Why D&D is slowly cutting its own throat.


log in or register to remove this ad

No, it doesn't. And no they aren't. They farmed out much of the "fluff", and thus cut their responsibility to produce loss-leaders, while retaining the profitable portion of their business. Which has allowed mammoth volumes of "fluff" to be produced. It was a canny and far-sighted move.

I think you have this backwards. The farmed the crunch of the game via the SRD and the OGL. The SRD does not contain fluff - or at least it contains as little fluff as WotC can manage. They retained to themselves the fluff, which they either license (in the case of fluff with percieved low margins of return) to someone else or develop themselves precisely because they recognize at some level that the fluff is more valuable. Meanwhile, they allow massive amounts of crunch to be released - even though it directly competes with any crunch they might want to print - because they no that there fluff is mainly where the money is in the long term. But the current product line - sans Eberron which is still waiting for a great module IMO - seems to be emphasising crunch over fluff, which in my opinion is maximizing your short term profit while neglecting your long term investment.

I think the OGL is a great idea, but it will look like the height of folly if some other company out there ends up creating intellectual property (not covered under the OGL) which has move value than WotC's intellectual property and people ultimately leave the game because they find someone elses setting to be more compelling that WotC's properties. One way to defend against this would be to continue to get near universal penetration of the market the way modules like S1, I6, X2 and so forth have near universal penetration of the market. Settings are great, but I still think that they need great adventures as hooks. It maybe that the best way to do that now is with electronic modules like Neverwinter Nights or MMORPG's, but if that is true then it makes me a little bit sad.
 

Mark said:
This is news?

No. Which is why I'm suprised its contriversial.

I'm mostly asking, why aren't there more great adventures out there? And implicitly, do we love a game mostly because of the adventures that we've had in it?

I admit to having some biases. I'm first and foremost a DM; that's how I've spent most of my gaming time. The only true homebrew I've ever encountered is my own. Whenever I was a PC, I was playing in some variation of a published setting and often an adventure based on a published module - so this of course strongly influences what I remember as a player. Second, I'm getting old, I'm about to be a father, and I doubt I'll have time to develop adventures in the way that I used to. So the lack of modules on the market that I find really compelling is disappointing.
 


Celebrim said:
I'm mostly asking, why aren't there more great adventures out there? And implicitly, do we love a game mostly because of the adventures that we've had in it?

I think there are really great adventures out there if you look hard enough, it's just not usually WotC putting them out. The Freeport modules, Of Sound Mind, Rappan Athuk, etc.- all are good (at least by reputation). And don't forget the content of Dungeon.

As to your second question, I'd hazard that we love the game because of the adventures but not necessarily the modules.
 

Celebrim said:
I'm mostly asking, why aren't there more great adventures out there?

I think there are, but because there is a multitude of publishers now, rather than the one that dominated the market back in the day, no one module appeals to everyone, so you don't hear about it the same way. Also, the market has matured; simple dungeon crawls don't have the same appeal as they used to, except in nostalgic value. I have the "Serpent" trilogy of adventures for the Scarred Lands. I think they are fantastic modules. But how many people have used them? Not many outside of the Scarred Lands players because it to almost too setting specific to transfer to someone else's campaign. They published them and yet a year or so later, the line came to an end. Obviously modules were not what was needed to keep the line alive.

And implicitly, do we love a game mostly because of the adventures that we've had in it?
Of course we love the game for the adventures. I certainly don't love the game for the cool content, or a great cahracter generation system or whatever. I've had plenty of games with those elements which I have not loved because I never played great adventures in them. But do we love the game because someone published a great adventure, or because we played in one? I could care less who wrote it; WotC, my DM, Necromacer Games, Monte Cook. All I care about is that I had a good time.
 

the Jester said:
I think there are really great adventures out there if you look hard enough, it's just not usually WotC putting them out. The Freeport modules, Of Sound Mind, Rappan Athuk...

You lost me at Rappan Athuk. If all the early modules were like Rappan Athuk, then dungeons would deserve all the bad reputation that they have with some people. Granted, there were a few inventive encounters, but mostly it looked like something I wrote back in junior high and it reminded me of my least favorite (at least of those I played) 1st edition module 'S4: Lost Caverns of Tsojconth'. It seemed really and unnecessarily primitive to me, as if later modules hadn't proved you could hang superdungeons in the framework of a compelling story. It's exposure to the insides of the Rappan Athuk books (and to a lesser extent Bonegarden) which makes me highly skeptical when people tell me that Necromancer Games is putting out great modules.
 



Celebrim said:
No. Which is why I'm suprised its contriversial.

Seems obvious to me but my perspective might be skewed by having RPG'd since 1974 (primarily as a DM and with my own homebrew) and my long term interest in my own burgeoning RPG Publishing company.

The mechanics have changed over time but its the flavor that is protected legally and that endures. IMO, the decision to produce adventures can say a lot about a company. Is the company in it for the long haul and will they get a correlated return on their resource investment. If a company has no choice but to watch, or is only interested in, the bottom line, they will certainly find it hard to justify producing adventures.

Adventures require more flavor than mechanics (most of the mechanics are written elsewhere, though you can throw in a few new bobbles). By their nature they can only appeal to a sliver of the market since they are level-dependant and circumstantially restrictive (i.e. geared toward a type of situation whether it be environmental or philosophical or otherwise). Adventures are not, as has been said many times before, immediate money makers individually or on their face.

However, for my own part I believe that publishing adventures is important to the long term growth of my company. I have one available for sale and three for FREE with more to come.

The Whispering Woodwind 2nd-level (easily scalable 1st-4th)

Cooperative Dungeon 01 - Terror and Blasphemy 14th-level

CD 02 - Halls of Anarchy 7th-level

CD 03 - Crypt of Damnation 5th-level

I believe there is a growing section of the market that, much like yourself, has a continuing interest in the hobby but less and less time to devote to the behind-the-scenes prep work required to run a top-notch campaign. I think that growing segment can be supported with quality materials that aren't all about power creep and shiny new toys creating obsolescence in the books already on your shelf. So, congrats on the impending fatherhood and I hope that you find my publishing efforts useful to your needs! :)


As always,
Mark Clover
(The Godfather of Gaming ;) )
www.CreativeMountainGames.com
 

Remove ads

Top