So, it appears that WotC has released the remainder of its catalog for 2010. It wasn't what I expected, at least for the second half of their release schedule. They seem to be going less in the direction of II, III, or other numerated books and focusing on general appeal, such as a starter kit, a rules compendium, a DM kit, class expansion kits (without designating the Power source), and so on. The books also seem to be more player oriented, rather than DM sourcebooks. There are also a lot more softcover books and even some box sets.
I would guess that this is due to economic reasons, as sales in D&D products have probably dipped over the last year. Therefore, they are focusing on general appeal rather than niche appeal like specific settings (which only appeal to DMs who find such settings interesting). They also seem to be attempting to lower the cost of their products.
Note: These are just the trends I noticed based on WotC's release schedule, particularly September to December. I'm not here to discuss the merits of the system, particularly as I believe most people have made up their mind. While anyone is welcome to add to the conversation, I would think such discussion would be for those interested in the state of 4e or RPG trends in general.
What this does strike me at is experimenting with other possible approaches, though, so the success of these products might inform where they go from here.
You could be right here, but it does seem to me, at least for the later release schedule, that they are coming out with less expensive products that appeal to a more general audience.
For example, I fully expected them to come out with Draconomicon III: Catastrophic Dragons, especially since they will introduce such dragons in MMIII. Instead, we are getting a box set called Monster Vault. Also, instead of hardback Powers books, we are getting softcover books called, "Player Essentials," that highlight multiple popular classes (the first one focuses on clerics, fighters, rangers, rogues, and wizards) and racial traits (i.e. something for everyone).
EDIT: I don't see this as a bad trend. I, for one, would rather buy a 352 page softcover book that's cheaper than a 160 page hardcover book, particularly if the former book is more likely to have something I can use (i.e. the Player Essential books vs. the Power books).
|
The first thing that caught my eye was The Monster Vault. I will definately buy more product from WoTC if they start going this route. The Dungeon Master kit is another must.
|
EDIT: I don't see this as a bad trend. I, for one, would rather buy a 352 page softcover book that's cheaper than a 160 page hardcover book, particularly if the former book is more likely to have something I can use (i.e. the Player Essential books vs. the Power books).
This is probably what they are banking on, and I see it as good and bad. It's good that they want at least a little bit of something for everybody. A DM can buy one copy and the players can pass it around and there will be something for each of them.
On the other hand, I consider the more focused books a boon precisely because they have a wealth of options for a smaller niche. If I'm going to start a new campaign, and I know I want to play a wizard, I can buy Arcane Powers and have more than enough options between that and the PHB 1. Instead of paying $30 for a book that has a small number of options for my concept, I get a book that is about 1/4 focused on my class.
The break away from producing more of the core 3 and such was, I believe, planned for quite some time. They've been saying for years that the third year of 4e's product cycle would focus on trying to expand the market by bringing in new players, and the Essentials line is focused on doing just that.
|
They certainly seem to be trying to shake things up.
I have to admit, those Player's Essentials books don't do much for me at this point. I will have to page through them at Border's to see if they are worth picking up, vs ganking the powers and feats off of DDI. I liked the 'Power' series format, and the fluff contained in the more recent releases (and I was hoping to see Divine Power II and Arcane Power II).
We shall see.
(I hope they follow up "The Plane Below" and "The Plane Above" with books on the Feywild and Shadowfell at some point. I was hoping to see one of them in the catalog.)
The break away from producing more of the core 3 and such was, I believe, planned for quite some time. They've been saying for years that the third year of 4e's product cycle would focus on trying to expand the market by bringing in new players, and the Essentials line is focused on doing just that.
I seem to remember them definitely saying they were going to eventually focus on bringing in new players. But they seem to be doing this at the cost of what has been considered a kind of standard. For example, where is Adventurer's Vault III? While there's enough magic items to last one forever, those who play psionic characters may feel cheated that they are not going to get a magic item booster book. Also, they seem to have adventures HS1 and HS2 planned, but that's it, as if they suddenly decided to go a different direction. It's always possible they will write a HS3 for 2011, but it seems strange to have no new stand alone adventures for four months.
Not that I'm complaining, but it does seem they are shucking past trends for one reason or another. It will be interesting to see if they can bring in more new players, which would be great. I would rather see new players than detailed descriptions of this or that layer of the Abyss (which I enjoy too). I feel I have enough 4e stuff to last me a lifetime (let alone all the stuff I've kept from my 3e days).
WotC also seem to be steadily trying to cast the D&D brand's net wider than the immiediant fanbase. We already have the Heroscape tie-in for the miniture gamers, the stand-alone Gamma World game for the wider RPG crowd, while Castle Ravenloft and Dungeons of Dragonfire Mountain are gunning for the board gamers. Add to this the rumors of a new movie and/or animated series, and D&D seems to be on the march.
MY 2cp here; I dislike soft-cover books mostly because of durability, all of my hard cover books are still in good condition but some of the soft cover stuff like (sorry Paizo) Pathfinder adventures & gazetteers can't stand up to repeated use.
As for the boxed sets I would rather have a hard cover book that comes with a way to print out on demand the tokens they’re including in the box sets. Box sets also have the same problem as soft cover books, they aren’t as durable as a hard cover book they also take up much more space than a hard cover book.
In case anyone hasn't heard, the Rules Compendium is 320 pages, 6"x9", softback, $20. From what I gather, it is basically a reprint of the rules parts of the PHB, while pulling in later additions and adding Errata. Given the model that is evolving, *some* kind of updated core-rulebook product was very needed.
I'd love to see this book get a year in the title ("Rules Compendium 2010"), become an annual release, and come out in PDF (free, or at the very least, $10 or less).
Boxed sets? How very 1994. It does warm my heart to hear the first of the Essentials line being referred to, by WoTC, as "The Red Box". Might end up buying one for my nephew (12 is the perfect age for an intro to D&D, imo).
I'll be curious to see how Gamma world shapes up against 4e Darksun, in terms of product support.
Most excitedly for me is that they listened to the fact that fans wanted fluff with their monsters and are changing the monster books to add more fluff and ideas for the various denizens.
The first thing that caught my eye was The Monster Vault. I will definately buy more product from WoTC if they start going this route. The Dungeon Master kit is another must.
I'm confused by this product. Don't we already have vampires and such? Presumably they are not just giving them to us again ('cause that would cause an uproar) but I'm unclear what they are doing here.
The first thing that caught my eye was The Monster Vault. I will definately buy more product from WoTC if they start going this route. The Dungeon Master kit is another must.I'm confused by this product. Don't we already have vampires and such? Presumably they are not just giving them to us again ('cause that would cause an uproar) but I'm unclear what they are doing here.
I believe that some (a minority) or the monsters will be reprints of previously-published monsters. Keep in mind that this product (as with all of the Essentials line) is targeted at new DMs, so those who have been following the 4e product line for a while are not their primary target. A lot of the monsters will be new, but those will most certainly appear on DDI if you don't want to purchase the Monster Vault itself.
The adventure and tokens will be kind of cool to have, though. I might buy it, if the tokens strike my fancy.
the tokens do strike my fancy. i wish they were a regular product, like the tiles. i would buy them always.
they should be a stand alone product.
I agree, I hate hauling a bunch of minis around, but tokens would be perfect for my situation.
I think so too. I wonder why tokens aren't marketed more often. Not enough interest? They don't bring in as much per unit as plastic minis?
It's the third dimensional appeal, I'd say. Tokens just don't get the same love despite their portable conveniences. They don't elicit the same oooohs and ahhhs when you're looking them up and down at a gaming store.
It could just be bias too: "mini's are for rpg's, tokens are for ccg's". I have seen that attitude before from people who only play one or the other and not both.
It's the third dimensional appeal, I'd say. Tokens just don't get the same love despite their portable conveniences. They don't elicit the same oooohs and ahhhs when you're looking them up and down at a gaming store.
As someone who has 1000's of miniatures it is the satisfaction of plunking down a 10" tall Black Dragon and say - 'That is what you are fighting. Roll initiative." The sheer size difference often has my players wanting to flee. Their characters stay and fight of course but the players are outta there! ;-)
I wonder why tokens aren't marketed more often.
I've heard (and I don't remember where so take this for what it is) that Wizards makes more profit on minis than it does D&D books. Of course, this may have been just a reason given by some guy at a computer for why 4e is a "minis game." However I wouldn't be surprised.
The profit margin on minis is probably much greater than on tokens, especially with all the random packs. I'm not sure what the viability of a 3pp creating printed tokens would be.
I wonder why tokens aren't marketed more often.I've heard (and I don't remember where so take this for what it is) that Wizards makes more profit on minis than it does D&D books. Of course, this may have been just a reason given by some guy at a computer for why 4e is a "minis game." However I wouldn't be surprised.
The profit margin on minis is probably much greater than on tokens, especially with all the random packs. I'm not sure what the viability of a 3pp creating printed tokens would be.
Doubtful - they canceled the mini collectible game and let the Star Wars license lapse, both things they would probably not do if mini's where a printing press from cash. In fact when they let the minitures game lapse they stated that they did so essentially because it was a money loser for them and they could not justify continuing to make mini's under such circumstances. This is supported by the fact that no other company has gone into plastic mini's in any significant way and the Paizo staffers say that when they looked at this they couldn't find a way to make it work. Presumably WotC can, at least some of the time eke out a profit based purely on volume but none of this leads one to think that there is any huge amount to be made in plastic mini's.
In fact its possible that the paper tokens are for the opposite reason. It may be that they are trying to gauge the audiences reaction because they are seriously thinking of dropping the mini's line altogether.
im not tied to minis. i have bought several packages, maybe 10 to 15. but havent really gotten in buying them. i would buy many more tokens, especially if they themed sets...orcs undead, etc. i have all of the tile sets, and several of several of them. i would absolutely buy tokens.
i have never played ccgs, so i didnt know that tokens were a ccg thing. but i have played many board games, that have tokens. and i have a long history of playing old avalon hill games, which have cardboard counters. which are kind of like tokens.
i tokens are a game thing. not just a ccg thing. tokens have been around since forever.
also, i dont think 3pp could pull this off as well. the art maybe ok, but the cardboard would be different. i like the wotc cardboard. with the textured stuff on it.
I have used Steve Jackson Games cardboard heroes in the past, and I agree the cardboard stock chosen would be one factor, while the bigger one for me was affordable plastic bases. I actually used warhammer 25mm square and circular bases with a slot to insert the carboard and glue it.
This is a great substitute, except for very large creatues like dragons and such, as they end up being very long.
http://www.sjgames.com/heroes/
They are very portable and light as well.
|
Hmmmm,
I little disappointed myself. It has taken me AGES to leave behind my prejudices about role-playing and using miniatures. The D&D miniatures have grown on me (they are rubbish compared to say GW minis), but I'm really not that happy with random bits of plastic or bits of cardboard. If you going to make a game that "requires" miniatures to play then I would have thought that you should provide a way of getting them. This is bad form.
Currently with a little bit of effort the DM can make a pretty good battle board (i.e. standard of a better than average wargaming table) and have miniatures the a representative of what they are meant to be (weapons aside).
4e works really well, shame they can't support the visual side of the game.
Grrrrr,
S.
Hmmmm,
I little disappointed myself. It has taken me AGES to leave behind my prejudices about role-playing and using miniatures. The D&D miniatures have grown on me (they are rubbish compared to say GW minis), but I'm really not that happy with random bits of plastic or bits of cardboard. If you going to make a game that "requires" miniatures to play then I would have thought that you should provide a way of getting them. This is bad form.
Currently with a little bit of effort the DM can make a pretty good battle board (i.e. standard of a better than average wargaming table) and have miniatures the a representative of what they are meant to be (weapons aside).
4e works really well, shame they can't support the visual side of the game.
Grrrrr,
S.
I agree but there is a huge secondary market so actually acquiring obscene numbers of minis should not be to hard. In fact I suspect that the large numbers of mini's out there are again part of the problem. My group has a plethora of mini's already and can generally find something pretty close to what is being represented. The result has been that we simply have not bothered to buy any 4E mini's as the collection is unwieldy as is. I suspect that I'm not the only one who stopped buying minitures after their collection got large enough for their Roleplaying needs which likely puts ever more pressure on WotCs miniature line as many buyers eventually simply stop buying.
|
|
I agree but there is a huge secondary market so actually acquiring obscene numbers of minis should not be to hard. In fact I suspect that the large numbers of mini's out there are again part of the problem.
That is true, but no new miniatures will be coming out to fill in the gaps in both PC's classes and monsters. WotC have gone out of their way to make 4e almost exclusively reliant on miniatures for play but now have dropped, shall we say, part of the game? I guess I'm more sensitive to such things coming from a war-gaming background where figures were required to be representative. 4e looks best when played with "the right" miniatures, it's just nicer (even if they aren't the best mini's or paint jobs, they were cheap). The two concepts of a collectible miniatures game and 4e are at odds with each other and it (as said before) makes little sense I guess to make all combinations of PC's and all monsters.
Still, I would suggest that "adventure packs" would have been nice - meaning you buy an adventure and it comes with all the figures required. Sells adventures and sell miniatures (as a bundle), with the DM feeling he's really getting something for his money - an adventure to run and adding to their miniatures collection for later adventures or making their own adventures.
S.
Still, I would suggest that "adventure packs" would have been nice - meaning you buy an adventure and it comes with all the figures required. Sells adventures and sell miniatures (as a bundle), with the DM feeling he's really getting something for his money - an adventure to run and adding to their miniatures collection for later adventures or making their own adventures.
That's actually a pretty good idea. They produce specific grid mats for certain adventures, why not the figurines necessary? I have a lot of trouble understanding people's obsession with d&d minis. They look horrid. Purchasing them appears to be addictive and people end up spending a ridiculous amount of money on some haphazardly paint splattered hunks of plastic. I'm afraid to buy a pack for fear of whatever addictive agent secreted within is gonna waft out of the booster and infect my collector sensibilities. Granted I have been spoiled by Warhammer figures. Much nicer quality though I certainly recognize the increased expense and work involved.
I wish WOTC would develop a slightly better quality of mini that is as you mentioned specifically geared to support their adventure line ups. I don't think it would necessarily have to be in one package. You can just buy the adventure or you could purchase the Tomb of Horrors Expansion Set.
would fixed sets generate as much money as randomized booster packs? Again I don't buy miniatures but from what I see of the people that do..... they buy cases and cases. A fixed set would not generate the same amount of revenue. Would it draw in enough new mini buying customers? I don't think it will. Could it work if you purchased a core set covering the essentials and then booster packs that held multiples of all the mooks needed with an accompanying guaranteed rare big bad guy figure? Or special rare figures to represent the PCs?
Again I don't purchase minis so I have no idea how to market them better to the people who are already purchasers. I only know how to market them to me! That don't mean much unfortunately.
When they release Dark Sun..... if they had a complimentary line of minis designed around two opposing forces say one set covering a freed slave tribe and slavers.... one set of gladiators and city guards.... one set of desert monsters and dune traders and one set of good adventures and one set of evil counterparts would it sell? How much could it sell for?
In fact I suspect that the large numbers of mini's out there are again part of the problem. My group has a plethora of mini's already and can generally find something pretty close to what is being represented. The result has been that we simply have not bothered to buy any 4E mini's as the collection is unwieldy as is.
If I was trying to generate miniature revenues at all cost and didn't take into account a massive fan uproar, I would move to change the scale of the minis. Make em all bigger. Change the battlemat grids. Change the rules to take into account the bigger scale. Ahhh it would be a disaster but it would create the need for more minis!
That's actually a pretty good idea. They produce specific grid mats for certain adventures, why not the figurines necessary? I have a lot of trouble understanding people's obsession with d&d minis. They look horrid. Purchasing them appears to be addictive and people end up spending a ridiculous amount of money on some haphazardly paint splattered hunks of plastic. I'm afraid to buy a pack for fear of whatever addictive agent secreted within is gonna waft out of the booster and infect my collector sensibilities. Granted I have been spoiled by Warhammer figures. Much nicer quality though I certainly recognize the increased expense and work involved.
I don't know about other people, but the reason I buy the D&D minis is because I don't have time to paint minis anymore, sure I would love to use higher quality minis, but if I did, all they would have is primer on them at best. Between D&D minis and unpainted Reaper minis, I'd rather use the poorly painted D&D ones.
I don't know about other people, but the reason I buy the D&D minis is because I don't have time to paint minis anymore, sure I would love to use higher quality minis, but if I did, all they would have is primer on them at best. Between D&D minis and unpainted Reaper minis, I'd rather use the poorly painted D&D ones.
Yeah I definitely understand. My brother, who I play warhammer with, and I have a long standing joke that neither one of us will ever be able to field a fully painted army. We've come a long way from, "Uh yeah that milk carton is a Vindicator Tank," but its still a struggle to invest that much time prepping the miniatures.
Have you ever seen Rackham's pre painted minis for AT-43 and Confrontation? The paint jobs on them are fairly decent. Definitely better than the slathering of paint reserved for WOTC's product. With the cost involved in purchasing booster after booster of randomized minis I wonder if people would pay a higher cost for fixed sets that are significantly better crafted. From someone who collected Magic the Gathering cards I can recognize that some of the thrill in randomized sets is cracking open the package and seeing what ya got. A fixed set cannot replicate that excitement. Though I have noticed FFG's living card games seem to be doing well using a non random model. They just charge more for the cards.
|
|
Yeah I definitely understand. My brother, who I play warhammer with, and I have a long standing joke that neither one of us will ever be able to field a fully painted army.
I don't know about other people, but the reason I buy the D&D minis is because I don't have time to paint minis anymore, sure I would love to use higher quality minis, but if I did, all they would have is primer on them at best. Between D&D minis and unpainted Reaper minis, I'd rather use the poorly painted D&D ones.
I do agree in this case, the wargamer in me rebels against the poorly moulded, badly painted pieces of plastic that WotC calls figures. But, the 4e player in me thinks that from a distance they look fine and that due to their "bad nature" I'm happy to throw dice/coke/books at them during play. Anyone try that with my WFB Ogres and I'll disembowel them.
The WotC figures in my little mind were about right for what was required of them.
S.
to me the miniture strategy games arent really wargames. i played games like tactics ii, panzer leader, squad leader, with the cardboard counters.
i think the warhammer experience is worse than what dnd does: to have unit x on the battlefield, you must use this 30 dollar model.
minitures are not required to play dnd. you dont even need a map. it makes it much easier to keep track of the fluid battlefield, but you can use anything as markers.
i like the tiles a lot, and the tokens will be a great addition for use in my game.
What happened to DMG 3? Am I not seeing it? Or has it been shleved until mext year? Which I find kind of dumb. Release PHB3, MM3 but not the entire set.
They had to start making stuff up just to fill the DMG2. They probaly don't have enough good advice or extra rules to fill another book.
What happened to DMG 3? Am I not seeing it? Or has it been shleved until mext year? Which I find kind of dumb. Release PHB3, MM3 but not the entire set.They had to start making stuff up just to fill the DMG2. They probaly don't have enough good advice or extra rules to fill another book.
The DMG2 was probably the single best received book in the 4e catalog so far. If they had to "start making stuff up" to fill it (how is this different from any other RPG book?) they sure did a good job of it.
|
|
They had to start making stuff up just to fill the DMG2. They probaly don't have enough good advice or extra rules to fill another book.
Thank you for not responding to what I asked in a constructive manner while taking a cehapshot at Wotc. Don't you have anything better to do?
The DMG2 was probably the single best received book in the 4e catalog so far. If they had to "start making stuff up" to fill it (how is this different from any other RPG book?) they sure did a good job of it.
Well said Scott. Now can anyone who a)has any actually knowledge please respond and b)if not any have an axe to grind with Wotc not answer.
What happened to DMG 3? Am I not seeing it? Or has it been shleved until mext year? Which I find kind of dumb. Release PHB3, MM3 but not the entire set.
If I remember correctly from what I read of the DDXP product seminar, its still on the table, but the D&D Essentials line that is going to dominate the later half of this year necessitated a delay since they needed to devote most of their resources to it. I would probably expect it sometime early in 2011.
What happened to DMG 3? Am I not seeing it? Or has it been shleved until mext year? Which I find kind of dumb. Release PHB3, MM3 but not the entire set.If I remember correctly from what I read of the DDXP product seminar, its still on the table, but the D&D Essentials line that is going to dominate the later half of this year necessitated a delay since they needed to devote most of their resources to it. I would probably expect it sometime early in 2011.
Boo Hiss...
DMG2 was my favorite book and I want more.
They had to start making stuff up just to fill the DMG2. They probaly don't have enough good advice or extra rules to fill another book.Thank you for not responding to what I asked in a constructive manner while taking a cehapshot at Wotc. Don't you have anything better to do?
Well said Scott. Now can anyone who a)has any actually knowledge please respond and b)if not any have an axe to grind with Wotc not answer.
The DMG2 was probably the single best received book in the 4e catalog so far. If they had to "start making stuff up" to fill it (how is this different from any other RPG book?) they sure did a good job of it.
Sorry I sounded snarky to you but IMO DMG2 was completely useless and I'm sure many others feel the same. It just seemed that a lot of the content was taken from the forum boards and used as filler.
And again it's my opinion that WotC realized they didn't have enough useful material to make a third DMG book this year and are compiling ideas from Dragon and Dungeon magazines as well as the online forums to put into the next DMG.It's not a cheap shot at WotC just a statement that I think they realized they couldn't put out a quality product yet and are delaying it.
i think the dmg2 is a great resource. there are great chapters in it, with tons of great ideas.
a dmg is only worth the ideas it generates, and this one has generated alot of good ideas for me. i open it everytime i am writing a new adventure, and everytime i get ready to run a comercial adventure.
its a great resource.
|
|
Sorry I sounded snarky to you but IMO DMG2 was completely useless and I'm sure many others feel the same. It just seemed that a lot of the content was taken from the forum boards and used as filler.
And again it's my opinion that WotC realized they didn't have enough useful material to make a third DMG book this year and are compiling ideas from Dragon and Dungeon magazines as well as the online forums to put into the next DMG.
It's not a cheap shot at WotC just a statement that I think they realized they couldn't put out a quality product yet and are delaying it.
Sorry I kind of got too defensive. As to the quality od DMG 2 I guess we will have to disagree. I found DMG 2 to be the most useful of the 4E books so far.
They are aimed at new players, you're right. It's a different take on the old AD&D and D&D split in the 80s and 90s, but done properly this time. The Essentials line uses the same rules but packaged differently.
They are aimed at new players, you're right. It's a different take on the old AD&D and D&D split in the 80s and 90s, but done properly this time. The Essentials line uses the same rules but packaged differently.
Well we won't know if its done properly until we see if it works. I'm pretty skeptical myself.
I'd do a 'teach D&D' as a single sizable adventure that laboriously went through all the basic elements of both playing and DMing during the adventure and spelled out all the necessary activities and was specifically designed to ease new concepts into the adventure for both the DM and the players. Hence the first time the players meet a diseased creature the rules for disease are spelled out right in this part of the adventure.
What are these "Essentials" line for? Not sure I get the idea behind them. I've read their descriptions but just can't see myself purchasing them. I'm I wrong or is it that they are aimed at new players to D&D?
Several of the books include new class builds/powers plus there are tiles and monster tokens. I can see myself buying some of those products, though I will probably skip the initial red box set for beginners.
|
|
Sorry I sounded snarky to you but IMO DMG2 was completely useless and I'm sure many others feel the same. It just seemed that a lot of the content was taken from the forum boards and used as filler.
And again it's my opinion that WotC realized they didn't have enough useful material to make a third DMG book this year and are compiling ideas from Dragon and Dungeon magazines as well as the online forums to put into the next DMG.
It's not a cheap shot at WotC just a statement that I think they realized they couldn't put out a quality product yet and are delaying it.
I think you might be in a bit of a minority on this one. I liked the DMG2 as well. I have used quite a few bits from it (and the new rules on skill challenges are particularly useful).