WotC Wizard's Future Plans Has 3 Big Problems: Ft. The Professor of Tolarion Community College

In any case ... pretty much pure clickbait conflating MtG with D&D while making dubious claims. I have no idea what the future holds. This video did nothing to enlighten me.

I've got a gloomy feeling that a bunch of Youtubers discovered that bashing WotC was a lucrative endeavour during the OGL mess (when, to be fair, WotC as an organisation thoroughly deserved whatever flak they copped), decided that this was a click stream they wanted in on, and will be doing their best to ensure that the early January state of scandal and rage and guys in black t-shirts pulling theatrically shocked faces on video thumbnails continues indefinitely.

I mean, there's a whole cottage industry of clickbait videos dissecting every microsecond of every Marvel trailer, show, movie or interview and drawing tenuous longbow conclusions about WHAT IT REALLY MEANS FOR PHASE 712 or WHY ALL THE AVENGERS FEAR THIS CHARACTER or EASTER EGGS YOU MISSED IN THE TITLE CREDITS OF SHE-HULK. Obviously WotC is a smaller fish than Marvel, but some of the same dynamics seem to be in play, depressingly enough.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
We aren't that rare,
Rare, no, but certainly a minority of customers.
and less experienced fans do listen when we say WotC did a half assed job on these products.
That's up to debate. I haven't seen this kind of complaint broadly. But I am also not super keyed in and just keep one eye on reddit.

Are 15 year olds mad about Spelljammer? I'm guessing not.
 

Are 15 year olds mad about Spelljammer? I'm guessing not.
I honestly have no idea, but I'd be guessing too.

One thing though - this isn't 1992 when everyone's opinions about products were generally only known to themselves or their gaming groups, unless TSR bothered to do some market research or check their sales numbers. These days, every 15yo who's sufficiently into D&D to care about Spelljammer at all will be looking at tiktok or reddit or youtube videos about it, and they'll be hearing everyone else's opinions. I was personally very surprised when the OGL issue blew up as widely among the broader D&D community (as opposed to us terminally online types who haunt ENWorld and buy a lot of 3pp material) because I figured the majority of players wouldn't hear about it. But in retrospect, I shouldn't have been, because of how ubiquitous online-ness is now, especially among younger people. That means news travels fast, and bad news is absolute greased lightning. If you're even moderately interested in D&D and have a moderate social media presence that has involved D&D in any way, ever, the algorithms would have ensured you saw Spelljammer content, and given the reception that product has got, there's a pretty solid likelihood that the content you see would have been critical of the perceived lack of meat in the material.
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
I honestly have no idea, but I'd be guessing too.

One thing though - this isn't 1992 when everyone's opinions about products were generally only known to themselves or their gaming groups, unless TSR bothered to do some market research or check their sales numbers. These days, every 15yo who's sufficiently into D&D to care about Spelljammer at all will be looking at tiktok or reddit or youtube videos about it, and they'll be hearing everyone else's opinions. I was personally very surprised when the OGL issue blew up as widely among the broader D&D community (as opposed to us terminally online types who haunt ENWorld and buy a lot of 3pp material) because I figured the majority of players wouldn't hear about it. But in retrospect, I shouldn't have been, because of how ubiquitous online-ness is now, especially among younger people. That means news travels fast, and bad news is absolute greased lightning. If you're even moderately interested in D&D and have a moderate social media presence that has involved D&D in any way, ever, the algorithms would have ensured you saw Spelljammer content, and given the reception that product has got, there's a pretty solid likelihood that the content you see would have been critical of the perceived lack of meat in the material.
I'm not convinced D&D "influencers" actually move the needle much. But what do I know?
 


bedir than

Full Moon Storyteller
I honestly have no idea, but I'd be guessing too.

One thing though - this isn't 1992 when everyone's opinions about products were generally only known to themselves or their gaming groups, unless TSR bothered to do some market research or check their sales numbers. These days, every 15yo who's sufficiently into D&D to care about Spelljammer at all will be looking at tiktok or reddit or youtube videos about it, and they'll be hearing everyone else's opinions. I was personally very surprised when the OGL issue blew up as widely among the broader D&D community (as opposed to us terminally online types who haunt ENWorld and buy a lot of 3pp material) because I figured the majority of players wouldn't hear about it. But in retrospect, I shouldn't have been, because of how ubiquitous online-ness is now, especially among younger people. That means news travels fast, and bad news is absolute greased lightning. If you're even moderately interested in D&D and have a moderate social media presence that has involved D&D in any way, ever, the algorithms would have ensured you saw Spelljammer content, and given the reception that product has got, there's a pretty solid likelihood that the content you see would have been critical of the perceived lack of meat in the material.
but if this bad news is travelling because a grifter says that he and his "leakers" exchanged seven novels worth of conversation within two weeks we are all worse off.

Elevating DnD Shorts after their regular and routine lies is a bad choice.

They admitted to fabricating quotes. It's time to cut them off.
 

HomegrownHydra

Adventurer
I'm not convinced D&D "influencers" actually move the needle much. But what do I know?
I would assume they have a meaningful impact on sales, so I wonder if their opinions of the new Spelljammer were as negative as those of the critics here on enworld or were they more much more positive.
 


but if this bad news is travelling because a grifter says that he and his "leakers" exchanged seven novels worth of conversation within two weeks we are all worse off.

Elevating DnD Shorts after their regular and routine lies is a bad choice.

They admitted to fabricating quotes. It's time to cut them off.
Yeah, I'm not arguing there.

The D&D influencer ecosystem (if i can call it that) is a two-edged sword. Upside - word about WotCs OGL shenanigans spread faster and wider than I'd ever believed possible, and the online attention is 100% why WotC backed down. Downside, we're going to be stuck with a lot of people who've tasted relevance and high click numbers spinning drama out of nothing or flat-out fabricating stuff to keep attention on themselves. Middle ground - it'd be hard for anyone to be unaware of the debate about whether, for instance, Spelljammer was too content-light, regardless of which side they personally take.
 

Clint_L

Legend
3e Forgotten Realms and Eberron both have more content made for them by WotC than 2e made for Dark Sun.
Forgotten Realms is the default setting for the game so it's not really the same, but even so, nope:



Also, both of those examples are besides the point because both those settings were designed to work pretty much seamlessly with the base rules of their edition, which was not the case with some of the 2e settings. I will grant that the Eberron setting was the closest they came to repeating TSR's pattern (WotC always wants to push that Magic synergy), but it still doesn't compare.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top