WotC's Nathan Stewart: "Story, Story, Story"; and IS D&D a Tabletop Game?

Forbes spoke to WotC's Brand Director & Executive Producer for Dungeons & Dragons, who talked about the 5th Edition launch and his vision for D&D's future. The interview is fairly interesting - it confirms or repeats some information we already know, and also delves a little into the topic of D&D as a wider brand, rather than as a tabletop roleplaying game.

Forbes spoke to WotC's Brand Director & Executive Producer for Dungeons & Dragons, who talked about the 5th Edition launch and his vision for D&D's future. The interview is fairly interesting - it confirms or repeats some information we already know, and also delves a little into the topic of D&D as a wider brand, rather than as a tabletop roleplaying game.

In the interview, he reiterates previous statements that this is the biggest D&D launch ever, in terms of both money and units sold.

[lq]We are story, story, story. The story drives everything.[/lq]

He repeats WoTC's emphasis on storylines, confirming the 1-2 stories per year philosphy. "We are story, story, story. The story drives everything. The need for new rules, the new races, new classes is just based on what’s going to really make this adventure, this story, this kind kind of theme happen." He goes on to say that "We’re not interested in putting out more books for books’ sake... there’s zero plans for a Player’s Handbook 2 any time on the horizon."

As for settings, he confirms that "we’re going to stay in the Forgotten Realms for the foreseeable future." That'll disappoint some folks, I'm sure, but it is their biggest setting, commercially.

Stewart is not "a hundred percent comfortable" with the status of digital tools because he felt like "we took a great step backwards."

[lq]Dungeons and Dragons stopped being a tabletop game years or decades ago. [/lq]

His thoughts on D&D's identity are interesting, too. He mentions that "Dungeons and Dragons stopped being a tabletop game years or decades ago". I'm not sure what that means. His view for the future of the brand includes video games, movies, action figures, and more: "This is no secret for anyone here, but the big thing I want to see is just a triple-A RPG video game. I want to see Baldur’s Gate 3, I want to see a huge open-world RPG. I would love movies about Dungeons and Dragons, or better yet, serialized entertainment where we’re doing seasons of D&D stories and things like Forgotten Realms action figures… of course I’d love that, I’m the biggest geek there is. But at the end of the day, the game’s what we’re missing in the portfolio."

You can read the full interview here.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MechaPilot

Explorer
For me, Nathan's words just emphasize the need for a good licensing agreement that will allow people like me (I don't care about FR in the slightest, and I would love to see a new setting) to get 5e content from other publishers.

If WotC wants to focus on FR, that's fine (maybe it's even a good idea if they can license their other settings to other publishers for a small fee). None of the FR products will attract my limited recreational budget, but as long as I have someone else I can turn to who can and will provide the 5e material I would like then I'll be happy to give them my cash instead of WotC.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
I can only agree partly. While she had a new plot, it was Tiamat all over again. Why did they had to chose the very same villian they already used in the first AP in 4e?

Because most of us ditched out on 4e by the time 4e's Tiamat adventure came out?
 

"Brand" is starting to turn into a trigger word for me.

For some reason the entire interview left me cold.....so FR only, D&D is not a tabletop game anymore--I mean, I do understand what he's saying: it's a Brand now (twitch twitch), not just what it started as...sigh. But its hard not to be unhappy with the notion that the man behind my hobby is much more interested in that Baldur's Gate III Triple-A title which assuming its not in development will be a sort of "good luck on that" before 2018 if they plan on competing with the big boys there.

But the good news is: this is a great edition, and they got the three books out I needed to sustain years of gameplay. 3rd party support fro Frog God Games and Goodman is filling some gaps and is apparently possible even without an OGL, and if they only release 1-2 books a year, even if those are FR tomes I have to adapt to my own use I have to say that that's a lot of free money I have to spend on other games and books.....and some of those will be Pathfinder books I then convert to 5E because frankly that's pretty damned easy to do.
 

Harry Dresden

First Post
With the exception of the Manual of the Planes and Campaign Setting guides, I'm hard pressed to see how previous edition crunch books beyond the core supplied tools for any stories. I see a lot of player-oriented power creep, but not a lot of story.

Underdark, Shining South, Unapproachable East, Cormyr, Serpent Kingdoms, Lost Empires of Faerun, various Bix sets and adventures such as Myth Drannor, Zhentil Keep, etc....

I could go on and on but my browser keeps crashing so I don't want to push it.

I'm guessing you are new to the game and didn't pay much attention to previous editions because they are full of story elements.

Mod Note: "Harry Dresden" here is an alt of a serial jerk, trying to get around a ban. Please pay no mind to this user. ~Umbran
 
Last edited by a moderator:



Jhaelen

First Post
Underdark, Shining South, Unapproachable East, Cormyr, Serpent Kingdoms, Lost Empires of Faerun, various Bix sets and adventures such as Myth Drannor, Zhentil Keep, etc....

I could go on and on but my browser keeps crashing so I don't want to push it.
Well, excepting Underdark (which was originally a part of the World of Greyhawk) all of this is FR stuff, isn't it?
D&D isn't (or apparently _wasn't_) FR.

Imho, FR sucks. FR is everything that I ever disliked about (generic) fantasy settings. It's the worst setting every published for an RPG. Yeah, I guess I'm in the minority about this, but at least your browser seems to agree with me ;)
 


Lee Singleton

First Post
I would like a few more class options for most classes. Specifically clerical domains that fit with 3e domains, a bunch more sorcerers, maybe 1 or 2 options for each other class. I would like another 2 monster manuals. I would like a bunch more traps and treasure. These would all help me tell more stories.

Well to be fair, you have had more options with just this new AP print release (PoA)

43 new Spells (also given away for FREE in the players handbook)
40 new monsters
14 new magic items
1 new playable race

Which in addition also includes a bunch of fluff on a small region of the FR campaign world and ways to port the adventure to several other WotC worlds (roughly 2 pages to each world) and a small section on slotting it into your own world.

In addition the Free players handbook also gave you for FREE

4 new playable races (1 reprinted in PoA)
43 new spells (All reprinted in PoA, for those of us that don't use electronic devices at the table)

Plus the adventurers league has just given us a whole bunch of bonds and backgrounds for players playing in the Elemental Evil path (http://dndadventurersleague.org/elemental-evil-bonds-and-backgrounds-for-mulmaster/). Which I agree are very specific and tied to the Moonsea area primarily also gives some good ideas which can easily be changed by changing place names etc. In addition the AL are producing 16 small adventures all tied into the overall theme of the Elemental Evil storyline but again they can be easily ported across to your own worlds.

Not bad for the new release just 3 months after the last release of a D&D 5th Ed product.
 

wedgeski

Adventurer
The rest of the AP was decent, and the cultists actually had good characterization notes, but by comparison, Giantslayer invokes the feel I got from Steading of the Giant Chief and it isn't even a third done yet! iron Gods is about stopping a nascent GOD from apotheosis! I would rather WotC should add more depth of character to their stories, and a slightly darker maturity level, because if I want to convince people to play more 5e, I'm thinking I'm better off using Paizo APs or classic AD& D modules, rather than the tools offered. I want more 5e APs more to give me better alternatives than because they arent fast enough.
What I find interesting about your comments is that they represent exactly one of the things that caused Paizo to spin off on their own in the first place: that 4E couldn't tell the kind of stories they wanted to tell. WotC's method makes for a particular flavour of D&D and varies in its success, and I don't think there's much chance the company is going to change its approach: they stuck to the formula through 4E and it looks like they're sticking to it now.

I'm inclined to pick up one of Paizo's more recent AP's so as to get a feel for where their experience has taken them. Like it or not, their audience is, I think, different than Wizards' in many ways. They can afford to take a few more risks.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top