Tuesday, April 22, 2008
D&D 4th Edition "Open" - But Only If You Close 3.5E
Apparently, Wizards of the Coast has come to a conclusion regarding whether or not there will be anything resembling the much-celebrated "Open Gaming License" for 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons.
The response is still a little hazy, as nobody commenting on it has seen the actual contracts, but the key aspect that has a lot of nerd rage going on at the ENWorld forums is a requirement for anyone to use the new license that they forever forswear creating any content for the previous system (or any other "open gaming" system). In other words, you marry yourself to 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons, or you aren't invited to the party at all.
I guess that's one way of putting the genie back in the bottle. As reported by Clark Peterson of Necromancer Games (one of the attendees of the conference call), "I was told that specifically by Wizards of the Coast. In direct response to that direct question. The answer was, 'we dont want fence sitters. Companies have to choose.'" So unless there's a change at the last minute, there will be no dual-statted modules for both Pathfinder and Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition. As restrictive as it sounds, for a few weeks third parties were worried that Wizards was going to revoke any sort of "open" third-party support, returning to the ol' 2nd edition days where third parties were cut off completely (AFAIK).
It's a pretty bold move, one that could only be made by Wizards throwing its considerable weight and best-known brand around within the admittedly small "industry." Wizards of the Coast is committed to doing away with the legacy game system (and competitive products that piggybacked on the OGL, like Castles & Crusades and Pathfinder). But I also see signs that they are not just trying to put a bullet in the head of an older system - they are actually trying to reinvent the entire industry.
Face it - the pen & paper roleplaying game industry is almost identical to its 1974 roots. Books are durable goods, and players only need so many books to play the game. Seriously - I have much-beloved copies of the 1st edition Monster Manual, Player's Handbook, and Dungeon Master's Guide, and I could very easily continue to play the game for years with nothing more than that. There are, in fact, a bunch of holdouts who are doing exactly that right now. Every book makes the players more and more independent of the company.
So as bookshelves get filled, purchases drop off. Players have more game books than they know what to do with, and aren't really interested in more. Wizards of the Coast has already solved - to a point - this problem for their collectible games, like Magic: The Gathering and D&D Miniatures. It sounds like they are applying a similar approach to D&D, making it a constantly-evolving game... and a game players must keep paying for, as new "core" books become an annual expense. And that's not even including their online initiative, which I expect to be a key element of their marketing and sales strategy.
Will it work? Does Wizards have the clout to hit the reset button this time? Does this strategy provide enough benefit to customers that they'll put up with greater dependence on the company under the new plan (assuming there is a new plan and I'm not just tilting at windmills)? And will third parties hitch their wagons to 4E, or will they throw their collective weight behind competing products, fracturing the small industry even further?
(Vaguely) related musings
* Pathfinder: The New Dungeons & Dragons 3.5?
* Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Announced
* Disappointment In the Demonweb Pits
* Original Dungeons & Dragons Trivia
* Spring and... D&D?
.
Labels: Biz, Roleplaying Games
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 6:00 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Their move makes it look like they are 1) heavily dependent on third party for some of their publicity, materials and success, and 2) are very worried about the 3.5E players and publishers cutting into their success.
I suppose if you have a saturated market, the only chance to keep it alive is to turn the product into a consumable, a growing collectable set, or a subscription.
I suppose if you have a saturated market, the only chance to keep it alive is to turn the product into a consumable, a growing collectable set, or a subscription.
Don't think you are tilting windmills. I think though, that, like the record industry (and others), the p&p/table top industry is holding on to outdated business models.
I just don't see the light at the end of the WoC tunnel. Granted, I haven't kept up with the industry since I stopped playing BattleTech/MechWarrior (various attempts to start weekly grownup D&D games have all failed so dismally that we gave up years ago), but I just don't see the revenue stream from that model.
You are absolutely right. There is a critical mass of printed material one NEEDS to play. After that you have to be a fan boy to make someone rich (I know...cause I was a serious B-Tech fanboy). There are just not enough of them...uh...us...around to keep an aging industry alive.
I really think that WoC and crew lost their best shot with NWN. They should have started pushing that direction. Doing what the big boys in the MMO market won't do...and that is create an infrastructure and game tools that allow people to migrate from p&p to the computer full time. Not just to augment their RPG play, but to make it the center of their RPG time. Small groups, small adventures, more controls in the hands of the players, and dare I say DM.
I think WoC is wasting precious resources trying to hold on to an old model. Print is still viable, but not like this, or rather not like I think it sounds like they are going.
cl
I just don't see the light at the end of the WoC tunnel. Granted, I haven't kept up with the industry since I stopped playing BattleTech/MechWarrior (various attempts to start weekly grownup D&D games have all failed so dismally that we gave up years ago), but I just don't see the revenue stream from that model.
You are absolutely right. There is a critical mass of printed material one NEEDS to play. After that you have to be a fan boy to make someone rich (I know...cause I was a serious B-Tech fanboy). There are just not enough of them...uh...us...around to keep an aging industry alive.
I really think that WoC and crew lost their best shot with NWN. They should have started pushing that direction. Doing what the big boys in the MMO market won't do...and that is create an infrastructure and game tools that allow people to migrate from p&p to the computer full time. Not just to augment their RPG play, but to make it the center of their RPG time. Small groups, small adventures, more controls in the hands of the players, and dare I say DM.
I think WoC is wasting precious resources trying to hold on to an old model. Print is still viable, but not like this, or rather not like I think it sounds like they are going.
cl
I am really concerned with 4th edition. I was at DDXP, and got to playtest a little 30 minute dungeon crawl.
It is painfully obvious that Hasbro, the parent of WOTC, is trying to target MMORPG players.
Getting rid of prestige classes, bringing in party "roles", the advent of at will, per encounter, and daily abilities (cooldown, anyone?), etc.
I did actually preorder the 4th edition gift set from Amazon, because I want to see the entire package before I make a final decision.
But I'm concerned. Very concerned.
It is painfully obvious that Hasbro, the parent of WOTC, is trying to target MMORPG players.
Getting rid of prestige classes, bringing in party "roles", the advent of at will, per encounter, and daily abilities (cooldown, anyone?), etc.
I did actually preorder the 4th edition gift set from Amazon, because I want to see the entire package before I make a final decision.
But I'm concerned. Very concerned.
# posted by 
: April 22, 2008 2:36 PM
: April 22, 2008 2:36 PM
I think WotC would be better served by stabilizing the core rules and focusing on campaign settings, adventure modules and game accessories. Campaign settings provide limitless opportunities for products that advance plotlines or incorporate new game mechanics. Players expect campaign settings to be living, and so changes to them don’t generate as much alienation as core rule changes—if the changes are organic to the setting.
I don't know if WotC would have been better served that way - though I suspect the community and fans would have been.
I mean, I would have signed up for the online initiative and online Dragon / Dungeon subscriptions for 3.5. Now, the only money they are likely to get from me in the future will be for the core rulebooks, and maybe future miniatures (since those can be used for older editions of D&D just fine...) But I doubt I represent the average gamer. Or their new target market.
I really don't think that competing against World of Warcraft like they are is a smart way to go, if that's really their plan.
I personally hope this really results in there being far more extended support for 3.5, and other games like Pathfinder (aka "D&D 3.75") and Castles & Crusades (which is very much like a streamlined, simplified 1E D&D borrowing from OGL material), True20, and other similar systems.
Post a Comment
I mean, I would have signed up for the online initiative and online Dragon / Dungeon subscriptions for 3.5. Now, the only money they are likely to get from me in the future will be for the core rulebooks, and maybe future miniatures (since those can be used for older editions of D&D just fine...) But I doubt I represent the average gamer. Or their new target market.
I really don't think that competing against World of Warcraft like they are is a smart way to go, if that's really their plan.
I personally hope this really results in there being far more extended support for 3.5, and other games like Pathfinder (aka "D&D 3.75") and Castles & Crusades (which is very much like a streamlined, simplified 1E D&D borrowing from OGL material), True20, and other similar systems.
Links to this post:
<< Home
