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.

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.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do not see any inherent problems with presenting the Drow to the "mainstream"

I guess it might not be obvious to a global audience, and I should have added the caveat of in the US, or even, certain parts thereof.

It's easy to forget that most of the world is saner than I'm accustomed to.

 

[billd91]

Story is a goal of a Storytelling Game but a byproduct of a Roleplaying Game.

Only if your definition of story is real tight. Byproduct just doesn't seem the right word. It may be secondary to the fun experience of playing, but implying it's incidental just doesn't seem to be the right connotation. It's just what the history of the game looks like from a pulled-back perspective.

 

[Mark CMG]

Only if your definition of story is real tight. Byproduct just doesn't seem the right word. It may be secondary to the fun experience of playing, but implying it's incidental just doesn't seem to be the right connotation. It's just what the history of the game looks like from a pulled-back perspective.

I think it depends more on how loose your definition of story might be. Everything is a story if it is conveyed as such, and one only has to encounter anyone who wants to tell you about their character to understand that. But it is a matter of goals and with RPGs story is not so much a goal as a serendipitous happenstance.

 

[billd91]

Totally. Old coke wasn't something anyone could go make. Pepsi was still Pepsi - if you didn't like it before, you might try it, but you weren't necessarily gonna like it now.

There's a reason it's an analogy and not the same case study. An analogy is rarely a 100% fit. The pertinent comparison, I think, is the power of brand identification and messing with that identity.

And, probably, misreading the market.

 

[Hussar]

I think it depends more on how loose your definition of story might be. Everything is a story if it is conveyed as such, and one only has to encounter anyone who wants to tell you about their character to understand that. But it is a matter of goals and with RPGs story is not so much a goal as a serendipitous happenstance.

BUZZ, sorry, that's mistaken. Thanks for playing.

Unless your campaign is nothing but a string of completely random encounters with no connection to each other, you have a story before you even start playing.

Always.

Tell me about your next adventure Mark CMG, without making it a framework for a story? Do you have NPC's with motivations (plot)? Do you have a location for this adventure (setting)? Are players going to play characters in this adventure (character)?

Guess what? You have a story. It's not serendipitous, it's unavoidable. You cannot play an RPG without a story.

 

[Mark CMG]

BUZZ, sorry, that's mistaken. Thanks for playing.

Unless your campaign is nothing but a string of completely random encounters with no connection to each other, you have a story before you even start playing.

Always.

Tell me about your next adventure Mark CMG, without making it a framework for a story? Do you have NPC's with motivations (plot)? Do you have a location for this adventure (setting)? Are players going to play characters in this adventure (character)?

Guess what? You have a story. It's not serendipitous, it's unavoidable. You cannot play an RPG without a story.

I have a setting and the players explore it while in character as part of the Roleplaying Game I run. What comes of it as a story happens in retrospect based on the decisions they make as players of characters.

 

[Parmandur]

There's a reason it's an analogy and not the same case study. An analogy is rarely a 100% fit. The pertinent comparison, I think, is the power of brand identification and messing with that identity.



And, probably, misreading the market.

Closer comparisons might be New World of Darkness or Traveller: The New Era, where gamers reacted badly to radical changes that they were not fond of, even if the new thing was not bad.

 

[billd91]

Closer comparisons might be New World of Darkness or Traveller: The New Era, where gamers reacted badly to radical changes that they were not fond of, even if the new thing was not bad.

No doubt. TNE's changes even cost GDW their closest 3rd party publisher. I don't know if licensing was a factor as the 4e license contributed to WotC losing Paizo, but it is an interesting parallel.

 

[Bedrockgames]

BUZZ, sorry, that's mistaken. Thanks for playing.
.

Can we have this discussion without the snark?

 

[Sunseeker]

I have a setting and the players explore it while in character as part of the Roleplaying Game I run. What comes of it as a story happens in retrospect based on the decisions they make as players of characters.

I get the feeling that you and Hussar are using story in two completely different manners, because the way I'm seeing it, you both have a story.

Hussar is right that you can't have an RPG without a story, you can't have life without a story. Real life is full of stories. So any "living world" is full of stories as well. The party might get involved in them, or create their own, or get involved in many of them. I think this is indirectly a railroad v. sandbox discussion. Sandboxes have stories and players have the choice to participate in them or not. Railroads have stories, but players do not have a choice in participating them.

Lets frame it this way: it's a question of what comes first, the story or the adventure? You say the adventure creates the story. Hussar says the story creates the adventure.