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.

 

[DMZ2112]

I forgive Nathan the corporate hyperbole in saying D&D has stopped being a tabletop game because of this:

we’re gonna have long cycles, and so when we go all in on Greyhawk or Dragonlance or Spelljammers, that’s going to be awhile.

That'll do, Nate. That'll do.

 

[HonorBoundSamurai632]

From the interview:

"Now, with that being said, we recognize that a lot of fans love other settings, so we will be doing things to give those guys tools to support that in their own way. But we’re gonna have long cycles, and so when we go all in on Greyhawk or Dragonlance or Spelljammers, that’s going to be awhile. We’ll support that stuff, we’ll give players the tools to do things that they want to do, but the main focus will be on the Forgotten Realms for a long time."

I wish they would come right out and tell us what in the world their plan is!! I'm sorry, but not everything has to revolve around the Forgotten Realms. Everyone is like .... well it's the most fleshed-out campaign, and more importantly, the one that makes them the most money. TRUE. You know why? Because since the grey box was first released in 1987 .... it's the only campaign that had any real support. They changed everything else constantly. After Gygax was booted out of TSR, D&D has tried to distance itself from him ever since, (until those last 3-4 years of his life.) They have said time and time again in the core books for this edition that the default setting for D&D is THE D&D Multi-verse. But thanks to video games, every story takes place in the Realms. Fine .... whatever, at least come out with an update to The Realms. This is BS that we have to buy your story books to get updates to The Realms. I know most of you are going to be like .... update it yourself then!!

NO!!!!!

If that is the setting they are going to be "staying in" for "a long time" ..... they need to update the whole thing so we have a better understanding of what is going on in the Realms. Myself, like many others, didn't play 4th Edition, so I, (again .... like many others,) do not know what has changed in the Realms since 3rd. I shouldn't have to look up fan sites to find out what is going on. Like many others have stated ..... I feel psionics need to be updated for this new edition as well.

It's very frustrating as a fan of the D&D multi-verse to know that we are not going to get the complete support we crave because the setting we love has a name other than The Forgotten Realms. Sure we are going to get support .... some day .... maybe, but we won't get big, huge, beautiful maps, detailed descriptions of The Free City of Greyhawk, or Palanthas, or know how to operate a Spelljamming vessal, or a much needed update to The Lady of Pain. They have said time and again that PotA was NOT part 3 of The Temple of Elemental Evil. Yet in the introduction to that book by Mike Mearls, he clearly states that PotA is the successor to The Temple of Elemental Evil. I wonder what is next? Moving Castle Ravenloft to Amn (completely taking it out of Barovia?) Why is it so wrong then to let 3PP who love these settings, (and probably know more about them than WoTC/Hasbro .... just see Sovereign Press' 3.5 Dragonlance books. Thank-you for those Margaret Weis,) update these settings?

And the thing that rips my heart out the most is ..... I actually love 5th Edition. Unfortunately, right now I'm only a player, and like one other person said here, I too will not be DM'ing in this new edition anytime soon. I'll save that for Pathfinder.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I'm guessing you didn't pay attention to my post where I said, "with the exception of campaign settings." But please, continue listing the things I said did have story.

EDIT: Also, I said "crunch" books, and you list a bunch of fluff books. Next time you want to casually insult someone, at least be right.

I wasn't being a jerk, I was just making a statement. Those books also contain a fair bit of crunch as well. They have prestige classes, spells, feats, magic items, etc......

 

[HonorBoundSamurai632]

I look at the way that this new edition has borrowed much from Pathfinder. Examples being, D&D Next playtest available for download like Pathfinder was before it's release. D&D minis now being based on story lines like Pathfinder Battles minis are. D&D core books costing $50 like the PF Core Book, (even though that book is a PHB and DMG in one book.) The Wizard now rolls 1D6 for HP's like in PF.

Why can't WoTC do map packs also then? In the back of PoA, they give examples on how to convert that story to other settings in the D&D multi-verse. Cool. So I ask a 14 year-old first time DM ..... where is the Cairn Hills in Greyhawk. Have you ever heard of Hommlet? At least give us map packs ...... please? At least we'd know where these places are.

A Forgotten Realms map pack with 4 HUGE quadrants, that when put together give us this ginormous overview of Faerun wouldn't be so bad. (or even a nice map pack of Waterdeep would be awesome too!!)

 

[Kramodlog]

They have released 7 products in 10 months. Frog God games has released an additional 4 books for it.

As far as I know, Frog God isn't WotC. Its products do not have WotC's seal on it, so it isn't WotC supporting its edition. Out of the 7 products WotC released you have a starter kit that is for noobs. So we are left with the core books, which is the birth of an edition. The very basis. Cool. What else? Psionics? Planes? Campaign settings (old or new), MM2? No.

What else as came out? Well not much. Two lackluster APs (one of which is divided in two books). Not very enticing to buy and nothing but those are coming out. 1 or 2 a year. Want something else? Too bad for you. WotC doesn't want your patronage.

Maybe if WotC actually published ground braking APs that reinvented the product like Paizo did, and still does, the strategy of putting all their eggs in one basket wouldn't be so bad. Right now it is an edition with core rules books and not much else to give it attractiveness.

That's over a book a month, and these aren't counting the small guides like the Spell Cards, the DM's Screen,

Not content. Just redundant stuff to drain your money. Like Fantasy Ground's platform is not content, just a platform for the little content we have.

the free Players supplements, the free basic rules supplements, etc.

Wow. 4 races. Unearthed stuff is nice, but limited in scope and length. Not playtested either. It is scraps. Not meat.

We haven't even gone through an entire year of having this product out yet, and you're already calling it stillborn because they released the Adventurer's Handbook for free.

A year of stuff out? Read the interview. If another AP comes out this year, we're lucky. D&D with 1 or 2 APs coming out a year is not a lively edition. It is on life support.

By "People" I'm assuming you refer to yourself alone?

Lets see what Merriam-Webster has to say about the wrd people:

humans making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest

. Um. So, no.

Because there's nothing that supports that notion that it won't get any more releases.

Aside from the brand manager saying in the interview found in the OP?

Why are RPGs, the one game dependent on players being able to use a single product for years, held up to a higher standard than any other medium for product releases?

Video game gamers consumme a lot more than one a year. The problem is platform for RPGs. AKA the rules. Only WotC can make D&D stuff, unless it releases a OGL. The platform for video games is either a PC or a console. Once you have a PC, you can buy many games. Consoles work with third parties to have content for their platform. WotC isn't doing that. Maybe they will you say? Well, so far all that has been said points to no. Ok, the APs. But those are subpar and niche.

A video game in a single series releases once a year or once ever several years, but an RPG must have more support than a book a month or its dead in the water?

The platform isn't supported. That is why it lost its liveliness. Its momemtum.

Want psionics, planar details, campaign settings, new classes, more magic items, other monster manuals? Too bad for you. You have all that you'll get.

I see more enthusiasm for this edition than any other,

I saw more enthusiasm with 3e and Pathfinder. Well, not at first. When the core books were caming out, there was lots of positive feedback. Once the DMG was out people started looking at what was coming next. The Adventurer's Handbook was cancelled and no product are annouced after PotA. Enthusiasm led way to
disappointement. Maybe frustration. Sure some are happy, but those are people who probably wouldn't have bought other products (based on their comments about dislike of bloat).

I just don't see any evidence for what you're saying.

Check out this thread and the people voicing disappointement. Or the thread started by the Jon Brazer guy, saying D&D isn't maintaining his interest, to paraphrase.

 

[Shemeska]

Thats an opinion, but for those like you there are thousands of grognards like me who love the FR, (check out Candlekeep forum). FR is why Ive stayed with D&D and its almost become synonymous with the brand. Like the article mentions, it lets the design team do just about anything in terms of creating stories.

It's the best known setting, but since 2008 I'm not sure if the FR fan base is nearly as healthy or enthusiastic as it was prior to then, with the tone and reception on Candle keep as an indicator (plus the severe slowdown on novels and no obvious plans for a FR campaign setting).

 

[Mercule]

Isn't this what they're already doing? PotA comes with twenty pages of references of where to put the adventure in other campaign settings. Yes, Tyranny of Dragons was pretty much Faerun exclusive, but they've said that the game itself is setting agnostic.

Yup. PotA == good way to straddle the line. ToD == useless if you don't like Faerun. As much as I'd like to have seen PotA be set in Greyhawk or a non-setting, the way it was done is within my "suck it up" bounds. If this is the model, going forward, I'll grouse a bit but be fine. If ToD is more representative of the norm, I'll be buying less product.

Ideal: At least half the releases should be non-Realms. This means either a different published setting (Eberron, Ravenloft, etc.) or settingless.
Result: I buy stuff just because it's interesting, even if I don't plan to use it.

Acceptable: The vast majority of releases use the Realms as the "implied setting", but are loosely coupled and have some conversion notes (i.e. use PotA as the model).
Result: I look at most things and buy what looks useful and/or easy to scrub off the Realms-stink. Complain a little bit, but generally glad to have stuff to play.

Unacceptable: Releases are largely tied to the Realms in ways that are hard to detach (ToD model) and things that update the Realms "story" are seen as primary.
Result: I grow increasingly frustrated with the game products and eventually stop following releases and bothering to even see when something new is released. I leave ENWorld, like I did during 4E and you don't have to listen to my dissatisfaction.

I've reconciled myself to a less than ideal situation, which doesn't bother me because few things in life are ideal. Right now, I'm trying to figure out whether the model falls into the "acceptable" or "unacceptable" box; so far it seems like a coin flip. There are actually more products (LMoP and PotA) that are "acceptable" than are "unacceptable" (ToD). All the words I hear come from Wizards, though, sound less than encouraging. It could just be a communication thing (either side of the equation), though -- like I said, I'm trying to figure that out. If I'm really lucky, things will be "acceptable" with a couple of bones towards "ideal".

Note: I'm explicitly excluding PHB, DMG, and MM from "releases". I know they qualify as such, but they're not really indicative of what Wizards has said the future holds.

Forgotten Realms is the only well known setting that Wizards owns. ... Forgotten Realms, as hated as it seems to be on these boards, is the only thing they can rely on for people to have heard about. Why would they even think about trying to sell a new game based on an unknown setting?

I can't disagree with what you say, here. That's why I say I don't have a problem using FR to pay the bills. It's also why I'm paranoid about D&D becoming "All Realms, all the time!" It makes some sense, but it's not what I, personally, want out of the game.

To put a fairly fine point on things: I don't really give one whit about a product line's solvency if said product line doesn't benefit me, personally.

That's not a statement of "I hope they go out of business for messing with my stuff." It's a factual statement of disinterest. I have no interest in the Forgotten Realms continuing to exist in any medium (RPG, video game, movie, book, etc.). Full stop. If it thrives, good on it. If it disappeared tomorrow, I'd shrug and move on -- if it even got that much of a reaction. The only value the Realms serves to me is in whether it directly or indirectly helps finance non-Realms D&D products.

When the party line is "we're doing nothing but Realms for the foreseeable future", I want to know whether the products I actually care about are dead or whether it's some combination of "we need to pay some bills to be able to support other stuff" and "we're using the Realms as a default/implied setting, but no more so than Greyhawk was for 1E." Even if Wizards doesn't plan to ever publish anything of value to me, again (which I doubt, it's more a matter of portion), my rules books don't become useless. It just means that I can tune out to future products, and I'll be waiting for 6E to launch with "Forgotten Realms PHB".

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

A lot of marketing talk and I'm not really interested in their stories, but I'm pretty set with the 3 awesome books we have so far. Its a complete game. If they put something else out down the line I'll check it out, but its got no real effect on my game on Wed nights.

Would have been nice to hear "Oh btw Dungeon is coming back", but if not I've got a ton of easy to adapt adventures from already.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

That's why my irony meter goes to 11.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

It's very frustrating as a fan of the D&D multi-verse to know that we are not going to get the complete support we crave because the setting we love has a name other than The Forgotten Realms. Sure we are going to get support .... some day .... maybe, but we won't get big, huge, beautiful maps, detailed descriptions of The Free City of Greyhawk, or Palanthas, or know how to operate a Spelljamming vessal, or a much needed update to The Lady of Pain. They have said time and again that PotA was NOT part 3 of The Temple of Elemental Evil. Yet in the introduction to that book by Mike Mearls, he clearly states that PotA is the successor to The Temple of Elemental Evil. I wonder what is next? Moving Castle Ravenloft to Amn (completely taking it out of Barovia?) Why is it so wrong then to let 3PP who love these settings, (and probably know more about them than WoTC/Hasbro .... just see Sovereign Press' 3.5 Dragonlance books. Thank-you for those Margaret Weis,) update these settings?

And the thing that rips my heart out the most is ..... I actually love 5th Edition. Unfortunately, right now I'm only a player, and like one other person said here, I too will not be DM'ing in this new edition anytime soon. I'll save that for Pathfinder.

There is something odd in your position. First you lament a lack of old dnd campaign setting Support, then you announce you move to pathfinder. I believe that would be far more rational if you use 5th edition rules with old campaign material...