Zero Buzz on 5E...Is It Dead Out The Gate?

Seerow · Post by **Seerow** » Wed May 28, 2014 10:01 pm

Fucking bounded accuracy.

Really this.

If it weren't for bounded accuracy I might be willing to give 5e a serious look. Or even with Bounded Accuracy, if they had ever lived up to the promise of making high level characters gain new and interesting abilities at an increased rate to make up for the loss of raw numbers, I'd give it a look.

But with what we do have? No thanks.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Wed May 28, 2014 10:13 pm

Avoraciopoctules wrote:But the best part? Basic D&D is a free PDF. Anyone can download it from our website. We want to put D&D in as many hands as possible, and a free, digital file is the best way to do that.

That is terrible.
After the 5e fiasco, there is a good chance that upper management assumes it is because they handed out the basic game for free.

Avoraciopoctules · Post by **Avoraciopoctules** » Thu May 29, 2014 12:02 am

That would be pretty funny. Then again, they are inching further and further towards the realm of Freemium cell phone games, so I think there's a chance they double down and try to put a bunch of ridiculous microtransactions in.

"Pay $1 to unlock the Owlbear in your Monster Manual now! Pay $5 to unlock 7 random monsters! Special sale on Warpriest unlocks, only $2 if you tell your Facebook friends."

Because obviously, the problem was getting people to pay for a whole book at once instead of selling content piecemeal.

Dogbert · Post by **Dogbert** » Thu May 29, 2014 12:45 am

Well Paizo already sells in-game buffs with their novels, so no, it doesn't sound like hyerbole at all.

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Thu May 29, 2014 12:49 am

ishy wrote:
Avoraciopoctules wrote:But the best part? Basic D&D is a free PDF. Anyone can download it from our website. We want to put D&D in as many hands as possible, and a free, digital file is the best way to do that.
That is terrible.
After the 5e fiasco, there is a good chance that upper management assumes it is because they handed out the basic game for free.

Now, wait. 5e still looks like a shit flavored shit cake, and Mearls is still a hack. But free PDF download of the basic rules is in itself a good thing. The potential to do even this wrong still exists (freemium model, as you said. *shivers*) but that has to be the first 5e press release that doesn't disappoint me.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Thu May 29, 2014 12:56 am

I would honestly not hate a fremium model. I mean, the specific implementation might be shit, but at least fremium would tend to cut down on shovelware.

erik · Post by **erik** » Thu May 29, 2014 1:01 am

nockermensch wrote:
ishy wrote:
Avoraciopoctules wrote:But the best part? Basic D&D is a free PDF. Anyone can download it from our website. We want to put D&D in as many hands as possible, and a free, digital file is the best way to do that.
That is terrible.
After the 5e fiasco, there is a good chance that upper management assumes it is because they handed out the basic game for free.
Now, wait. 5e still looks like a shit flavored shit cake, and Mearls is still a hack. But free PDF download of the basic rules is in itself a good thing. The potential to do even this wrong still exists (freemium model, as you said. *shivers*) but that has to be the first 5e press release that doesn't disappoint me.

That's his point. Having the free download packaged with a flaming bag of poop may sink free downloads by association, spoiling WotC on free pdfs. They already walked away from SRD which was a sad move.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Thu May 29, 2014 4:08 am

erik wrote: That's his point. Having the free download packaged with a flaming bag of poop may sink free downloads by association, spoiling WotC on free pdfs. They already walked away from SRD which was a sad move.

Yeah, without a doubt if they learned anything at all from Pathfinder, it's the fact that you can have a fully loaded SRD and it won't hurt your sales. I really have no idea why they're not doing that. It's already shown to be a successful business model.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Thu May 29, 2014 7:08 am

The SRD system was introduced with their most successful product and when they moved away from it and one of their competitors embraced it, that competitor took the mantle of "most successful RPG." So you'd think that the SRD would be obviously the way to go. But apparently having a correlation coefficient of "1" with success is not enough to make the SRD anything other than controversial among the WotC suit wearing caste. I have no idea how that could be true, but apparently it is.

-Username17

souran · Post by **souran** » Fri May 30, 2014 3:54 am

FrankTrollman wrote:The SRD system was introduced with their most successful product and when they moved away from it and one of their competitors embraced it, that competitor took the mantle of "most successful RPG." So you'd think that the SRD would be obviously the way to go. But apparently having a correlation coefficient of "1" with success is not enough to make the SRD anything other than controversial among the WotC suit wearing caste. I have no idea how that could be true, but apparently it is.

-Username17

You know exactly why its controversial. Because the Suits at WOTC don't care about the fact that the product was successful, they care that because of the SRD they didn't get all the money from that edition of the game they could have.

In the mind of the WOTC/HASBRO execs the SRD/OGL created their largest competitor The fact that white wolf went bankrupt and Shadowrun has passed between various lisencees looking for somebody who can make money off of anything that is NOT d20 doesn't matter. All they see is that they let other people make stuff for their game an suddenly they didn't make all the money.

And this reveals the real issue with 5E. If it took them 2.5 freaking years to make the core rulebook how much support is this game going to have?

The pathfinder doesn't put out a hardback crunch book every other month like WOTC did. They do one crunch hardback a year, 1 setting hardback for their in house setting, and 1 book of monsters and the rest is adventures.

If WOTC doesn't get that they need to support people's ability to play sessions and not just pump out mini's and dice and novels and all the good margin stuff. They HAVE to support the game or it doesn't matter if its dead out of the gate, it will just die when nobody plays the damn thing.

Heaven's Thunder Hammer · Fri May 30, 2014 4:06 am

Man this is so depressing. I was honestly (and naively) hopeful that D&D 5E would be a game that I'd be introducing to my kids when they're old enough to play.

At this rate, I'm just going to wait another 5 years for Pathfinder 2E (which will eventually come out right?) or D&D 6E if 5E doesn't kill D&D for good.

That said, I have loads of other RPGs.

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Fri May 30, 2014 4:49 pm

The D&D division of WotC has three problems that contribute to the lackluster marketing plan for DDN:

1-D&D is an afterthought by now. I firmly believe that Hasbro's policy of "we don't inject money in R&D for low-sales brands" has been applied to D&D for the last couple of years at least.

2-WotC hasn't done the transition to a digital company yet. They still have their hilariously bad in-house programming division, and they're still thinking that their competitive advantage is "we can print stuff and distribute it for cheaper than the competition". Their business model is still "sell cardboard, paper, ink and glue", not "sell content."

3-WotC is very much a "friends-only" company. They hire mostly Seattle gameshop barnacles and assorted friends, and they'll tolerate ridiculously low levels of performance before firing anyone (see also: WotC's programming division.) So they're probably stuck with overstaffed marketing, distribution and production departments, and going mostly digital is just going to exacerbate that. And if you have an overrated physical distribution department, everything is a reason not to go digital.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri May 30, 2014 5:30 pm

So, lets assume that 5e kills D&D for WotC and the suits are looking to offload a "toxic" property. What are we looking at happening, based on business practices and all that? Is there any way to estimate what they would want from a company who wanted to buy the rights to D&D?

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Fri May 30, 2014 6:36 pm

souran wrote: You know exactly why its controversial. Because the Suits at WOTC don't care about the fact that the product was successful, they care that because of the SRD they didn't get all the money from that edition of the game they could have.

In the mind of the WOTC/HASBRO execs the SRD/OGL created their largest competitor The fact that white wolf went bankrupt and Shadowrun has passed between various lisencees looking for somebody who can make money off of anything that is NOT d20 doesn't matter. All they see is that they let other people make stuff for their game an suddenly they didn't make all the money.

Couldn't they have an SRD without having an OGL? Making all your material accessible to everyone so you can recruit people doesn't necessarily mean you have to let 3rd party publishers into the mix.

Is there some legal reason I'm not aware of?

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Fri May 30, 2014 8:25 pm

Prak_Anima wrote:So, lets assume that 5e kills D&D for WotC and the suits are looking to offload a "toxic" property. What are we looking at happening, based on business practices and all that? Is there any way to estimate what they would want from a company who wanted to buy the rights to D&D?

Hasbro doesn't sell intellectual property. If they think it's not worth having, they'll keep it anyway. Later they'll see if they can revive it.

Ferret · Post by **Ferret** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:35 pm

http://jobs.hasbro.com/job/Renton-Lead- ... /65666800/

Pretty sure they're advertising Mike Mearls' job already

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:43 pm

Ferret wrote:http://jobs.hasbro.com/job/Renton-Lead- ... /65666800/

Pretty sure they're advertising Mike Mearls' job already

Close, but Mearls is the Lead Designer.

ACOS · Post by **ACOS** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:44 pm

Ferret wrote:http://jobs.hasbro.com/job/Renton-Lead- ... /65666800/

Pretty sure they're advertising Mike Mearls' job already

Hey, it's time for the June layoffs, and 5e is now hard-dated for the shelves.
What else could you expect?
The best he can hope for is to be allowed to step down to a worker bee role. The best we can hope for is that the door does indeed hit him on the way out.

nockermensch wrote: Close, but Mearls is the Lead Designer.

Damn it.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:47 pm

ACOS wrote:Damn it.

They might be doing an internal promotion and reshuffling.

ACOS · Post by **ACOS** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:29 pm

RadiantPhoenix wrote:
ACOS wrote:Damn it.
They might be doing an internal promotion and reshuffling.

So there IS hope.

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:57 pm

Let's be honest, is there anyone we trust to actually replace Mearls?

We all know that they are just gonna bring in a friend of a friend.

As an aside, I suspect there's a good reason the MtG team refuses to associate with the D&D team.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:00 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote:As an aside, I suspect there's a good reason the MtG team refuses to associate with the D&D team.

Oh? IIRC they claimed to work together regularly in the past. When did that change?

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:07 pm

ishy wrote:Oh? IIRC they claimed to work together regularly in the past. When did that change?

From what I heard the magic team shot down D&D in Dominara because they figured the D&D team would crap all over it. So sayeth my friend who is more into Magic than I am.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:49 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote: From what I heard the magic team shot down D&D in Dominara because they figured the D&D team would crap all over it. So sayeth my friend who is more into Magic than I am.

Yeah, there has to be some kind of reason why they haven't done a MtG/D&D crossover, because that seems like such a no brainer. I suspect it must have to do with the MtG guys fearing that D&D will ruin their product.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:06 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote:From what I heard the magic team shot down D&D in Dominara because they figured the D&D team would crap all over it. So sayeth my friend who is more into Magic than I am.

Well last time I know of when wotc published an article about a MtG setting was here:

[url=http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ro3/20111024 wrote:rule of three[/url]]]Back in 1997, when Wizards of the Coast acquired TSR, we took a long look at the idea of D&D and M:tG crossovers. We even did some early concept work. Ultimately we chose not to pursue crossover products. Basically, we feel that D&D and Magic: the Gathering are two different experiences aimed at different audiences. We want to be careful not to make either game into something that it isn’t in an attempt to increase its appeal in the other category—if adding trappings of Magic to a D&D setting impinged on the “D&Dness” of that setting, or vice versa, it would just dilute what each brand does best. If our thinking on that changes or if we find an opportunity to explore a crossover, you’ll be the first to know. After us, of course.

We do trade personnel back and forth between the D&D and M:tG R&D teams, as the opportunity presents itself; there’s a lot each team can teach the other. That’s why Matt was involved in some recent Magic work, and we’ve had folks like Tom LaPille, Robert Gutschera, Ryan Miller, Mike Donais, and Mons Johnson involved in D&D projects over the years.