D&D 5th Edition makes the New York Times

[navar100]

It wouldn't be profitable. 99.9% of the players still playing 2E or earlier editions are grognards who have been playing those games since last century. In addition, gaming design and philosophy has surpassed the rather restrictive nature of those rules. There won't be new customers for old systems.

Pathfinder has a market because despite the rage of those who abandoned 3E for 4E, there are still a good number of current customers who like the 3E system. WOTC chose to fire those customers for its 4E system, choosing instead to side with those who were enraged and market for new customers who never played D&D before.

5E will be the barometer to tell whether WOTC wants its 3E customers back. I don't expect it to be 3E with just a 5 pasted over it, but the nature of it won't be known until it's published. If they were to try to get 3E customers back, they might opt to bring back Vancian magic and the more familiar spells for spellcasters, tweaked to satisfy those who get apoplectic over Gate or Glitterdust, but use the 4E model for warrior classes.

[bloodtide]

It wouldn't be profitable. 99.9% of the players still playing 2E or earlier editions are grognards who have been playing those games since last century. In addition, gaming design and philosophy has surpassed the rather restrictive nature of those rules. There won't be new customers for old systems.

As an old gamer, I can say that most of us would love a nice new D&D book.

5E will be the barometer to tell whether WOTC wants its 3E customers back. I don't expect it to be 3E with just a 5 pasted over it, but the nature of it won't be known until it's published. If they were to try to get 3E customers back, they might opt to bring back Vancian magic and the more familiar spells for spellcasters, tweaked to satisfy those who get apoplectic over Gate or Glitterdust, but use the 4E model for warrior classes.

Somehow I just know they will Jump the Shark even further then they did with 4E did from old E.

[Trog]

Even with ebooks they have to pay writers, editors, and artists. Books aren't cheap to develop. If you're developing 4 books for every 1 book you would normally, costs are going to creep up.

And your idea for publishing one adventure with 4 sets of crunch? First, that sounds terrible. Seriously I can only imagine how cluttered that would be. Second, WotC hardly ever publishes adventures. They mostly produce crunch material that they know a larger percentage of their audience would be interested in.


Finally, a lot of the people who don't want to switch editions are people who are perfectly happy with what they already have. Particularly among those who claim to still play second edition, I know of a few... but have not met a single one who didn't have such a huge number of houserules it was not a recognizable game anymore. Even if WotC DID try to support 2e, most of the players who play it wouldn't bother, because their own game is so different from the actual 2e system, that the material is as useless to them as 3.5 or 4e material.

Yes and they have to pay developers to develop a new system and new rules too. I fail to see much of a difference here.

Setting up the front half of a book with all the fluff and info and having separate chapters for the major editions still being played would keep it clean enough I'd think. Right now adventures get the maps and encounters separate from the adventure proper now anyway. It's not that far of a leap from what they are doing now already.

Most people stopped advancing because they were still in the middle of something in the old edition. And yes in all editions there are lots of house rules. Nothing's going to stop that. Though I suspect that you may be right about the game changing a lot for the old school types who run old editions. But if something new was published for that system they'd probably just adapt that new stuff like they had the old stuff so I fail to see how they couldn't still use it.

Publishing a new edition brings better profits than publishing materials for old editions. Between your love and your money, WotC would rather have your money.

Well I guess since the fans hold the purse strings here we can choose what we love and put our money there. I seem to recall a game called Pathfinder which capitalized off of WotC leaving 3.x behind. So yeah... the money goes to what we love. No longer offer it and we no longer pay. As they have found out since they have been less profitable as of late from what I understand. In short I think the money is where the love is. If they want our money they should cater to what we love. *shrug*

Well, it would be six sets of crunch: 0E, 1E(AD&D), 1E(D&D), 2E(AD&D), 3/3.5E(D&D, but not the 1E D&D) and then 4E.

Don't forget Player's Options! Like I said above maybe they could narrow it down to the most fan bases that are still active. I don't truly know what that is (and maybe they don't either) but I'd sure be interested to see.

[Manateee]

Stupid monsters are totally my biggest draw to D&D, drop the Landclams and Yelling Mushrooms, and I'm really not sure what its advantage is over any of the lighter, more usable clones.

[Lord Tyger]

I'm curious because I've seen it come up a couple times in these discussions- what exactly is a grognard?

[Manateee]

It's like a gamer, but it's dustier and it rolls on more tables.

[bloodtide]

I'm curious because I've seen it come up a couple times in these discussions- what exactly is a grognard?

From French grognard (“old soldier”)

(games, slang) Someone who enjoys playing previous editions of roleplaying games when new editions of the game are available.

[The-Mage-King]

I'm curious because I've seen it come up a couple times in these discussions- what exactly is a grognard?

French term for "Old Soldier". Adopted by wargamers and RPG players because it fits.


Me? I classify myself as a grognard.



Regarding the discussion... Yeah, it'd be great if they DID reprint all old editions instead of 5E, but... Not likely.

[Seerow]

Yes and they have to pay developers to develop a new system and new rules too. I fail to see much of a difference here.

You don't see the difference between paying one development team doing a new system, vs 4 teams working on 4 separate systems?

Or do you expect a single team to divide its attention evenly among 4 separate systems? {Scrubbed}

[Trog]

You don't see the difference between paying one development team doing a new system, vs 4 teams working on 4 separate systems?

Or do you expect a single team to divide its attention evenly among 4 separate systems?

{Scrubbed the post, scrub the quote.}

You uh... you missed the point there, Sparky. They *wouldn't* be developing 4 systems. They would be inventing 0 (zero) systems. They would, instead, be producing content that worked across all the previous already existing systems.

TSR failed because they produced crappy setting after crappy setting (Red Steel, anyone? "I must have the Cinnabril now! *pew!pew!* ... awful. >.<) not because they tried to do what I am proposing - they never did that.

[Sidmen]

You uh... you missed the point there, Sparky. They *wouldn't* be developing 4 systems. They would be inventing 0 (zero) systems. They would, instead, be producing content that worked across all the previous already existing systems.

Developing material for a system is the same as developing a system. Every new spell, critter, feat and feature needs to be cross-checked against the others of each and every system to avoid abuse - unless you don't care and just want to churn out a crappy product.

So, you'd either be asking a group of developers to learn 4-6 fundamentally different systems, and balance everything they do in those systems (which - not happening). Or, you hire a bunch of different teams, which is more expensive.

Besides, each time they've switched systems they've essentially said "this system's flaws are so great that to continue we need to redesign the game engine." Why would you go back to an engine that you've already stretched and mutilated to the point that you couldn't add anything more to it.

[Kane0]

Hmm, i'm more or less of the opinion that 4e was an experiment more than anything, to look into D&D in a world of MMOs. If this is the real WOTC then i will wager that they would have learned a lot and will that will make 5e better from it.

I would say that we wouldnt be as divided as you would think as 4e hasnt been out long compared to the rest has it? if 5e comes out soon then most would simply move on from 4e before they got too attached to it like we have with 3.5, right?

Just my 2 cents really

[TheLoneCleric]

There is no way they have the manpower or money to pull that off. Besides, Hasbro wouldn't let them. The previous editions didn't have enough sales.

[horseboy]

#4 is easily fixed.
1) Don't have stupid amounts of flying stuff.
2) Arrows, they're good for more than taking out guard's knees.

[EccentricCircle]

I can't see this happening.
it would be good if it did. i've said for years that they ought to keep the old books in print via electronic media. they may not have the resources to design new books for old editions or do limited print runs of them but they must have the capability to sell a pdf file of any of their older books at relatively little cost to themselves. the only reason they don't do this is that they would much prefer everyone to buy new stuff and so don't want to support the older editions at all. I can't see that changing any time soon.

what I do hope is that it will be possible to convert existing products to 5e.
the inability to adapt my existing 3.5 library to 4e is one of the many reasons I don't run 4e games. it would take far more work than just doing it with 3.5 even if both systems have some nice things that I would like to mix and match. it would be nice if 5e was somewhere in between. so that I could say, runa 3.5 like game , but use the monsters from 4e manuals like the Dark Sun book. which is great for fluff. but doesn't help me to run a Dark sun game.

[Katana_Geldar]

While you are at it, talk to this guy.



{{scrubbed}}

[gkathellar]

Look at it from WotC's financial perspective: ultimately, costs for doing this are prohibitive on the personnel scale. You need teams for each edition you support, teams for fluff and setting work, teams to do formatting, distribution, PR, tertiary product and graphic design work, teams to mediate between all of these teams and make sure they can actually communicate, and above it all you need an oversight team run by someone who knows everything there is to know about everything but is also fantastic at delegating.

So that's a lot of money, and it's a lot of manpower, and setting up such a supergroup requires you to have a personnel manager who is already absolutely amazing at using and hiring people for this type of project. But okay, what if the assertion is that for all this cash you're spending, you'll just end up making more?

Well, no, you won't. Just like PF has limited 4E's success, each edition you support is drawing potential business away from the other editions. Maybe the total amount of business between all six editions is greater than the total business from just one would be, but if you could get even 40% of your players from editions 1-5 onto edition 6, than the reduced personnel costs would probably make up for it. And you can't run market tests, because tests run the risk of creating new fervor for old editions which, despite being popular aren't actually economically profitable.

5E is already a risky business move in light of 4E's problems in the market, but I like the boldness of it: they're making their best conscious effort to pull the fractured fanbase back together. Maybe they'll fail, maybe they'll succeed, but they're taking their only real business chance while the iron is still hot.

[Trog]

Developing material for a system is the same as developing a system. Every new spell, critter, feat and feature needs to be cross-checked against the others of each and every system to avoid abuse - unless you don't care and just want to churn out a crappy product.

So, you'd either be asking a group of developers to learn 4-6 fundamentally different systems, and balance everything they do in those systems (which - not happening). Or, you hire a bunch of different teams, which is more expensive.

Besides, each time they've switched systems they've essentially said "this system's flaws are so great that to continue we need to redesign the game engine." Why would you go back to an engine that you've already stretched and mutilated to the point that you couldn't add anything more to it.

As WotC themselves said when they bought D&D they had been playing it a long time. So they knew 2nd ed already. Which is very very similar to 1st ed. They themselves developed 3.x and 4.x. Again there's no system to learn there for them. They already know how to balance things in those systems (such as balance can be achieved at all in any system that is.) Why hire different teams? Use the ones you have now but make it a requirement to make each new thing in three different versions. It's not terribly difficult as they themselves have done this all before. And the further back you go the less work it is. Monster stat blocks, once upon a time, used to be shorter than this paragraph.

And I disagree with their assessment of system flaws. I appreciate that with each new system they have gone the next step to make the rules better, of course. I've played D&D for 25 years and I've played in every system they've put out. I myself will continue to do so. Others may not. If the past is anything to learn from there will be people who will not go to 5e. Just like some didn't go on to 4e. And to 3e. Those lost customers. The systems themselves are good enough to keep people playing in them for decades at a time and still enjoying the system - flawed or no.

Hell, WotC *just* came out with Heroes of the Feywild - a part of their core three worlds for that version of the game. I realize they cannot publish everything at once but I myself just got this and had planned to use it. And now by the time I get midway into it there will be a new edition out. One that has only a scant amount of books as they always have at the beginning. And it will be a waiting game all over again to get the things I need to help my game. Which may or may not coincide with what WotC thinks they should publish first. I could have gamed forever on 2e. Or 3.5. Or 4e. Some people will. Why not cater to them too? They already like and play D&D... but they aren't buying anything new because it's not in their system.

I think for this edition... for the game to move forward... and for WotC to try and unify their base of potential customers... they need to introduce backward compatibility. So putting out products labeled "5e" and having that simply mean it supports AD&D, 2e, 3.5e, and 4e means that every D&D player out there can use the product for their game without modification.

You may say I'm a dreamer... but I'm not the only one.

[DarkEricDraven]

I think that makes sense. I mean, they can't please everyone with 5e. One way or another, people will hate it because it isn't "their" version.

[DigoDragon]

I think having an electronic archive of older editions is a pretty cool idea for those of us who never quite completed our older sets. Already there are resources like that online, so I don't see it difficult to keep it going.

On the other hand, there is a non-zero chance that 5e turns out to be a really good edition of D&D. If it turns out to be anything like when my AD&D 2e group was introduced to 3e, I'd buy into it immediately.

[Katana_Geldar]

I think that makes sense. I mean, they can't please everyone with 5e. One way or another, people will hate it because it isn't "their" version.

This is my point, and there's nothing we can do to stop 5e coming out. Or the other editions where they revise the system and get suckers like us to buy it. And we will.

[Talyn]

Something that I think most people in this conversation - hell, most people on these boards and maybe even most people on the internet, period - are forgetting is that D&D 5th Edition isn't going to be designed purely for current players.

Current players are current because there already is a D&D that works for them. That's why they are playing. A new edition is going to be designed for neophiles (like me) who would rather play in a new system than in an old one, and for entirely new players (like, say, my kids when they get older) who would otherwise not be playing D&D at ALL.

If WotC did what the OP suggested and, rather than publish a new edition, simply devoted their considerable manpower and creativity to polishing older editions, they would lose out on the neophile/never played before market, in order to try and sell to people who aren't going to be able to financially support them.

Look at it this way - you self-proclaimed grognards who are still playing 2nd Edition or AD&D or what have you, if WotC put out new variant rules, kits, etc. that conflicted with the stuff you've been homebrewing for the past fifteen years, would you buy it? Or would you go to the forums, shout "ruined FOREVER" and not give them any more of your money than you already do? Be honest.

[DoctorGlock]

Pretty much exactly what Talyn said

I enjoy 3.5, and have plenty of stuff already. What can more 3.5 possibly add? There really is a maximum amount you can make for an edition and the 600+ 3e really has gone past it. Republishing old stuff will draw very little overall revenue.

I am always looking for new stuff however, because a shiny and streamlined system can be a huge improvement. For both reasons I am really hoping for something completely different. The newer players have always been daunted by the walls of text and byzantine rules. For WotC to profit off a new edition it needs to be something actually new, not a rehash or extension of old stuff.

[Tyndmyr]

You uh... you missed the point there, Sparky. They *wouldn't* be developing 4 systems. They would be inventing 0 (zero) systems. They would, instead, be producing content that worked across all the previous already existing systems.

Honestly, the amount of systemic knowledge needed to do that effectively means that you have separate people working on separate systems. I can't think of a single person that has a true depth of knowledge on ALL versions of D&D. One probably exists...but a full team of them, working for WoTC? Unlikely.

Sometimes, it seems they have difficulty finding people that know ONE system well. There's a LOT of turnover at the WoTC D&D design team.

Don't get me wrong...if they did this, I'd faithfully buy everything for my preferred editions, but I do think it'd be extremely difficult to pull off well and profitably.

[Tengu_temp]

Well I guess since the fans hold the purse strings here we can choose what we love and put our money there. I seem to recall a game called Pathfinder which capitalized off of WotC leaving 3.x behind. So yeah... the money goes to what we love. No longer offer it and we no longer pay. As they have found out since they have been less profitable as of late from what I understand. In short I think the money is where the love is. If they want our money they should cater to what we love. *shrug*

A short economy lesson:
The three books that make most money for each edition of DND are Player's Handbook, DM's Guide, and Monster Manual. The majority of DND purchases are made by people who are new to that particular edition. If WotC decided to release splats for old editions, they would sell less because they are splats AND because they are for an older edition, they would cause lower sales of similar splats to the current edition, and in addition to that WotC would have to put money and effort into actually writing and publishing the splat, one that would give negligible income in comparison to a splat for the current edition.
Printing the already published books for older editions would not fix the problem. Most of the old guard won't buy them because they already have them, and new players will pick up the latest edition most of the time anyway. Printing and then keeping a stock of books that will sell really badly wouldn't give enough income to make it worth it.

Short version: don't overestimate the purchasing power of the old guard. Look at the Transformers fandom, where the adult collectors complain that Hasbro isn't pandering to them even though they are a big chunk of the market. In reality, they make maybe 10% of the toy purchases - the rest are kids.

[Tyndmyr]

However, while new splats are likely not profitable, doing new print runs of older books might be. If they published a nostalgia collection of say "everything official for AD&D" or what have you...I'd pick it up purely for the hell of it.

Republishing already produced goods is fairly light on overhead compared to producing new ones, too.

[Knaight]

However, while new splats are likely not profitable, doing new print runs of older books might be. If they published a nostalgia collection of say "everything official for AD&D" or what have you...I'd pick it up purely for the hell of it.

Republishing already produced goods is fairly light on overhead compared to producing new ones, too.

True, they almost certainly could print the PHB, DMG and MM for every edition and make some money off of it. The issue is that doing so makes D&D that much harder to get into for new people, and might harm them in the long run. I personally suspect it will, and hope they will do something like this.

[Ancient Mage]

Solution to D&D 5th edition (In 3 easy steps):

1: change it back to 3.5
2: If you refuse to do this, WotC, then get rid of Healing Surges. D&D is not a Wily E. Coyote Cartoon. PC's are not trolls. They do not regenerate. If my body is a wreck of shattered bones, I will cannot heal by myself. I need a cleric.
3: Fights that take hours? Healing Surges? high-leveled monsters with 1 hp? Minions in general? Miniature-overload? Encounter Powers (I forgot how to do this for 5 minutes)? Daily Powers for fighters? (I can only swing my sword like this once a day, after that I forget it until tomorrow)??????

Bring back 3.5! Bring back roleplaying! Bring back Dungeons and Dragons!!

-Ancient Mage

[Yora]

No. If I would want to play 3rd Edition, I'd play 3rd Edition. I want something else.

[Tyndmyr]

True, they almost certainly could print the PHB, DMG and MM for every edition and make some money off of it. The issue is that doing so makes D&D that much harder to get into for new people, and might harm them in the long run. I personally suspect it will, and hope they will do something like this.

Honestly, I don't hate WoTC...and I really do hope that 5e is great. But yeah, I wouldn't be too upset if they lost a few bucks making legacy stuff available. I suspect as long as it's quite clearly marked as not the current edition(say, mail order only?), it won't hurt the newbies too much though.