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.

 

[Beleriphon]

I have no issue with a brand focus on D&D. I don't have enough time to buy, play and use every conceivable D&D book. I do have the time to play video games, watch TV and see movies though. I'll ask a question: how many people have bought an Iron Man comic book in the last decade on a regular basis? Did you see Iron Man (and its sequels), The Avengers or plan on seeing Age of Ultron?

The difference between the The Brand and the The Game is the difference between Iron Man as a brand and Iron Man as a comic book. The Brand includes underoos, movies, video games, and more. That doesn't mean that Marvel stops making Iron Man comic books, but it does mean that they have somebody to look after those other things. And saying that Iron Man isn't a comic book anymore isn't wrong either, because if you've never interacted with an Iron Man comic book then the only thing you know about Iron Man is the movie so to you Iron Man is a movie.

Or how about Star Wars? Sure the movies are what people think of, but Star Wars isn't movies and hasn't been in decades. Star Wars is also video games, toys, comics, books, hell anything you stick Darth Vader's face on!

Wanting to apply D&D to more than just a niche game in a niche market isn't a bad thing. It does mean that some guy is going to talk about things other than the TTRPG, because that isn't all D&D is anymore. Don't get me wrong, I'd love more D&D stuff, but the people that run the game aren't stupid. They need to expansion into more than just the game, I mean don't you want to buy t-shirts, or mugs, or kiddies birthday party plates with D&D stuff on them?

 

[SilverfireSage]

How are spell cards, DM screens or a virtual table top content? Or new content to be more precise. They are platforms for content. Nothing wrong with that, it just isn't a new class, a new monster, details on the sundering or a new setting. Those are content.

I was talking about the APs to be honest. There's tons of new monsters in those, PotA is basically a new setting, and they've given a bunch of expansion stuff for players out for free already.

First, you do not have to write the stuff to know what is coming out.

No, but you do need permission to talk about that stuff. Do you honestly think that everyone at WotC is just sitting on their hands doing nothing?

WotC is going to make 1 or 2 APs a year (do you agree disagree so far?)

They've said as much, so I agree.

and it will support that AP with its partners who will make minis, video games that share story elements, comics books, DM screens, etc (do you agree disagree?). That is it. Did yo uunderstand a FR campaign setting or gazetteris in the works? A splatbook? A Manual of the Planes, psionics or a MM2? Please share if you read that. All I saw was stories stories, stories. No more books just for books.

I agree with this as well, but I fail to understand how this is a bad thing. People have already proven that they don't want to buy splat books. The failure of 4E over time and the steady decline of Pathfinder has proven that. When people look back at the original D&D, or even 3.5, do they talk about how cool MM3 was, or how awesome that one random pamphlet about the Planes was? No, they talk about the Red Hand of Doom, Castle Ravenloft, Tomb of Horrors. Stories are how D&D thrives.

Heck, from his comment about just releasing 1 AP a year because people are starting to make their hoem game, we might not see another book until next year. Nothing else has been announced for this year aside from Sword Coast Legends. And that is not PnP RPG content.

Like I said, PotA wasn't announced until a month beforehand. Do you really think they're all just sitting on their hands?

Evidence? Like the negatives reviews of Hoard of the Dragon Queen got on ENworld's review section? Like the people saying they do not buy APs and want splat or campaign settings? This thread is evidence. But this sounds like setting up a barre that cannot be met.

Yes, Hoard got bad reviews. Rise of Tiamat got pretty good reviews though, and PotA has gotten great reviews. This one thread does not evidence make, especially since this thread is split about 50/50 towards both sides.

Except Paizo released more stuff after 10 months. PF was being supported. I'm not being fatalistic, I'm being realistic. We get the brand manager saying we'll see one or two stories set in the FR a year and not much else in terms of RPG content. It is pretty clear.

Pathfinder Core Rulebook was released in August 2009. The bestiary was released in November. The next book (that wasn't part of an Adventure Path, since we're apparently disregarding those) was the Game Mastery Guide, released in July of 2010, nearly a full year later (Although to be honest, this shouldn't count because it's really just the DM's guide released much later than it should have been). Also did you actually read the full interview?

"So it’s two stories a year right now. That might go down or up, depending on what the fan base wants." He then says that it might go down since they're seeing more homebrew stories.

"A class would be another example. Mike Mearls and I always like to talk about if we do a pirate adventure, and add a sea-faring class and Swashbuckler this and that."
"I wouldn’t be surprised if we do some books here and there that pick up things that the fanbase wants in between stories, because of the feedback we’re hearing."

He's not talking about not releasing any books at all. He's talking about making sure all of the books and classes and such are tied to the stories that they're telling.

News articles aren't content for D&D. Liking 5e now doesn't mean you won't get tired of it after a year or two because it became repetitive because of lack of new content. A lot of people have said they bought and played 4e until it just was repetitive. Then they moved on. This time it is a different paradigm at play. It is less about the mechanics and more about the support of the game.

Yeah, and 4E had metric craptons of material for it. Obviously that model doesn't work.

If you refuse to see that in the interview the guy that manages the brand is saying that they won't release content for the RPG aside than APs and some web articles

Again, I would love to see some direct quotes from them saying it. Because reading between the lines or looking for the "subtext" is not how discussion works.

 

[billd91]

Pure speculation!

You have no idea if WotC care more or less for their product, fans or brand than Paizo. Paizo publish books to make money, and do it while enjoying it as well. They aren't a social service catering to every whim of their fan base. WotC is beginning to sound more like a made up Evil Empire by the vocalists on the internet, whom by no means, are those that represent the fan base.

I think it's less a question of beating up on WotC than it is beating up on Hasbro. After all, it was WotC that saved D&D from bankruptcy limbo with its revenues from Magic. It was WotC that lightened up TSR's online policies and offered some good content for free on the web. It's the people at WotC who pushed the OGL that fostered a lot of 3rd party entries into the industry. But as time has marched on and Hasbro has impressed its culture upon WotC, the company seems to be pretty different. I think they've lost a lot of their agility and vision - would WotC be able to stick its neck out for TSR now? I doubt it. Under Hasbro's control, rather than balancing serving the hobby with running a business, they're serving the shareholders who care little for hobby table-top gaming. That's what megacorps do in contrast to entrepreneurs who are passionate for an interest and think they can make a living serving it.

 

[Staffan]

I am not really sure how. At the moment, they have small-company resources working on the game itself. In a small company, they'd have small-company resources. How would that be better?

Because currently, they have small-company resources shackled by large-company requirements on ROI, decision-making, TPS reports, and so on. It's like something having the strength of a pixie and the dexterity of an ancient dragon.

In a smaller, more focused, company, the boss can say "Sure, my team of 10 people cost a million dollars per year in salary and benefits, but I make 1.1 million off them, so we're good." In a larger, more diversified company there's probably a boss higher up saying "Why should I pay those people a million per year to bring in 1.1 million, when I can put two more people each on My Little Pony and Transformers, which will make me the same 1.1 million extra, and lay the rest off?"

 

[SilverfireSage]

Also, I have to encourage everyone to actually read the entire article. The quotes from Morrus are taken somewhat out of context, and the full article gives a much better feel for what he's talking about.

 

[SilverfireSage]

Because currently, they have small-company resources shackled by large-company requirements on ROI, decision-making, TPS reports, and so on. It's like something having the strength of a pixie and the dexterity of an ancient dragon.

In a smaller, more focused, company, the boss can say "Sure, my team of 10 people cost a million dollars per year in salary and benefits, but I make 1.1 million off them, so we're good." In a larger, more diversified company there's probably a boss higher up saying "Why should I pay those people a million per year to bring in 1.1 million, when I can put two more people each on My Little Pony and Transformers, which will make me the same 1.1 million extra, and lay the rest off?"

This is exactly right. D&D is a blip to Hasbro, almost not even worth mentioning, so the fact that they're getting as much attention as they are from the press is rather astounding. One Transformers movie has likely made all that D&D has ever made in history.

 

[Kramodlog]

Maybe a bit unrelated, but why does WotC get such a hard time from some people for concentrating on one setting, while it doesn't seem to bother the same people, that Paizo only publish one setting?

Golarion is new-ish. Plus each AP is generally as its own flavor. Iron God was technology meets fantasy. Jade Regeant was the oriental adventure. Reign of Winter was planet/plane hopping (plus visite Earth!). Carrion Crown was the horror AP. Etc, etc.

So far with the FR APs they've revisited adventures already done and in a generic way.

 

[Kramodlog]

The AL Encounters, Expeditions & Epics organized play programs seem like support.

If you have a special store near you. I couldn't find one in Montréal.

 

[tyrlaan]

True. But WotC has made it rather plain what their current paradigm is. It definitely has changed from what they've done in the past, and thus they've been exceedingly up front about it. The issue is that people are unwilling to believe them as to their reason for doing so, or because that reason goes against what they personally want, they levy insults about the character, intelligence, or business acumen about the company. Basically, many people are being real dicks about it. They aren't getting what they want, so they make sure everyone within earshot knows about it.

If all this was people stating preferences with no moral outrage or making value judgments about WotC or the people in the D&D department, we wouldn't be having these conversations.

Agree with you completely. If my comments came across stronger than intended, my bad.

 

[Mercule]

True. But WotC has made it rather plain what their current paradigm is.

Actually, they haven't. Maybe I just missed it, though. If so, please help:

- Are they going to do anything besides adventures, for the foreseeable future? (I think they've answered this one.)

- Are the Realms currently exclusive, or just primary, in terms of resource/effort?

- For Realms-based adventures, will they be easily portable to other settings? Will they continue to have conversion guides?

- Are there deliberate plans to support another setting, or are they waiting to let the Realms run its course (which probably means some version of sales dropping)?

- If there are deliberate plans to support another setting, do they know which one? (I expect they don't know which, and am conditionally okay with that.)

- If there are plans to support another setting, is there a rough time frame -- there is a huge difference between "either early or late 2016" and "either 2018 or 2019"?

- How does the D&D "brand" differ from the Forgotten Realms "brand", outside the TTRPG?

- When are rules for psionics going to show up?