort." The input from WotC isn't just greenlighting the book at various stages; as Jeremy tells us "Our reviews are deep. We create the story & the concept art. We write portions of the books. We design mechanics. Etc.!" As he also points out, the credits page of each book tells us who contributed to each.

So there we have it. These books aren't outsourced to third parties in any traditional sense of that word; the books are written as a collaborative effort with writing and more done by both companies.

 

[Hussar]

I'd argue that avoiding using words with any strong connotations, good or bad, is simply a basic element of good communication. Using too positive words makes you sound "fannish" and is largely just as bad as using words with strong negative baggage. At least when you're writing to clarify.

 

[tyrlaan]

Late to the "party", but that pretty much sounds like outsourcing to me.

But then, why do we care?

I do care that the message feels disingenuous to me. However, I don't care if they do or don't outsource.

I also don't really understand why we care how they go about manufacturing their product. I mean, if they were selling hotdogs, sure I'd want to know the ingredients. But frankly (heh, pun not originally intended), the credits will be in the book, so we will know the "ingredients".

Personally I think this is a topic WotC shouldn't have felt obligated to respond to. I get why they did, since there are clear negative connotations in the minds of some when it comes to outsourcing. I dare say that if the fanbase deserves a wrist slap for something, it's not this response to Crawford's words, but to it's demand to understand the details of the product creation process.

 

[GobiWon]

However, I don't care if they do or don't outsource.

I agree. I'm reassured that WotC was intricately involved with the company they hired to complete this project. I wish Crawford didn't feel the need to spin WotC's involvement. It doesn't really concern me who makes the product as long as it is quality, and I'm sure WotC's involvement and attention to detail will result in a much better product. It seems like there is no longer a need to produce something every month just to meet an arbitrary production schedule, and that is a good thing. I'm cautious, but excited to get a new glimpse at the evolving Realms. I just wish we saw more designers traditionally associated with the Realms attached to this project.

 

[Uchawi]

I am not sure what is so negative about the term outsource, and why there needs to be an explanation. There are pros and cons to contracting some of the work out versus allowing a third party to develop something independently. Because it is hard to match up personalities and mind sets within a company, it is probably double the effort to maintain the same mind with a third party. As long as the standards are there for how to write the adventure, I would assume more independence equals more creativity.

But probably the biggest problem is the slow release schedule and lack of an OGL to even write basic adventures. Anything that is released gets picked apart microscopically and then you end up trying to save face when something does not get a good reception. Or in other words if the adventure paths received awards and where flying off the shelf, then I doubt outsourcing would ever become an issue or a blip on the radar.

 

[Hussar]

I am not sure what is so negative about the term outsource, and why there needs to be an explanation. There are pros and cons to contracting some of the work out versus allowing a third party to develop something independently. Because it is hard to match up personalities and mind sets within a company, it is probably double the effort to maintain the same mind with a third party. As long as the standards are there for how to write the adventure, I would assume more independence equals more creativity.

But probably the biggest problem is the slow release schedule and lack of an OGL to even write basic adventures. Anything that is released gets picked apart microscopically and then you end up trying to save face when something does not get a good reception. Or in other words if the adventure paths received awards and where flying off the shelf, then I doubt outsourcing would ever become an issue or a blip on the radar.

Do you have any evidence of sales of any of the adventure paths?

 

[Owen K.C. Stephens]

At least one reason people in the industry are reacting negatively to the term outsourcing is because that term hasn't been used in situations that are extremely similar to this one.

When Rodney Thompson and I wrote the Star Wars Saga Edition core rulebook, neither of us worked at WotC. We were given free reign to outline the book, make whatever changes to previous editions we wanted, decide what npcs went into it, write it, discuss changes with Gary Sarli, the (also not WotC employee) editor, and brief Chris Perkins as we ant, and take his feedback between turnarounds.

We wrote art orders, discussed format (since it was in a new size ratio), developed each others work, and did a lot more than just "write."

Then the final manuscript went to wotC, where they made development changes and did final art and layout.

No one discussed that manuscript as "outsourced."

When I wrote the Advanced GameMaster's Guide for Green Ronin, I did an outline, wrote the manuscript, did art orders, did some of my own citing, was involved in art approvals, and even wrote art orders for the previous book in the line, which I wasn't otherwise involved with. It would't occur to anyone to call that "outsourcing."

In most cases, the artist for an rpg book isn't an employee of the publisher. The writers often aren't employees of the publisher. Editors frequently aren;t employees of the publisher. I know of books where every single of these steps was done by freelancers from outside the company, meaning the only thing the publisher did was conceive, coordinate, and do final development and approvals.

In this case, the freelancers are all part of a single group that can better coordinate their efforts. It's weird to me that people want to call that outsourcing, as opposed to books where it's still outside sources doing everything but they are less able to work together to do it.

 

[GobiWon]

In this case, the freelancers are all part of a single group that can better coordinate their efforts. It's weird to me that people want to call that outsourcing, as opposed to books where it's still outside sources doing everything but they are less able to work together to do it.

... but if hiring another corporate entity to do these things is not outsourcing, what is? What in your mind constitutes outsourcing if not this.

 

[oakthorne]

... but if hiring another corporate entity to do these things is not outsourcing, what is? What in your mind constitutes outsourcing if not this.

The point is that the term is meaningless, because it's being used to suggest that it's different from the way RPG books have literally always been made, and that's just not true. "Outsourcing" suggests a different way of doing things. The book is made in literally the same way that RPGs are always made (with the possible exception of core rulebooks). You use the term to differentiate a production method (which relies on "outsiders") that is at odds with previous production methods (with the insinuation that it's usually "insiders").

It's not different. It's literally the same. So the term is wholly meaningless, because the thing you're trying to communicate with it is patently not true. That's all.

 

[Mistwell]

... but if hiring another corporate entity to do these things is not outsourcing, what is? What in your mind constitutes outsourcing if not this.

Freelancers are also companies you know, most of the time. They might be a sole proprietorship, but they're still outside companies. How come you never called freelancer usage "outsourcing"?

 

[Celtavian]

... but if hiring another corporate entity to do these things is not outsourcing, what is? What in your mind constitutes outsourcing if not this.

In general, outsourcing implies sending jobs overseas.

Technically, you're correct. Domestic contracting jobs are outsourcing. The negative light the word inspires is due to companies sending jobs overseas to save money.