http://www.change.org/petitions/wizards-of-the-coast-support-all-current-an d-past-editions-of-dungeons-dragons#share
I found this petition to WOTC and to Mike Mearls specifically. At this point, I really believe this is the direction that WOTC should go in. In fact, it is likely the only way I can see that I will support the D&D brand in the future.
It is definitely worth a look; even a diehard Pathfinder fan may find it worth supporting.
Here is a copy of the letter that would be sent below:
WotC: Support all current and past editions of Dungeons & Dragons!
Dear Mr. Mearls,
I just signed the following petition addressed to: Wizards of the Coast, LLC.
----------------
After only four years since last edition of Dungeons & Dragons (4E) was released, Wizards of the Coast and Hasbro have made the decision to stop supporting it, despite its popularity with numbers older gamers as well as a noteworthy population of new gamers. As a replacement, it has been decided that a new edition of D&D would be designed for the gaming community, based upon a retro-clone model, despite a glut in the game market of heroic-fantasy-D&D-like clones. Furthermore, DDI support features which had been promised for the current retiring edition, such as the Virtual Table Top (VTT), Character Visualizer, and Encounter Builder, have all been postponed indefinitely or cancelled, in a move which was inherently detrimental to brand loyalty.
Poll data released by Wizards of the Coast and EN World have reported that approval ratings by the playtesters of the new edition’s rules are only registering at less than two-thirds (~60%). And this says nothing of those gamers in the D&D Community which show so little interest in D&D Next that they have not even bothered to sign up for the playtest and contribute to the development of the new edition.
So rather than a new edition, I urge you and Wizards of the Coast to bring back corporate support for ALL EDITIONS of Dungeons & Dragons – D&D, AD&D, 2nd Edition, OGL/3.5, and 4E - and give all D&D fans access to the massive product library from the past, and going forward into the future!
There are definite advantages to a Content-Provider Publishing Model, and they can earn profit by any and all of these methods:
• Re-publish core rulebook and sourcebooks for all previous editions of D&D.
• Re-publish all old D&D supplemental content such as modules and settings for all editions.
• Re-publish old issues of Dragon and Dungeon Magazine in POD or eBook formats.
• Use POD and eBook formats such as EPUB, PDF, and Kindle to release the vast library of D&D content without stock overhead.
• Convert modules and campaign settings originally published under one edition, and publish them under all other editions.
• Combine all material from the current 4E edition, including errata and Essentials materials, to create more streamlined version of this edition to be re-published.
• Sponsor DDI support for all four editions, including Character Builders, Monster & Encounter Designers, and Rules Compendiums. Allow fans to buy subscriptions to each support program separately, or to subscribe to bundles, or the entirety of DDI support, as desired.
• Implement the use of new technology in all editions of D&D, either through internal development or outsourcing. Publish Player and Dungeon Master apps for palm devices, tablets, and smart phones.
• Release new content for all editions in Dragon and Dungeon Webzine articles, allocating percentage of pages in proportion to DDI subscriptions for each edition.
• License all editions under a new agreement to encourage 3rd Party Publishers to support all editions of the game.
• Design and release of new supplemental content (modules, sourcebooks, campaign settings, etc.) can be published for all editions – one product sells to four consumer groups!
Supporting ALL D&D EDITIONS means supporting ALL D&D FANS!
----------------
Sincerely,
[Your name]
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
• Convert modules and campaign settings originally published under one edition, and publish them under all other editions.
Even if the others were to actually happen, there's absolutely no way this would ever happen. Do you understand the massive undertaking that this would be? No sane company would ever even attempt this. Hell, Paizo hasn't even done this with anything other than Rise of the RUnelords, and they're very careful to tell us that this is a one-off thing. And that's only converting from 3.5 to PFRPG. You really want them to put out EIGHT versions of every support product in their back catelog?
Original Dungeons & Dragons
Dungeons & Dragons BECMI / Rules Cyclopepdia
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1E
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2E
Dungeons & Dragons 3.0
Dungeons & Dragons 3.5
Dungeons & Dragons 4E / Essentials
Dungeons & Dragons Next
It's completely non-viable.
Supporting multiple settings was a factor in TSR demise. And supporting multiple editions would cause the same problems, only on a bigger scale... So while I like the idea, it has slim chances of happening.
|
Yes, but they're not putting out separate versions of each book for 3.5 and PF. Or even including both sets of stats in the same version.
Yep, and WotC would need to do even more work to support the D&D editions that were more different than PF & 3.5 are; converting am AD&D setting to 3.5 or 4e would involve a lot more work.
Yes, but they're not putting out separate versions of each book for 3.5 and PF. Or even including both sets of stats in the same version.Yep, and WotC would need to do even more work to support the D&D editions that were more different than PF & 3.5 are; converting am AD&D setting to 3.5 or 4e would involve a lot more work.
I would be happy if they just made PDFs of all the modules available.
I convert on the fly.... Never been a hassle for me I have run the Secret of Bone Hill, In 1st Ed, 2nd Ed, 3.5, GURPS and Rolemaster. I should make notes but I am too lazy, I have GMed for a long time and I kinda know what will kill a couple of party members and what will be a challenge.
As long as you have the plot, events and the NPCs motivations the mechanics of the system are interchangeable.
I don't support all of the items proposed above. That said I do believe PDF sales of out of print products, to include core rules, is a great idea.
I also believe they need to rethink the DDI digital strategy and expand it to support the D&D game regardless of edition. I think they need to maintain the 4E suite of tools in their final form when D&D Next becomes available to allow 4E players to continue to use them. I believe they need a new suite of tools available with Next, to include tools for character creation, virtual play, campaign/adventure/encounter building, etc.
I think they should publish a deluxe hardcover version of the Rules Cyclopedia for the 40th anniversary in 2014.
I think they need to reintroduce print versions of Dragon and Dungeon, perhaps quarterly and larger instead of monthly, with online support in the form of art and maps.
This seems like a fast way for WotC to lose a lot of money.
|
Well, most of the campaign settings have any support have online fan sites, with WotC's tacit blessing. They seem much twitchier about rules content, or anyone actually making money out of their IP. Honestly, I don't see why the creators should get them - they signed the contract, they got the fee, and they knew the score. It's really up to WotC to determine what it does with what it paid for, their IP isn't a public good and none of the campiagn settings were OGL even under the OGL.
This seems like a fast way for WotC to lose a lot of money.
And a fantastic way for Hasbro to shelve the D&D RPG for a decade because of that money loss.
PDFs back on the market would be awesome, and even better would be an approved POD source, though I suspect that neither is going to happen, as they'd be seen as stealing revenue from the current version...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, they are doing a reprint of the three core rulebooks for 3.5 in a few months. Not really sure what they hope to acoomplish with that, since I'dhave to presume that the overwhelming majority of the 3.5 fanbase:
1. Already owns a copy of the 3.5 core rulebooks, or...
2. Have moved on to either 4E or Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What a stupid idea. Reminds me of Coca-Cola who asked you to vote if you wanted the old coke (now known as Classic) to return. The call cost 25cents. Are you stupid or what? Look at you sales, bozo!
My way of doing this is to refuse to buy WoTC books that are not 3.5 compatible.
Good luck to all the people signing that petition however.
The real ironic thing was that when blind taste testing was done, New Coke was generally the overall favorite. The problem was that there was a lot of sentimental attachment the old logo. What many people forget is that Coke Classic itself is nowhere near the original Coke.What a stupid idea. Reminds me of Coca-Cola who asked you to vote if you wanted the old coke (now known as Classic) to return. The call cost 25cents. Are you stupid or what? Look at you sales, bozo!
My way of doing this is to refuse to buy WoTC books that are not 3.5 compatible.
Good luck to all the people signing that petition however.
Yeah. No actual coke in it.
Yup, its not the drug store item it once was.
1. Already owns a copy of the 3.5 core rulebooks, or...
2. Have moved on to either 4E or Pathfinder.
There is evidence out there to suggest that 3.5 is still the edition of choice for a lot of people.
The real ironic thing was that when blind taste testing was done, New Coke was generally the overall favorite. The problem was that there was a lot of sentimental attachment the old logo. What many people forget is that Coke Classic itself is nowhere near the original Coke.What a stupid idea. Reminds me of Coca-Cola who asked you to vote if you wanted the old coke (now known as Classic) to return. The call cost 25cents. Are you stupid or what? Look at you sales, bozo!
My way of doing this is to refuse to buy WoTC books that are not 3.5 compatible.
Good luck to all the people signing that petition however.
Yeah. No actual coke in it.
I heard that a lot of the members of the pannel were Pepsi fans. The new coke was to get back to the #1 spot in sales and had a taste very similar to Pepsi.... So.... Of course they would prefer the new one.
Anywho I digress. I left D&D when WoTC stopped issuing 3.5 and were telling me to buy a whole series of new books to play 4.0. So I switched to Pathfinder and never looked back.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Supporting products you have control of to compete with similar products is why Coca-Cola has so many different formulas. People keep referring to "New Coke", but they forget the different kinds of diet Coke, the various flavored Coke types, and even other Coca-Cola products that aren't related to the Coke formula at all.
1) Soda and RPGs are completely different products. There is no sense comparing one market to the other and thinking they can be sold the same way.
2) Coca-Cola does not require new updates, options, and expansions. It just requires the formula to go to the factory and the marketing people to find ways to sell it. D&D requires a sizable creative team to continue coming up with new rules, adventures, and support.
3) Coca-Cola dwarfs WotC in terms of size and resources. To look at a company that size as a model and ask why WotC doesn't copy it is like asking a mom and pop shop why they can't keep up with Wal-Mart.
4) The different versions of Coca-Cola are easy to differentiate and not labeled Coke version 1, Coke version 2, et cetera. The editions of D&D don't have that, and trying to explain the difference between 1st edition and 3rd edition to your average consumer is not going to go over well. And while somebody who buys the wrong type of Coke is only out $2.00, somebody buying a D&D supplement that is not for an edition they play is out about $30.00 and probably not going to risk making that mistake again by buying more supplements.
5) Numerous industry insiders, including folks who worked at both TSR and WotC, have cited the multiple product lines all demanding support as a major factor in that company's demise. There isn't much common sense behind repeating those mistakes.
6) Even if WotC did go to this model, do you really think that people who want to play AD&D would be satisfied with the products? Imagine WotC, which already struggles with adventure design and which is often criticized as having art that is bereft of the old school feel, trying to cater to 1st edition fans. The end result would be a lot of people talking about how putting a pig in makeup doesn't stop it from being a pig.
7) I really don't think that older editions are as profitable as some people think. Just because Swords & Wizardry or OSRIC gets a lot of downloads doesn't mean that those old editions would generate enough revenue to affect a corporation's bottom line.
What difference does it make if this guy is buying AD&D, that guy is buying 3.5, and that guy over there likes 4E, when all of them are buying WotC products?
Because the petition isn't just asking for old products to be re-released, which could arguably be worth it. It's asking for new support for all editions, which would mean a massive increase in staff size, more resources expended, and a quintupling of product releases from WotC. All those resources make it much more difficult to turn a profit, and the increase in product releases would oversaturate the market very quickly.
Diversification is a key to market share. If it works for a shoe store, why can't it work for WotC?
Because, just as WotC isn't a soda company, it's also not a shoe store.
These days, a book company doesn't have to warehouse thousands of copies of a product to be competitive. They need only print what is needed to fill orders. The bookbinding industry has changed dramatically since the demise of TSR. They don't have to shut down the machines to change the typeset; it's all done with PDF files these days. Change the source file and you change the book being printed. In the middle of a print run.
I don't think the book industry works the way you think it does. Producing books is still an expensive endeavor that is being made more difficult by current changes in technology and the economy. While the industry has changed over the past 15 years, it is still hard for books to turn a profit, especially when the target profit is set by a major corproation such as Hasbro.
As far as the "major factor in the death of TSR" is concerned, it wasn't supporting two systems that was the problem. It was mismanagement on a major scale, in all areas of the company, with decisions being made by a CEO and upper-level management team who didn't understand RPGs or the customer base.
And that mismanagement on a major scale is one of the reasons they churned out so many product lines that cannibalized each other's sales, divided the market, and hurt the company.
You're equating "support" with ongoing development. But with previous editions of D&D, the expensive part of the work is already completed.
See, just re-releasing the games is one thing. "Support" implies new releases coming out. I agree that releasing PDFs of old editions is a good thing. Actually supporting them with new product is where things fall apart.
As to re-releasing hard copy books, WotC is doing things right by testing the market with the books they know will sell well. Re-releasing everything would mean spending a lot of money on books that people will not buy. There's a lot of garbage in D&D's history.
I think that's why they're reprinting older versions of the game. To test out what I'm talking about. Such a move would not ruin WotC. It would likely save it.
I disagree that it would save WotC. First, WotC is doing very, very well. They have this thing called Magic: the Gathering that is pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars yearly. They don't need saving. Second, I don't think old editions of D&D are as popular as some folks think they are. Regardless of how well 5th edition sells, I can guarantee that it will make WotC more money than they would make by re-selling all 1st and 2nd edition products combined.
|
"Cannibalizing sales" does not make money vanish. If you have two products that directly compete with each other, your company makes money from both of them. That does not make the company go down the tubes.
Here is what Lisa Stevens had to say on the subject...
It may have been at it's most popular, but the splitting of the customer base is the #1 reason why TSR went out of business. It would take me a couple of hours to explain why this was the case, but as the person responsible at WotC for taking the old TSR data and analyzing it to see why they went belly up, the biggest cause that I found was splitting the customer base into segments. Whether it was D&D vs. AD&D. Or Forgotten Realms vs. Ravenloft vs. Greyhawk vs. Dragonlance vs. Birthright vs. Dark Sun vs. Planescape vs. Mystara vs. Al-Qadim vs. Spelljammer vs. Lanhkmar vs. any other setting book that they produced. Splitting the customer base means lower sales on any particular product which means lower profit margins which eventually means going belly up.
-Lisa
I've read the petition. It's asking WotC to keep the older versions of the game alive by printing new copies of old books, not asking them to make new books about old editions.
The primary goal of the petition is to get the old games back into print, and possible to get PDFs available again. It isn't to re-vamp WotC's RPG department.
I dunno...from the language on the petition, I can see the following things being very costly for WotC:
• Convert modules and campaign settings originally published under one edition, and publish them under all other editions.
• Combine all material from the current 4E edition, including errata and Essentials materials, to create more streamlined version of this edition to be re-published.
• Sponsor DDI support for all four editions, including Character Builders, Monster & Encounter Designers, and Rules Compendiums. Allow fans to buy subscriptions to each support program separately, or to subscribe to bundles, or the entirety of DDI support, as desired.
• Implement the use of new technology in all editions of D&D, either through internal development or outsourcing. Publish Player and Dungeon Master apps for palm devices, tablets, and smart phones.
• Release new content for all editions in Dragon and Dungeon Webzine articles, allocating percentage of pages in proportion to DDI subscriptions for each edition.
• Design and release of new supplemental content (modules, sourcebooks, campaign settings, etc.) can be published for all editions – one product sells to four consumer groups!
Those are all bullet points asking for WotC to come up with NEW content, and undertaking it all is probably too much for the company to handle. Not to mention that it's asking not to have a 5th edition, which will be taking away something WotC has already invested a good amount of money on and which will probably earn WotC more profit than re-releasing all the other editions combined.
Again: bringing back PDFs: good. Trying to find a workable POD model to allow some release of old material: good. Spending massive amounts of resources to support all previous editions while scrapping production of a new edition: terrible.
I think for a lot of customers, a relatively low cost/good faith solution WotC can take when they come out with D&D Next is to support Next exclusively in the print line but make all of the classic PDFs of previous editions available and provide conversion guides to help people adapt older material to the new game - or to any other version. Some of these already exist, such as the 2nd edition to 3rd edition pamphlet. Continue to produce a lot of edition neutral products like maps, minis, tokens and tiles. Use the web site to provide conversion material, for example 1E/2E/3E/4E stat blocks for key villains/NPCs in adventures for new adventures produced for 5E. That sort of thing.
|
|
I think the petition is a good way to let WotC know what we as paying customers want. And I disagree with those who call this bad business sense.
Supporting products you have control of to compete with similar products is why Coca-Cola has so many different formulas. People keep referring to "New Coke", but they forget the different kinds of diet Coke, the various flavored Coke types, and even other Coca-Cola products that aren't related to the Coke formula at all.
Having multiple versions of the game available might well factionize the customer base, but that doesn't matter when you have products that appeal to all of the factions.
What difference does it make if this guy is buying AD&D, that guy is buying 3.5, and that guy over there likes 4E, when all of them are buying WotC products?
Diversification is a key to market share. If it works for a shoe store, why can't it work for WotC?
Because not enough people are going to buy (for example) the BECMI/RC version of Return to the Tomb of Horrors to make it anywhere near worthwhile for the HUNDREDS of hours worth of conversion work they would have to hire someone for.
Because the production line for two different flavors of soda is Nothing anywhere close to what you need to support multiple game systems? Especially in print production. Trying to support two systems was a major factor in the death of TSR. Now you want them to support a half dozen?These days, a book company doesn't have to warehouse thousands of copies of a product to be competitive. They need only print what is needed to fill orders. The bookbinding industry has changed dramatically since the demise of TSR. They don't have to shut down the machines to change the typeset; it's all done with PDF files these days. Change the source file and you change the book being printed. In the middle of a print run.
As far as the "major factor in the death of TSR" is concerned, it wasn't supporting two systems that was the problem. It was mismanagement on a major scale, in all areas of the company, with decisions being made by a CEO and upper-level management team who didn't understand RPGs or the customer base. Sort of like our worst fears of Hasbro.
And I'm sorry to have to disagree with you so categorically, but "supporting multiple game systems" is exactly like the production line for two different flavors of soda.
You're equating "support" with ongoing development. But with previous editions of D&D, the expensive part of the work is already completed.
There's no more research and development to be done on AD&D. It's finished. All that "support" needs to do is print it.
The same thing applies to OD&D, 3.5, and, in a few short months, 4E. All done, unchanging, ready to be printed-on-demand to keep a couple of copies on game shop shelves. The expense is no different than if they were printing more copies of their current brand; less so, in fact, since there are no changes between print runs.
I think that's why they're reprinting older versions of the game. To test out what I'm talking about. Such a move would not ruin WotC. It would likely save it.
To support a product you have to do it with new books, and ideally adventures also. That requires writers, for every version that you are "supporting". Writers/Devs cost money. WoTC makes enough money from those card games to be ok. D&D is not the money winner. People who have so much time/money to go around. As the saying goes, the cream always rises to the top. Reprinting old books is one thing, but active support is something entirely different.
|
|
Do they even have all the 80s stuff? In anything but hardcopy?
Up until 11:59 PM on April 6th of 2009, WotC offered pretty much every product of every edition in PDF format (including stuff as far back as the 70's)...
At 12:00 AM of April 7th of 2009, WotC pulled the proverbial plug on the sale of PDFs...
Not only that, but the retail outlets who sold the PDFs (Paizo, RPGNow, DriveThruRPG, etc.), were no longer able to allow their customers access to the files already purchased...
*EDIT*
Here is Paizo's announcement of this (sent to customers on April 6th 2009):
Wizards of the Coast has notified us that we may no longer sell or distribute their PDF products. Accordingly, after April 6 at 11:59 PM Pacific time, Wizards of the Coast PDFs will no longer be available for purchase on paizo.com; after noon on April 7, you will no longer be able to download Wizards of the Coast PDFs that you have already purchased, so please make sure you have downloaded all purchased PDFs by that time.
We thank you for your patronage of paizo.com. Please check out our other downloads at paizo.com/store/downloads.
WotC did not give much notice that they were doing this...
|
Ah, now I see. That petition was started by Neuroglyph, so it's more of "D&DN sucks, please keep 4E alive instead!" dressed in "let's unite all editions!" clothes. And yeah, the guy totally doesn't connect the dots that led to TSR's death.
Which is pretty damn funny, because I remember Neuroglyph dismissing anti-4E criticisms as backwards bickering of unwashed grognards who just can't cope with a New Better Edition. Now he's calling for all those folks to help keep 4E alive. I love the irony here :)
• Convert modules and campaign settings originally published under one edition, and publish them under all other editions.
Even if the others were to actually happen, there's absolutely no way this would ever happen. Do you understand the massive undertaking that this would be? No sane company would ever even attempt this. Hell, Paizo hasn't even done this with anything other than Rise of the RUnelords, and they're very careful to tell us that this is a one-off thing. And that's only converting from 3.5 to PFRPG. You really want them to put out EIGHT versions of every support product in their back catelog?
Original Dungeons & Dragons
Dungeons & Dragons BECMI / Rules Cyclopepdia
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1E
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2E
Dungeons & Dragons 3.0
Dungeons & Dragons 3.5
Dungeons & Dragons 4E / Essentials
Dungeons & Dragons NextIt's completely non-viable.
Kthulhu, 100% agree that the above is non-viable. However, that is not the point of the petition; the bullet points were only possible alternatives to D&D Next. WOTC needs to get completely out of the rules creation business. Honestly, there are enough rules from 0e-4e plus retroclones for a lifetime of play. The D&D Next design team of Mearls & Co. doesn't have either the time or the talent to pull this off. They are going to create a Frankenstein monster of editions with a fresh coat of new art on it; what is old is new again and all is right in the brave new RPG world -- frankly, this is total BS and I am not going to support it.
What I am going to support is a third-party publisher like Frog God Games which in essence supports the first six items in your list through support of Swords & Wizardry and Pathfinder. Since WOTC does NOT need to create another rules set and they CAN'T produce adventures of the same quality as Paizo and FGG, the ideas presented in this petition is the best case to prevent the shelving of the D&D brand.
However, I really don't believe that either. For me, this petition really represents that the best days of D&D brand are in the past and the future belongs to others. I have been a part of the D&D Next play test and recently I got what has to be one of the world's stupidest surveys; once more asking me again what my favorite edition is; instead I wished they would have asked what my most disliked edition is.
In any case, the petition is likely a meaningless exercise that allows the expression of the total pointlessness of D&D Next.
Ah, now I see. That petition was started by Neuroglyph, so it's more of "D&DN sucks, please keep 4E alive instead!" dressed in "let's unite all editions!" clothes. And yeah, the guy totally doesn't connect the dots that led to TSR's death.
Which is pretty damn funny, because I remember Neuroglyph dismissing anti-4E criticisms as backwards bickering of unwashed grognards who just can't cope with a New Better Edition. Now he's calling for all those folks to help keep 4E alive. I love the irony here :)
Yeah, I'm not a fan of that mentality either. Especially since no one really has any idea what D&D Next will eventually look like anyway. I guess he's just one of those people who hits a wall at some point and decides everything prior was great, and everything after is awful.