Do you think its a good or bad thing that WotC only sells one RPG?
Why or why not?
It's a good thing, both if you like D&D5E or not. If you like it, then you know they're concentrating their best (ok, only) RP writers on that RPG, not splitting them amongst several lines. And if you don't like 5th Ed, then at least they're not spamming a dozen equally dire games into limited phase space (either cash, time or "reach"). It's a win-win for everyone!
EDIT: I'm in the first group, by the way!
Bad thing. Gamma World, Marvel Super Heroes, and Star Frontiers were fun, and being official TSR made it easier to find players. I think the sole focus on a single brand is an overreaction to the lessons learned from TSR, when they spread themselves too thin during 2nd edition. One and only one? That's overkill. Mars doesn't just make Snickers candy, AMC doesn't just show The Walking Dead. There's a difference between producing different settings in the fantasy genre that all compete with each other, and having different lines that might appeal to different players, or the same players at different times. Variety is good.
Though it's only a mild bad because there's a wealth of games available from other companies. We're not suffering. And from a corporate standpoint, it seems to make sense. Hasbro probably doesn't care much about D&D, the game. They're probably more interested in the brand, and this maximizes their return while minimizing their effort. Having a diverse line takes work.
They could do another Gamma World. Thats been redone almost as much as Spiderman.
Because not even top-selling properties like Star Wars can make enough to justify diverting resources from the 80,000-lb. monstrosity that is Dungeons & Dragons.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1101872Do you think its a good or bad thing that WotC only sells one RPG?
Why or why not?
Corporate ownership believes they should do whatever will produce the most profitable return on their investment.
Well, that was one of the reasons for the d20 system back in the early days of WOTC. They realized they were just competing with themselves with other systems.
Quote from: JeremyR;1101908Well, that was one of the reasons for the d20 system back in the early days of WOTC. They realized they were just competing with themselves with other systems.
Which they learned really and catastrophically fast was false.
Quote from: Razor 007;1101901Corporate ownership believes they should do whatever will produce the most profitable return on their investment.
Also they can barely produce D&D.
I for one am glad they only do the one. More competition and more room for more creative people.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1101872Do you think its a good or bad thing that WotC only sells one RPG?
Why or why not?
Hasbro has WOTC on a tight leash even now after the monumental screwups of 4e and the total botch of handling 4e D&D Gamma World. Which was made during the tightening of the leash.
WOTC has done little to show Hasbro they can safely handle things so they either outsource stuff to other publishers, or just have not been granted funding yet for any other products. And considering just how much WOTC has botched handling various small IP they have acquired. yeah... keep the leash tight Hasbro.
Keep in mind that D&D and more importantly, WOTC is a rather troublesome IP for Hasbro. Much as a few other IPs they acquired are. Due to mishandling of those IPs in the past in ways that are not feasible to deal with.
Quote from: JeremyR;1101908Well, that was one of the reasons for the d20 system back in the early days of WOTC. They realized they were just competing with themselves with other systems.
They also learned that you can not make money selling adventures.
Quote from: JeremyR;1101908Well, that was one of the reasons for the d20 system back in the early days of WOTC. They realized they were just competing with themselves with other systems.
So the d100, 2d6, 3d6, opend6, etc games cut on the sales of D&D?
I think evidence points to the opposite being true. Just in this forum you have many d20 players who also buy/enjoy games with other underlying systems. How many of those games might not exist if WotC kept publishing their other games?
Corporate incompetence is the most likely explanation, They have to maximize profit while reducing the cost, if you don't need to have 3-4 different teams developing games/modules/worldbooks for 3-4 different games you're cutting your costs by 3/4. Risk/benefit analysis is a thing on corporations, unlike oneman bands who can publish different stuff because they are the only owner they need to answer to the share holders. Unless they can be sure a d100 game will sell like gangbusters they won't spend a single dime on it.
And since they left all the rest of the spectrum for other publishers now they have to compete with what has become the default in different genres.
It sells only one RPG simply because the market is smaller for Tabletop RPGs than the other brands.
They have the following brands
* Magic: The Gathering
* Avalon Hill
* Transformers (Card Game)
* Duel Masters (Imported Game)
So, you have diverse games--a few CCG (which is WoTC speciality, that was always the bigger brand and what allowed them to buy TSR), and a board game brand.
In the business sense, they really don't need to diversify their games. They are on the top, and since they already have a diverse portfolio it doesn't make sense to diversify the RPG. This is unlike the TSR days when it was much smaller and there were different marketing forces. This is the actually the best way to diversify--diversify product lines, not just a genre of product.
We don't actually need more products, if we will just use our own imaginations.
Quote from: Razor 007;1101937We don't actually need more products, if we will just use our own imaginations.
Thats a great idea.
.
.
Imagines WotC making more products.
.
.
Imagines WotC cocking it up.
Oh, Gawd damn it!
See how easy that was?
Quote from: Pat;1101884Bad thing. Gamma World, Marvel Super Heroes, and Star Frontiers were fun
Agreed, I want all of these.
It would be cool, if they would release a D & D 5E Basic hardback; with 3 dozen monsters, and a few DM resources in a single volume.
The 5E answer to the OSR market.
I think the majority of the TTRPG market only has time for one game. Some might rotate between which game is the "one" at a time, but unlike twenty years ago both young and old have unlimited entertainment options at their fingertips. When I was a kid, lots of groups would get have more free time than D&D could fill without getting sick of it. So they'd switch it up, play a different game until the urge returned. All that was on were 3 channels, Dad wasn't going to miss 60 minutes or the nightly news, and not everybody had a VCR or even an atari/coleco/intellivision.
Now most D&D players probably would refuse to stop binge watching netflix or playing vids to the extent they'd become over-saturated on their D&D campaign.
Quote from: Razor 007;1101988It would be cool, if they would release a D & D 5E Basic hardback; with 3 dozen monsters, and a few DM resources in a single volume.
The 5E answer to the OSR market.
My understanding is that the Essentials Kit (mine due today!) is 5e Basic D&D, in a box not hardback. Covers levels 1-6 which is twice Moldvay or Mentzer Basic, and a good level range for many campaigns, though a 6-10 or 7-12 Expert Set box would be nice too.
Because Hasbro is very much concerned with its IP and IP lawyers are expensive. The more games, the more IP, the more billable hours (or in house lawyers you have to hire on salary).
Quote from: S'mon;1102009My understanding is that the Essentials Kit (mine due today!) is 5e Basic D&D, in a box not hardback. Covers levels 1-6 which is twice Moldvay or Mentzer Basic, and a good level range for many campaigns, though a 6-10 or 7-12 Expert Set box would be nice too.
The D & D 5E Essentials Kit appears to be a better offering; and will likely squash the sales numbers of the D & D 5E Starter Set. More dice, and more toys in the box; for a few dollars more.
The PF 1E Begginer Box was more expensive; but a much better game set at the table, than the D & D 5E Starter Set was.
I can't speak to the quality of the PF 2E Begginer Box; as that's not a game I ever intend to play.
Quote from: Omega;1101919Keep in mind that D&D and more importantly, WOTC is a rather troublesome IP for Hasbro. Much as a few other IPs they acquired are. Due to mishandling of those IPs in the past in ways that are not feasible to deal with.
I'd think that with the rising popularity of D&D they'd try to cash in through other merchandise. How well did the D&D boardgames sell? You'd think there would at least be a D&D themed monopoly.
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1102081I'd think that with the rising popularity of D&D they'd try to cash in through other merchandise. How well did the D&D boardgames sell? You'd think there would at least be a D&D themed monopoly.
Saw a version of D&D Clue at Target. From what I can tell, the D&D themed hobby board games, such as Betrayal at Baldur's Gate, sell very well.
I always thought of 5e as just a place holder game to keep the D&D IP current while Hasbro cashes in on the ancillary products like t-shirts.
The question shouldn't be "why doesn't WotC sell other RPGs?" but, rather, "What RPGs could WotC possibly make that would outsell D&D?"
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1102083Saw a version of D&D Clue at Target. From what I can tell, the D&D themed hobby board games, such as Betrayal at Baldur's Gate, sell very well.
I always thought of 5e as just a place holder game to keep the D&D IP current while Hasbro cashes in on the ancillary products like t-shirts.
The question shouldn't be "why doesn't WotC sell other RPGs?" but, rather, "What RPGs could WotC possibly make that would outsell D&D?"
Or at least not cannibalize D&D sales.