Quote from: trechriron;950785Paizo has way more employees than WOTC's D&D division. I'm pretty sure Hazbro would shit itself, on TV, with flaming feet to have a Paizo under it. Hasbro might be giant, but that doesn't mean they just toss piles of cash at D&D on a whim (obviously). If I had to bet on it, I would think Pathfinder and accessories are making more money for Paizo than 5e is making for WOTC, even with higher sales volume. Shit, I don't play Pathfinder and I have a couple hundred tied up in pawns and mats. Seriously considering picking up the Bestiaries just for the damn sexy artwork!

I highly doubt that. Obviously, there isn't much data out there, but the only reports I've seen from FLGS are that total D&D revenue and total Pathfinder revenue tend to be roughly equal. That's across all SKUs, and they all have a lot more Pathfinder product in stock. This points to Pathfinder being a much lower-margin product than D&D.

By contrast, 5e is the best-selling WotC edition of D&D by all accounts (PHB sits at #60 on Amazon!) by running on a skeleton crew and outsourcing the accessories. This points to it being very high-margin product.

For a big corporation like Hasbro, low-margin products just don't make sense unless the volume is huge, and by "huge," I mean "bigger than the entire TTRPG industry."

QuoteThe point is, that GOOD adventures do sell, and just because WOTC once decided on the "only source books" business model does not mean it is THE business model for publishing RPGs. "Modules don't sell" is a fucking myth perpetrated by WOTC as an excuse for a business model that has clearly been proven to be a shit philosophy by several other publishers now.

When WotC took over TSR, they looked at the books and saw that books like Player's Option: Combat & Tactics outsold modules many times over. They didn't decide to base their business model on expansions in order win online arguments or for ideological reasons.

I could be wrong, but I heard somewhere they switched to adventures because 4e didn't make enough money to be considered a "franchise brand" by Hasbro. Franchise brands get bigger staffs, bigger marketing campaigns, frequent product refreshes, etc. Think Nerf. A comparatively small number of franchise brands bring almost twice as much revenue to Hasbro than all their games put together (and that includes Magic). D&D didn't hit that, so it got booted to a lower tier where they're expected to have a sustainable product, a higher margin, and do it with a smaller crew.

Obviously, splats are not nearly as sustainable as adventures.

I get what they're doing, because one part of this modest but solid lineup is that it can be evergreen. This could well be the last edition of d&d. OTOH, I think that there are a few general books that could still be made like Manual of the Planes, Deities and Demigods, maybe Fiend Folio. I think that would make a nicely complete set for any GM.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;950810When WotC took over TSR, they looked at the books and saw that books like Player's Option: Combat & Tactics outsold modules many times over. They didn't decide to base their business model on expansions in order win online arguments or for ideological reasons.

Player's Option is 2.5, the modules TSR was releasing at that point had been absolutely rancid for years.

The thing is, 'adventures don't sell' wasn't just a TSR/WotC thing--I heard it from people working for White Wolf and Hero Games, and I'm sure there were others. I suspect the change had to do with several factors: the graying of the hobby and the growing desire for 'pick up and play', the reduced publishing barriers (is anyone other than Goodman Games doing small adventures in print?) and perhaps the focus on longer-term value in modules with the new 'adventure path' model.

Quote from: CRKrueger;950748Yeah, that Paizo...no money at all in modules...dunno what the fuck they are thinking.

Though they don't sell as well as other Paizo stuff.

I just think that Paizo realized that even if they only broke even on adventures (I'd guess they still make a bit - but I have no clue) they were still well worth making because good adventures make people want to play Pathfinder in general and they'll then buy more of their other books.  Basically it works sort of like marketing which pays for itself.

I know quite a few people who primarily play Pathfinder for whom Pathfinder isn't their favorite system, but it's okay, and they really like the adventure paths.

Adventures don't sell...but selling only two adventures a year is a pretty big change from how it was done before. Looking at peak Amazon ranks for their post-launch adventures:

PotA: 156
OotA: 138
CoS: 107
SKT: 201

So a few years in, it does seem that this is a viable strategy. It was also received wisdom before that the "right" thing to do was drop an edition, then sell splats until you couldn't sell any more, then drop a new edition. But I think the OSR and the success of Pathfinder had to make them rethink it. Those showed that "new edition" doesn't always mean "better edition."

Quote from: HorusArisen;950610At the risk of a slightly negative first thread I have to ask where has D&D gone?

It has gone to a greater number gaming tables in my local area than I can remember it going to before. WotC seems to have really hit it out of the park in making D&D approachable and popular again.

Quote from: JamesV;950823I get what they're doing, because one part of this modest but solid lineup is that it can be evergreen. This could well be the last edition of d&d. OTOH, I think that there are a few general books that could still be made like Manual of the Planes, Deities and Demigods, maybe Fiend Folio. I think that would make a nicely complete set for any GM.

From the UA releases it looks like some kind of expanded character options are on the horizon but hopefully they keep it under control.

I agree completely that a new Legends and Lore would be most welcome to fill-out the very sketchy pantheon info in the PHB. A new Manual of Planes seems a sureshot hit as well.

They could keep putting out MM's or Fiend Folio without adding to system bloat as it is always good to have more monsters. Although almost inadvertent I think one reason for AD&D's success was that the MM was the first book to be released. Everyone loves monsters.

Quote from: Skywalker;950844It has gone to a greater number gaming tables in my local area than I can remember it going to before. WotC seems to have really hit it out of the park in making D&D approachable and popular again.

It's a great system and as a player I've loved playing but as a DM and consumer....it's a bit boring.

Part of that might be expectations, I was hoping for some long forgotten settings to be revisited and some new ones to enjoy, I'm old enough to remember how much I enjoyed 2e so with fifth I enjoy it, love the rules update from 3e (skipped 4th) but it's just not exciting anymore .

But remember that more than 50 percent of groups homebrew. They don't rely on WoTC to create adventures.

Quote from: HorusArisen;950851It's a great system and as a player I've loved playing but as a DM and consumer....it's a bit boring.

I don't agree. I don't equate spending more $ as more interesting. The fact that the products to date have been reliable in quality and usable without being a head ache has been great for me as a player and DM.

It also allows me to buy the likes of Adventures in Middle-Earth, which provides greater interest.

And here I am stripping options OUT of the PHB for my campaigns because I think 5e has TOO MUCH stuff, especially for complete newbies to the hobby. Next time I run I'm thinking about removing Backgrounds & bonds/flaws/ideals completely, and possibly skills, along with some of the races and perhaps even some of the classes. I might just rewrite the core rules to reflect all the changes I want to make (while preserving the mechanical core of 5e, folding in lots of the "hard mode" options from the DMG, and possibly switching to GP for XP and removing combat XP completely).

Quote from: Skywalker;950861I don't agree. I don't equate spending more $ as more interesting. The fact that the products to date have been reliable in quality and usable without being a head ache has been great for me as a player and DM.

It also allows me to buy the likes of Adventures in Middle-Earth, which provides greater interest.

The third party support is interesting but proves my point, extra material is interesting

Quote from: HorusArisen;950800Neither saintly or self righteous, just not rude.

Just think of us as that bunch of half-pissed old farts down at the local pub who use "manky bugger" as a form of address and "fucking wanker" as an endearment.

Hell, my real life brothers and I use "shit for brains" as an endearment to each other.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;950628I have to agree; what I'd really love to see is not necessarily a huge churn out of products, but at least one hardcover book (if not a classic boxed set) devoted to each of the classic campaign settings

Yeah, strictly speaking I don't need a new edition of any one campaign setting but fuck it, it would be nice if the kids coming into this hobby had their own boxed sets with lush world maps and fantasy gazetteers to fire up the ol' imagination like I had in the distant, exotic 1990s.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;950628Though a self-contained boxed set with all the rules needed to play specifically adapted to each setting is something that could be marketed to Toy and board game shops, even find initial funding with Kickstarters (maybe paired up with CMON for an included set of miniatures).

I wouldn't quite do it like this. But hey, could work. It sort of worked for WW back in the day, didn't it? You bought the same (admittedly simpler) ruleset with each fatsplat as a stand-alone game.

Quote from: Voros;950634I wish. Planescape, Dark Sun, Spelljammer...only if they let third part publishers get their mitts on the settings.

Didn't they outsource the Sword Coast book (or bits of it, anyway) to Green Ronin?

Quote from: S'mon;950658I run 5e with 3ePathfinder or OSR material. It's a much better system than 3e/pf and conversion is extremely easy.

I haven't run D&D5 yet, but if I ever do, I'm using it like I used Castles & Crusades: with AD&D1 and Palladium Fantasy material.

Quote from: Larsdangly;950657Both the volume and quality of official, WoC or directly licensed, 5E products are frankly pathetic. In the same time period they've published a few super shitty railroad adventure path books, the OSR community has cranked out dozens of amazing products. I think the worm has turned; pre-3E D&D (and its various knock offs and variants) is where the action is. I understand that 5E maintains a large body count because its run at lots of game stores and so forth. But it is withering away as a product line.

Agreed for the most part. The OSR's anarchic and decentralized nature ensures its continued vibrancy. I also believe Paizo is probably doing a better job of keeping the hardcore crunch crowd entertained, and a decent job of building IP as well (Golarion has novels, boardgames, and would have CRPGs too if they hadn't trusted you-know-who to develop their MMO).

I think D&D5 may coast along the power of the brand, even with the current, anemic release schedule, for a long time, in no small part owing to corporate upper-echelon apathy. The claims that D&D is "more valuable as an IP for electronic gaming" have been proven to be bullshit — where are the D&D-branded CRPGs? Neverwinter, a weak Diablo clone by all accounts, is all they've got to show since the end of the Atari suit. In terms of corporate management, I suspect this is only one step up from shelving D&D altogether.

But hey, D&D is still in print, in an edition that doesn't suck as bad as the last two, is much more casual-friendly (though still not as much as the TSR versions) and now stands a non-zero chance of getting a suite of digital tools that actually comes out and does not suck. So I'm really, really hoping they don't screw this up.