His business, his second profession if you will, is to sell publications. Ipso facto his musings on what happens to the publication business is right in his wheelhouse. Both as a professional professor and professional business owner.
BOOM!
Your knock out blow is “he sells it so his speculation about it is more valid?” I’ll be sure to ask the guy at 7-11 what is coming from RJ Reynolds, and the clerk at CVS when the efficacy of the Coronavirus vaccine will improve.
The sale of a business imprint directly relates to his primary job. The sweeping changes to an entire industry in which he plays but one part relates less directly.
The only contrast between those points is that you used one speculative blog and I used another. You only care about which speculation aligns with your “D&D is unflinchingly awesome and I must say so at all opportunities” worldview
Also you fell for my trap. It's not like my browser doesn't have auto-correct as I type. Sometimes I spell things wrong on purpose, sometimes I leave typos to see what the quality of character is among those who debate me. Not that we didn't already know your character but it's nice to see people unwittingly confirm their nature.
I see, correcting your spelling says I lack character...
What does setting a trap to out me as someone who corrects spelling say about your character?
|
Are 1,764 fans enough to be considered most fans? No. But it's certainly more likely to be representational than a single review by two vloggers. One is a single data point, while the other is almost 2000, with the overwhelming majority being positive.If 3764 fans are an overwhelming majority
That is NOT remotely what I said.
I said there was an overwhelming majority of the 1,764. Not that there was only 1,764 fans. That's a ridiculous statement to make.If that 1,764 is a representative sample of D&D players—and there's no reason to think it isn't, as Amazon is a pretty universal—than Tasha's is very well received and the opinion of two vloggers is an outlier.
Especially as people in general (and gamers in specific) are very quick to review bomb and leave bad reviews online. This would imply Tasha's is even more popular and well-received than the Amazon reviews would suggest.
Except it's not the same source....Except that it is because QB links to Scott Thorne multiple times in this thread when he goes on his wildly speculative side discussions about COVID's market effects, or movie adaptations, or comic adaptations.
You have literally replied to my replies to QB that include Thornes blog.
Are there different rules in this thread for you and QB? Are you the owners of this thread and I'm just having badwrongfun by trying to engage with you on the terms that you said I wasn't engaging before?
AS I SAID EARLIER THERE IS A DIFFERNCE BETWEEN THORNE PROVIDING INFORMATION AND GIVING HIS OPINION.
Thorne talking about the effect of COVID on the market is one thing, as he can actually see that in his store and other stores he talks with. That's relevant and he is an "expert." Him engaging in speculation as to why WotC is having rough contract negotiation is something else as that's not where his expertise or knowledge lies.You have spent page after page of this thread engaging in bad faith arguments and generally behaving like a contrarian at best and a troll at worst.
What do you actually believe, sir?
Do you believe 5e is doing good or bad? Do you believe it is doing better or worse than Pathfinder? Do you have an opinion of your own at all or are you just here to crap on our opinions?
You don't get to troll and then invoke "badwrongfun" when you're called out for trolling.
I read a research paper somewhere that concluded that although online reviews were self selected and thus not necessarily representative of the underlying population, they nonetheless do correlate strongly with sales.
Thus, they provide good evidence (albeit indirect) of how well received a given book is - assuming you accept that high sales is part of what one means by “well received”.
AS I SAID EARLIER THERE IS A DIFFERNCE BETWEEN THORNE PROVIDING INFORMATION AND GIVING HIS OPINION.
Thorne talking about the effect of COVID on the market is one thing, as he can actually see that in his store and other stores he talks with. That's relevant and he is an "expert."
Sure, back in April when he posted he sure had an idea what the LASTING impact on the market would be. I’m so glad that Quark Blast provided that “information” about what the lasting impact of a global pandemic would be - one month into said pandemic.
Thanks for distinguishing information from opinion from this particular oft quoted blogger .
Move along home to praising D&D in all its glory....
You have spent page after page of this thread engaging in bad faith arguments and generally behaving like a contrarian at best and a troll at worst.
I see, asking for evidence to back up a claim is being a contrarian and a troll. QB is just a normal poster who has the rule of might and right on his side and I’m the one acting in bad faith by asking him to qualify his opinions. Sure buddy. “Can you provide evidence of that” is bad faith while “only Star Wars collectors are buying that FFG game because I’ve never met anyone who actually plays it” is good faith?
What do you actually believe, sir?
I actually believe QB is an intellectually dishonest egoist who latched onto this thread as his own personal blog where he can make himself feel good by turning any engagement in this topic into an argument about how well D&D is selling because he can’t actually lose that argument. I believe it’s an easy win he set for himself so he can feel bigger and somehow more “important” on the internet. I believe you signed on for some reason. Either for some secret motive known only to yourself or to actively keep sticking it to Paizo by reminding everyone that D&D is doing better. Problem is - no one has challenged that argument and all you end up doing is acting as QB’s hype man.
Do you believe 5e is doing good or bad?
I believe it is doing extremely well, because it is. Not once have I claimed otherwise in this thread.
Do you believe it is doing better or worse than Pathfinder?
I believe it is doing better, that hasn’t been a legitimate question in six years.
Do you have an opinion of your own at all or are you just here to crap on our opinions?
This coming from the very person who dropped trou to take a dump on my opinion that there might be some cracks forming in the foundation of 5e.
You. Just. Want. To. Win. The problem is - no one is arguing with you. So you have to co-sign Quark Blasts opinions to throw down in his arguments.
You don't get to troll and then invoke "badwrongfun" when you're called out for trolling.
I specifically get to use that argument with you Jester. As you said before:
This thread was literally, 100% based on speculation and prediction. And is about educated guesses and loose deductions. If you bristle at that, then coming here and reading the thread is self-triggering and probably should be avoided. And telling us not to have a discussion the rest of us want to have is badwrongfun.
I posted the educated guesses and loose deductions I wanted to discuss and there you were to police how that conversation happened. Why are the loose deductions and educated guesses you want to discuss okay but the ones I want to discuss wrong? Mine relates to the topic as much as yours does and way more than QB’s comic book tangent or his D&D movie tangent. You were fine with those.
|
|
I actually believe QB is an intellectually dishonest egoist who latched onto this thread as his own personal blog where he can make himself feel good by turning any engagement in this topic into an argument about how well D&D is selling because he can’t actually lose that argument. I believe it’s an easy win he set for himself so he can feel bigger and somehow more “important” on the internet.
If you dislike QB then why are you in this thread? You gain nothing by engaging except making yourself unhappy.
I believe it is doing extremely well, because it is. Not once have I claimed otherwise in this thread.
No, you haven't claimed otherwise.
You haven't claimed much of anything, though. You've just criticized other's claims.Which is really what pulled me to comment. The endless posts not really saying anything and just arguing in circles; I read through 2-4 pages of posts while catching up and nothing new was added, and just felt someone needed to break the cycle for a second...
I believe you signed on for some reason. Either for some secret motive known only to yourself or to actively keep sticking it to Paizo by reminding everyone that D&D is doing better. Problem is - no one has challenged that argument and all you end up doing is acting as QB’s hype man.
I'm here because I like chatting on forums and find it fascinating to look at the continued popularity of 5e.
D&D was dead in 2011. People were seriously asking Paizo staff if they would consider buying D&D if Hasbro would sell. And then D&D not only experienced a comeback but a renaissance. It somehow became a bigger hit than ever before, surpassing it's previous peak in the early 1980s.
Nobody expected that.
Pre-launch Mike Mearls talked about how anyone could make an RPG that was a hit at launch, but the trick was making one that was a success two or three years later. Because that's always been the catch: once the core rules are out, how do you keep making money? Pathfinder and 3e/4e tried the endless waves of accessories and new books. But that leads to bloat and isn't sustainable or healthy for the game. 5e tried something very different, with the focus on adventures and accessories once a year with more races than class options. But it wasn't expected to work.
It's mind boggling to look at 5e and realize its best year was 2019, a full half-decade after launch. Or how 2020 might match that... or even beat that record.
Six years after the launch of 3rd Edition, WotC was already working on 4th. Six years after the launch of 4e... we had 5e.
It's nice to sit back and just reflect on the time we live in. The new golden age of RPGs.
Because six years ago RPGs were dying. It was a greying hobby: more people leaving than joining and mostly played by older individuals.
I love the hobby and RPGs and do want to just gush about how exciting a time it is to be a D&D and RPG player right now. And how neat it's going to be in the next 1-6 years, as the waves of D&D fans get bored of 5e and move onto other games, and explore other systems and genres. All the new people and ideas being brought to the hobby. Or think about all the many elements that made a perfect storm of D&D being this surprise hit again, and muse about how long it might last and what might finally end 5e. If anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and muse about how long it might last and what might finally end 5e. If anything.
You mean a musing like Hasbro selling WOTC which would mean selling D&D? Like an article was musing about? Cause you didn't seem too hip to that a few posts back.
So let's muse on that. How would 5e fair if Hasbro sold WOTC?
If you dislike QB then why are you in this thread? You gain nothing by engaging except making yourself unhappy.
I’m not unhappy. I just think the guy that spouts unsupported statements like “Stranger Things/D&D crossover comic will keep D&D on top for years to come” needs to be challenged for proof just as much as the guy discussing a rumor about the sale of the company. You seem to disagree, you seem to think any wild speculation that praises D&D is fine but if it does not offer praise then it is trolling.
Why is that? I don’t see any rules anywhere in this thread that states the speculation must be in favor of D&D.
You haven't claimed much of anything, though. You've just criticized other's claims.
No, I asked for evidence supporting those claims. Neither you nor QB oblige much, you think that making a claim is proof enough of the claim. So much so that you specifically told me I should stop challenging claims and just “advance the conversation.” When I did that you immediately challenged my claims. Yet somehow I’m the one being a troll?
D&D was dead in 2011.
No it wasn’t, it was the number two selling TTRPG in the world.
People were seriously asking Paizo staff if they would consider buying D&D if Hasbro would sell.
People on these forums were asking that question, but the people on these forums believe that a comic book somehow generates a massive amount of sales for a game and think they don’t have to then prove that statement. That’s how “serious” those people are.
Pre-launch Mike Mearls talked about how anyone could make an RPG that was a hit at launch, but the trick was making one that was a success two or three years later.
And the trick they pulled off restored the industry status quo that had existed since the 1970’s. Hardly the shocking development you’re waxing poetically over.
I love the hobby and RPGs and do want to just gush about how exciting a time it is to be a D&D and RPG player right now. And how neat it's going to be in the next 1-6 years, as the waves of D&D fans get bored of 5e and move onto other games, and explore other systems and genres. All the new people and ideas being brought to the hobby.
Then by god start a thread in which to gush rather than policing THIS thread when it deviates from your desire to praise a game owned by a company different than the owner of this forum. Your desires don’t dictate the discourse in a thread unless you became a moderator and didn’t tell anyone
Or think about all the many elements that made a perfect storm of D&D being this surprise hit again, and muse about how long it might last and what might finally end 5e. If anything.
And discussing a possible sale somehow ISN’T a discussion of how long it might last. Or are you saying that those conversations are only allowed to happen on your terms?
Sir.
|
|
and muse about how long it might last and what might finally end 5e. If anything.You mean a musing like Hasbro selling WOTC which would mean selling D&D? Like an article was musing about? Cause you didn't seem too hip to that a few posts back.
So let's muse on that. How would 5e fair if Hasbro sold WOTC?
Musing about the possibility of Hasbro selling WotC, or shutting WotC is fine. It's a neat hypothetical question: who would buy WotC or be in a position to license D&D.
Actually speculating that might be what is happening because of two unrelated lawsuits is silly and shouldn't be taken seriously.
I wasn't being critical of the conversation. I was being critical of the conclusion.
If you dislike QB then why are you in this thread? You gain nothing by engaging except making yourself unhappy.I’m not unhappy. I just think the guy that spouts unsupported statements like “Stranger Things/D&D crossover comic will keep D&D on top for years to come” needs to be challenged for proof just as much as the guy discussing a rumor about the sale of the company. You seem to disagree, you seem to think any wild speculation that praises D&D is fine but if it does not offer praise then it is trolling.
Jeez, are you still on about the comic comment? That was months ago.
My ex-wife retains stuff less than you.D&D was dead in 2011.No it wasn’t, it was the number two selling TTRPG in the world.
Okay, fine. It wasn't dead, it was just dying.
It dropped to third. Then rose back to second. Then dropped to third again before sinking to fourth and then falling off the charts for an entire report.It was being beaten by FFG's Star Wars and Fate. For a while it was being outsold by Numenera and Shadowrun.
For D&D that's dead.
And the entire industry shrank over those years as it's biggest game withered, people stopped playing, and new player acquisition slowed.
WotC gave D&D another chance after the failures of 4e and D&D Essentials. But they just as easily might not have. They cancelled other lines before. Heroscape and Dreamblade as examples. And Hasbro is full of big name dead brands. MASK, Visionaries, Popples, Pound Puppies, Micronauts, Inhumanoids, My Pet Monster, and more. D&D could have easily joined them.
But it got once last chance and succeeded.
People were seriously asking Paizo staff if they would consider buying D&D if Hasbro would sell.People on these forums were asking that question, but the people on these forums believe that a comic book somehow generates a massive amount of sales for a game and think they don’t have to then prove that statement. That’s how “serious” those people are.
Well, you're also on these forums. So that statement very much also applies to you. Self-own.
And I heard multiple interviews and panel recordings where Paizo buying D&D was asked.
So your continual, needless snark aside, no it wasn't just on these forums.
Then by god start a thread in which to gush rather than policing THIS thread when it deviates from your desire to praise a game owned by a company different than the owner of this forum. Your desires don’t dictate the discourse in a thread unless you became a moderator and didn’t tell anyone
If Paizo didn't want people to talk about other games, they wouldn't have this forum. I'll leave if you stop policing it as well as a form of self-appointed buzz kill.
Y'know, then, by god, start a thread in which to hate rather than policing THIS thread when it deviates from your desire to condemn a game owned by a company different than the owner of this forum.
|
|
And discussing a possible sale somehow ISN’T a discussion of how long it might last. Or are you saying that those conversations are only allowed to happen on your terms?
Except you didn't try to discuss it.
You presented it as something that was potentially happening as "proof" that D&D's foundations weren't solid.It was not a discussion point. It was presented as evidence. Which it was not.
But, please, enlighten us. Add to the discuss.
Who do you think would buy WotC or D&D?
What would be the outcome of the sale? '
Do you think they would continue 5e or make their own edition?
Would it be better or worse for the game?
What would it mean to the industry as a whole?
Let's actually discuss.
Actually speculating that might be what is happening because of two unrelated lawsuits is silly and shouldn't be taken seriously.
And the other points? Did you even read the blog post? It brought up more than the two lawsuits.
|
|
And the other points? Did you even read the blog post? It brought up more than the two lawsuits.
Actually speculating that might be what is happening because of two unrelated lawsuits is silly and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Yes, the blog starts with:
I received several emails regarding last week’s column, and a couple of them brought up yet another possibility (see "Rolling for Initiative -- Of Cauldrons and Lawsuits"). Hasbro might be cleaning up loose ends in preparation for selling off WotC.
Reading that clearly states that several people brought up the potential of sales, based on the original article ( https://icv2.com/articles/columns/view/47020/rolling-initiative-of-cauldron s-lawsuits ).
So, yes, the idea of the sale was solely prompted by the lawsuits. It was the cause of the speculation.
Which the writer then tried to further justify in the second article with some pretty shaky claims. But the sole "evidence" of a potential sale remains the two lawsuits.
So, yes, the idea of the sale was solely prompted by the lawsuits. It was the cause of the speculation.
Which the writer then tried to further justify in the second article with some pretty shaky claims. But the sole "evidence" of a potential sale remains the two lawsuits.
From what I can see the idea of the sale has been making the rounds since as early as 2018 with the release of a YouTube video from an MTG player.
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/specu lation/baseless-speculation/788322-rumors-of-hasbro-prepping-wizards-of-the -coast-for
|
|
I brought up that some DM’s have stated they found the book underwhelming as the “rules supplement” it was billed as.
Okay, Tasha's it is.
Do some DMs feel it's underwhelming? Probably. I'm one of them.
There was a lot of reprinted content, the patron rules were common sense and lackluster, the sidekick section anemic, and a lot of the DM advice was extremely basic. And we still need a really good magic item book, rather than this smattering of items.
But I also know that as someone who has been gaming for 30 years, there's very little they could add to a DM advice section that will surprise me. And the advice in this book was really aimed at DMs with 29 years less experience than me.
And because I've bought so many DM books in the past, I'm always going to prefer the focused 3e/ Pathfinder books that double down on a topic to the point of overkill. Part of me wants an Ultimate Equipment for 5e, despite only having used 1/5th of the magic items in the DMG. Having been around in the 4e days, I know some people won't even be satisfied with Dragon articles three times a week with new PC content every Friday.
But so many of those complaints could be aimed at Xanathar's Guide which was also a smattering of appetizers rather than a feast. But it became a huge hit and one of the best selling D&D books and a must-purchase. This is very likely going to become the same. And while I want more, my tables have only used a third of the subclasses in the game. The "underwhelming" content in Tasha's will keep us going for years.
The underpinnings of the system are fine and could last for years, but some on the DM side of things we’re hoping Tasha’s would be a fresh coat of paint.
We do need a second DM book. But that was never what Tasha's was advertised as. Hopefully they'll eventually release a "hacker's guide" or new version of 3e's Unearthed Arcana.
But, then again, as an experienced DM I'm pretty capable of doing that on my own and don't *need* the official stamp of approval to customize.It isn’t quite that. Even the new “Origin” system feels less robust than what was initially promised at the announcement.
Not really. We got what we were promised. I just think people read way too much into the promises and let their imaginations go wild.
Older gamers are just used to big, crazy subsystems that take up page after page. The race builder in the Advanced Race Guide. Or the books of optional rules from 2nd Edition. They forget how fast and loose 5e runs sometimes, and that you can get by with two pages.
I'm almost relieved they didn't go that route. Being able to mix-and-match racial powers is inherently broken. Just being able to swap out proficiencies is nice.
At some point the “rules not rulings” approach to balancing player facing needs and DM facing needs might need to realign slightly.
Hard disagree.
Rules not rulings was tried in past editions and didn't really work. It just ties the DM's hands and leads to rote memorization and rules lawyering. Players who win by knowing the rules rather than having clever ideas. It's what killed Pathfinder for me and why I won't ever run PF2: I don't want the players to just ending encounters because of little used rules and combos.
And it's just not necessary. We don't need firm, hard rules for everything because D&D and RPGs aren't computer games where everything has to be automated. There's a living, thinking person behind the DM screen who can decide if something seems logical or not. Or if the idea works once for a moment of glory but not again. Or if doesn't work because, despite it not being against RAW, it's silly AF.
5e is probably already 50% more complicated and fiddly than it needs to be. It's already somewhat intimidating and heavy compared to almost every other in-print game. If anything they might pull away from harder rules.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, yes, the idea of the sale was solely prompted by the lawsuits. It was the cause of the speculation.
Which the writer then tried to further justify in the second article with some pretty shaky claims. But the sole "evidence" of a potential sale remains the two lawsuits.From what I can see the idea of the sale has been making the rounds since as early as 2018 with the release of a YouTube video from an MTG player.
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/specu lation/baseless-speculation/788322-rumors-of-hasbro-prepping-wizards-of-the -coast-for
That seems to be based on this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGPuBOvTIUQThe speaker there is literally citing his source as "a friend of a friend." He clarifies there's no proof (around the 8 minute mark) but dismisses that with a fallacious appeal to authority over his unnamed friend's credentials.
His key argument is also flat out wrong, as he's arguing that WotC sold Pokemon. They didn't. It was always owned by Nintendo and WotC's licence to make cards and games expired.
Hasbro owns 10 subsidiaries. And has folded several other companies into Hasbro proper. They have never sold a subsidiary. They just close divisions and subsidiaries that underperform.
It's also based on the argument that MtG's sales were stagnating, which makes it more attractive as brand to be sold than one that can be maintained. However, since that video's release, MtG has steadily increased in sales, and has become a major Hasbro brand, offsetting poor sales elsewhere:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurenorsini/2019/07/24/magic-the-gathering-le ads-hasbros-second-quarter-earnings/?sh=5c6955ce2f54
But, for the sake of discussion, let's say that WotC will be the first division Hasbro sells and offloads. Who would get it?
Well, no tabletop companies can afford it. Magic pulls in a few hundred million each year, while most TTRPG companies rely on Kickstarters to raise 100k to do a print run.
It could be a big multimedia company like Disney or Sony. But I doubt the latter is interested, and Disney would only be interested in it for the IP and media rights. And they don't seem solid enough to become part of DisneyLand or a series of Movies.
The only people who might bite would be an investment firm or conglomerate, like Tencent. Buys WotC, fires the management, and adds their own but keeps the rest of the staff. And likely does some heavy layoffs to maximize profits. Which doesn't sound entirely unlikely, as WotC already partnered with Tencent to bring MtG to Asia.
But while CCGs have appeal in Asia, being big in China and Japan, D&D and RPGs are less popular. Call of Cthulhu is bigger there, and local games, that focus on one-shots and not campaigns. I doubt D&D would be a draw. And since it makes comparably less money, it'd probably be axed.
|
|
I'm not sure Tencent would invest in something mostly not web-based. Nor would it be likely that Hasbro would give up the rights to D&D movies. I guess a new exec team/board could move the company any number of ways but then that would be piling unfounded speculation on top of unfounded speculation. Not really an interesting tangent for me.
The movie/ media rights are the catch. Hasbro is trying really, really hard to get into movies and TV, with All Spark Entertainment. They've had some success with MLP and Transformers, but G.I.Joe, Battleship, and Ouija failed.
And MtG and D&D are ripe IP for them. I doubt they'd sell when they could just close WotC and license the games to other companies.OTOH, Tasha's Cauldron has nearly 2100 reviews, mostly good and by far most of the bad ones relating to printing/binding and/or shipping issues.
Their bindings are pretty meh.
Not as bad as Scholastic, which as a librarian I don't buy so much as rent. If a copy of Captain Underpants lasts more than a couple years without being layered in book tape I consider myself lucky.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Our favorite professional speculator has an interesting tidbit while making another point entirely in his latest column.
Except when he's not your favorite.
In other news:
Our favorite professional speculator has an interesting tidbit while making another point entirely in his latest column.However, unlike D&D and Stranger Things, I do not expect to see the chess sales boom continue much into 2021 (see "'Stranger Things' Meets 'D&D'"). Stranger Things has at least one more season under its belt and when it releases, I expect a slight resurgence in people wanting to try...
Yep, his wild speculation about network streamings knock on sales effect is absolutely more of value this forum due to his absolute zero experience in television than his speculation about a business practice of Hasbro was due to his experience as a business instructor.
And him stating that his expectation of a new season of television definitely means you were right about how an IDW Stranger Things comic book was going to drive sales. A can always be used as proof of W.
Also that comic has come out already. How did it sell? Did it drastically raise the sales of the ST Starter Set?
Also, Stranger Things doesn't really have a lot to do with D&D anymore.
It will, at least the first episode of season 4.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good to know about the binding. I had a professor who worked in the academic text book field for a decade or so and he told me that hardcover binding over soft is about $1/book in real cost whereas retail pricing is often >$40 difference. So given that the D&D HC books cost MSRP $50 I find it odd that they go the cheaper binding rout.
Book production costs tend to go up in fifths. 1/5th the cover price is manufacturing, 1/5th goes to the publisher, 1/5th goes to the distributor, and 2/5ths to the retailer.
A $1 increase at printing/ manufacturing means a $5 increase to the total book.
Although, going from paperback to hardcover tends to be a big jump.
How would you rate Paizo HC binding?
They're pretty decent.
Like most other harcover RPG books they're saddle-stitched. 11 by 17 inch folios are printed, folded in half, and then sewn onto a cloth backing that's glued into books. Tends to be more solid as single pages won't get loose.The D&D books are perfect bound, which tends to be done more for softcover books than hardcovers.
For WotC's books it's good to break them in: https://lifehacker.com/break-in-a-hardcover-book-without-ruining-the-spine- 1509842301
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... how about that stream with the Stranger Things cast playing D&D.
https://www.polygon.com/2020/12/15/22175192/stranger-things-dungeons-and-dr agons-actual-play-youtube
With David Harbour (Jim Hopper), Finn Wolfhard (Mike Wheeler), Gaten Matarazzo (Dustin Henderson), and Natalia Dyer (Nancy Wheeler).
I watched one of the celebrity games in the D&D Live 2020 event with David Harbour and he was a bright spot of that table. (The other three players hadn't played before, so it was awkward amateur hour.)
If this is lightly edited it might be more watchable as well. And it looks the production quality is also higher than just whatever webcameras the celebs have.
I've been dubious about the focus on celebrities playing D&D in the past. In 3e and 4e the biggest players were awkward nerds and bloggers. People in the community.
But since Critical Role premiered, more and more focus is on getting TV and Movie starts to play rather than average gamers. Which is fine for people like Matthew Lillard, Joe Manganiello, or Deborah Anne Woll who are massive lifelong D&D nerds. But when you're getting someone who has never played the game to play it's putting the focus on their popularity. It's telling every fan watching that no matter how big a fan they are, they'll never matter as much to WotC because they're not on TV.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And hey, D&D movie "news". With Chris Pines attached to star:
https://variety.com/2020/film/news/chris-pine-dungeons-and-dragons-movie-12 34853224/
I'd be more excited if there hadn't been past casting rumours, like Ansel Elgort:
https://deadline.com/2016/06/ansel-elgort-dungeons-and-dragons-movie-120177 8139/
They've been trying to get a D&D movie off the ground for years and years. I'll believe it when it actually starts filming.
Not that I expect a D&D movie to mean huge things for the RPG. A movie will be neat, but I doubt it will significantly attract people to the game, being so removed from the unique play experience that is the draw.
After all, it's not like Marvel Studios producing hit after hit has done anything to stop the hemorrhaging superhero comic industry.
But there will absolutely be tie-in products from WotC trying to squeeze the existing fans.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Especially after the last D&D movie.
You mean the last theatrical release or the two direct-to-DVD films?
:/
They've been trying to get a D&D movie off the ground for years and years. I'll believe it when it actually starts filming.Pine is a bigger hitter than Elgort, if not a better actor. If Variety is to be believed this means they have a script for pre-production, if not shooting. A producer signed and a lead signed. These are all really good portents that this one will actually film.
The bigger name is a good sign that this will have a budget and be treated as a more noteworthy picture.
Pine has been in a lot, but I don't recall him being the lead ever. Either part of a big ensemble (like Trek) or a key secondary role.
What worries me is casting a single lead in what has to be an ensemble picture. Kind of need a party if "D&D" is going to be expressly attached to this. If you have Pine why don't you have the rest of the co?
Agreed.
They need a decent supporting cast, and to build the party. Because the genre lives and dies based on the ensemble. (It's what made the IDW comic, which is the gold standard for D&D tale not based on an adventure or module IMHO.)