# More lay-offs at WOTC! [Merged]



## jaults (Sep 5, 2002)

*More WotC Layoffs*

    Yikes... more people leaving at WotC... *sigh*

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=5242&mode=thread&order=0
and
http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=5244&mode=thread&order=0

Jason


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

*More lay-offs at WOTC!*

Maybe someone has already posted this and I missed it, but several sources, including www.gamingreport.com are reporting that WOTC has layed-off up to 100 individuals, and some of them are rather important to the d20 world.

Among the layed-off, according to gamingreport.com are:

Skip Williams
Jeff Grubb
JD Wiker

Havent Skip and Jeff been working for WOTC for quite a while?  I find the firing of those two quite surprising.

JD was the rulekeeper for the SW RPG system.  He was the guy who would answer our queries.

This could get quite ugly for us D&D/Star Wars d20 gaming fans.


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

Could you close the other one?  I posted this first.  The other thread started after this one.


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 5, 2002)

*layoffs*

well i guess those guys just wern't pulling their weight.


joe b.



ps. this is sarcasm.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 5, 2002)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *Could you close the other one?  I posted this first.  The other thread started after this one. *




The other thread was posted 2 minutes before this one, according to the time stamp.  not that it matters, because I can't seem to close either right now.  Stupid computers.  I hate 'em.


----------



## Leopold (Sep 5, 2002)

Morrus said:
			
		

> *S'OK.  It's mildy amusing. It was there a good hour before Gaming Report got it though.  *




man your good! timing is everything!

where'd you get your news from, huh? huh?


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

Its where you put the news item that delayed everyone from reading in at enworld.org.  You put the lay-offs information at the bottom of the news for today.  Gaming report has their story at the top of their website right now.  If you have already read enworld.org today, you might miss your report regarding the lay-offs.  Good job posting it so quickly Morrus, but next time, a news items of this magnitude should be put at the top or near the top of your website.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 5, 2002)

> where'd you get your news from, huh? huh?




Sean Reynolds was kind enough to drop me a note.  I had to do some digging after that, though.

More importantly, though, Nicole Lindroos mentioned it on these boards 2 weeks ago, so I was waiting for it.


----------



## jaults (Sep 5, 2002)

Leopold said:
			
		

> *
> 
> man your good! timing is everything!
> 
> where'd you get your news from, huh? huh?  *



    I take it you don't know about Morrus and his deal with the gnomes?

Jason


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

Bah!  Damn my slow internet connection.  I have been following this story all day.  I think it broke several hours ago, when JD Wiker posted on the official SW boards that he had been fired.  That started the avalanche of speculation today that lead to confirmations.


----------



## kingpaul (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: More WotC Layoffs*

Just out of curiousity, what would happen to the corporate culture of WotC if the 2nd article's rumor is true about moving the operation to the home office?


----------



## ForceUser (Sep 5, 2002)

Well. 

That sucks.

What does this mean for the future of D&D?


----------



## Morrus (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: More WotC Layoffs*



			
				kingpaul said:
			
		

> *Just out of curiousity, what would happen to the corporate culture of WotC if the 2nd article's rumor is true about moving the operation to the home office? *




I've had a couple of people tell me that rumour, but I've had more people telling me its not true.  Right now, I don't know.  I'll wait until someone I know well gives me some solid info - there are a couple of people at or around WotC whose info I trust 100%.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 5, 2002)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *Its where you put the news item that delayed everyone from reading in at enworld.org.  You put the lay-offs information at the bottom of the news for today.  Gaming report has their story at the top of their website right now.  If you have already read enworld.org today, you might miss your report regarding the lay-offs.  Good job posting it so quickly Morrus, but next time, a news items of this magnitude should be put at the top or near the top of your website. *




Well, most of the people should get it.  There are about 500 people reading right now and there tends to be between 200-500 people on the page fairly constantly.  So I'm not too worried - just amused.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 5, 2002)

I understand that Stan! Brown is on the list as well. I understand that he had just been tasked with reinvigorating the playtesting program.

It will be interesting to see who inherits it.

Skip Williams has been with TSR and then WotC since... well, since forever. He's the only person to have worked on 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. I'm really surprised that he was amongst the layoffs.  His wife Penny was laid off, too.


----------



## Enkhidu (Sep 5, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *I understand that Stan! Brown is on the list as well. I understand that he had just been tasked with reinvigorating the playtesting program.
> 
> It will be interesting to see who inherits it.
> 
> Skip Williams has been with TSR and then WotC since... well, since forever. He's the only person to have worked on 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. I'm really surprised that he was amongst the layoffs.  His wife Penny was laid off, too.   *




I thought Jeff Grubb had been around for that long as well. Maybe I am mistaken...


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 5, 2002)

*yep*



			
				Piratecat said:
			
		

> *Skip Williams has been with TSR and then WotC since... well, since forever. He's the only person to have worked on 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. I'm really surprised that he was amongst the layoffs.  His wife Penny was laid off, too.   *




you have to wonder what the **** is going on over there.  personally i just think the non-gaming guys have decided to cull the crop and put in people who are more pliable, more likely to do whatever they're told without having any silly problems like treating the game with more respect than they (the non-gamers) think it should be treated.  sounds like the goals are switching from making a good product into making a product that sells more.

ah well... i could just be doom and gloomy.  Only nice thing about it is that the guys who made the game can easily find work doing what they were doing before.  and hopefully skip and jeff will continue putting out good stuff.

i fear that in 20 years DnD may morph into something so banal it will be unpalatable.  

joe b.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 5, 2002)

Enkhidu said:
			
		

> *
> I thought Jeff Grubb had been around for that long as well. Maybe I am mistaken... *




Well, I know Jeff wrote the original 1e MotP. Odd, then, that I remember reading that about Skip. Maybe I'm misremembering!


----------



## Enkhidu (Sep 5, 2002)

On the bright side, Skip and Jeff will have more time to create d20 products! I, for one, wouldn't hestate to pick up material by either of them, though that may be because I have a soft spot for their earlier work...


----------



## Mortaneus (Sep 5, 2002)

Maybe this is why WotC is doing the 100K setting search.

Looking for new talent to replace everyone that they've fired.


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 5, 2002)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> *
> What does this mean for the future of D&D? *




Nothing most likely...not any time soon. Except all the naysayers on the MsgBrds around the internet will once again predict the downfall and demise of D&D, the OGL, etc.


----------



## SHARK (Sep 5, 2002)

Greetings!

You know, in my opinion, getting rid of Skip and penny Williams is just sooo dumb, you know? I see people involved in things like this--as well as others--as intellectual, creative resources. Getting rid of such crucial resources is just stupid, and to my mind, can't be good for a company.

Sorry--it's like a platoon of Marines. Sure, every Marine is important--but the veterans, even more so. The veterans are the leaders, and the ones to inspire the rest of the team to greatness.

Wizards may have a hundred other game designers--but some game designers, like Skip, are not so easily found. They take time, skill, experience, and investment to build. This is a terrible loss for Wizards, whether they realise it or not.

I wish all the people that were fired the best. I do hope they will find excellent employment with other companies. If these companies in the end begin to make a bigger splash, and DO MORE as far as contributing great game material, well, Wizards can just eat cake!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 5, 2002)

In regards to D&D, Wizards is taking a cue from computer game makers: release a solid core game, make the code open source, and let the fans (or third-parties) do all the expensive game development/testing/refining. 

Look at Counter-Strike. That's a user-created modification to a very old game called Half-Life. But CS is the most popular game on the 'net. The sequel to Half-Life and CS are pretty much done, but the game's publisher has zero incentive to release these games because CS (or rather, Half-Life) is still selling like crazy. 

Wizards, I predict, will take the same stance: release fewer and fewer original products, and just keep selling core rule books to new fans. 

Or, if you prefer, you can view D&D as the game operating system. They'll just keep revving the OS, and let other companies spend the money on applications. Except, of course, for their Microsoft Office suite: FR and GH.

Smart! Why spend $$$ on staff and production when there's a whole stable of 3rd party developers ready to go?


----------



## Cougar (Sep 5, 2002)

*The Sage? Gone?*

I CAN'T believe the people they have layed off. I wish Hasbro would just sell the D&D license if it is such a dog to them, instead of stripping away every person who has worked on it.

How do you lay off the people who wrote your CORE products??


----------



## EricNoah (Sep 5, 2002)

I'm the phantom thread merger.  Woooooooo!!!!!


----------



## Numion (Sep 5, 2002)

The HASBRO DM is using the _Enron Executive_ prestige class without the official and mandatory errata, it seems.


----------



## Allister (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Cougar said:
			
		

> *I CAN'T believe the people they have layed off. I wish Hasbro would just sell the D&D license if it is such a dog to them, instead of stripping away every person who has worked on it.
> 
> How do you lay off the people who wrote your CORE products?? *




Um, what do you expect them to do? There isn't anything else for them to write really.

They have the 3 core books, (PHB, MM, DMG)
They have the meta-books out (ELH, DDG, PsiHB, MotP)
They have the expansion books (The splatbooks)

There really isn't much to put out.

While I am saddened to hear that so many designers got fired (really, who is left?) unless there is something for WOTC to produce, you can't simply just keep them on staff.


----------



## Enkhidu (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Allister said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Um, what do you expect them to do? There isn't anything else for them to write really.
> 
> ...




As much as I hate to agree with you, I do.

But I can really see these decisions coming back to bite WotC in the future. Some of the separations between Wizards and their talent pool have been amicable (take Monte for example - he still does freelance work for them), but I'd hate to see them make a misstep and alienant someone that could be instrumental in putting together 4th Ed 7 years down the road.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 5, 2002)

This smacks of a new type of corporate mindset - get rid of the high priced help.

A friend of mine was hired by a software firm in Ottawa.  The guy he was replacing made a cryptic remark to enjoy the moment and to take the next few years to pad his resume.  Of course, my friend thought this guy was just sour grapes.

Except my friend was sacked in turn after 4 years with the company.  

The reason - around the 4-5 year mark with this company, you are shown the door.  The company has a very attractive wage increase scale - so much so that my friend nearly doubled his salary in about four years. 

Guess who replaced him - yep, you guessed it.  Some 'just out of university' student who could do the job for about half the money.

With the exception of the CEO and a few 'founding' members, no one in the company has more than 5 years experience - they all get the boot.  And why not when you can get some 'not experienced in the real world' kid to do the job for half the money.

Apparently, the recruiting pitch for this company is the rapid advancement in salary.....they just omit to tell you that you are 'put out to pasture' in 4-5 years.

I heard of other companies doing similar practices.

So, Hasbro is just getting rid of the high priced help, IMO.


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Allister said:
			
		

> *Um, what do you expect them to do? There isn't anything else for them to write really.
> 
> There really isn't much to put out.
> 
> While I am saddened to hear that so many designers got fired (really, who is left?) unless there is something for WOTC to produce, you can't simply just keep them on staff. *




well there was that campaign search thingy they put out.  and i guess all the subsequent material on that.

joe b.


----------



## William Ronald (Sep 5, 2002)

This is a depressing development, but not surprising.  There have been a few changes in the market since Hasbro bought WoTC.

First, Pokemon and Magic: The Gathering, while still having a core base of fans, are not as popular as they once were.   Perhaps Hasbro has decided it was time to cut operational costs.  It does seem, according to reports, that the CCG division was hit hard.

Secondly, a lot of the things WoTC once produced -- such as adventures -- are now more often produced by other companies.  

Thirdly, the economy is in a slump so companies of all sorts are earning less money.

However, I must second SHARK's opinion that the loss of veterans is a key concern.  When I worked as a business reporter, I noticed that some companies had cut so deeply that they lost a lot of internal knowledge and expertise.  In the end, this hurt the competetive advantage that some companies once had.  I hope this will not be the case with Wizards of the Coast.

I suppose the new model of business is similar to what Zaruthustran discussed.  However, the loss of such veterans as Jeff Grubb, Skip Williams and Penny Williams is very sad.   (By the way, does anyone remember the old Marvel Superheroes adventure in Polyhedron where Penny Williams created a character named Lucky Penny.  She had the ability to Power Edit.)

I hope the people who lost their jobs will do well.  I admire their enthusiasm and hard work, and hope they will still be active voices in our hobby.  You have won my respect and admiration.  I will DEFINITELY look for your names on future products.  Your work has led to hours of fun with my friends, and a few debates as well.

 Also, for the sake of those who still have jobs, I hope that WoTC will not pull up roots and relocate.  They will likely loose even more people.  (Trying to convince a spouse to relocate the family is probably not going to be something anyone at WoTC wants to think about.)

As for the future, I don't know.  None of us truly do as yet.   I suspect Hasbro will keep WoTC and its brands for as long as it makes business sense to do so.   (Alright people, let the Monday morning quarterbacking begin.  I will go consult some tea leaves and try to come back with a reading within a few days.  Pity that the Oracle at Delphi is out of business. )

By the way, Morrus, I did get my notice from your page.  However, for major news, it might make sense to post it at the top of a page -- maybe with something to highlight it.  Keep up the good work!  It is appreciated.


----------



## Taren Nighteyes (Sep 5, 2002)

Good luck to all those who were let go.  Their talent is undeniable.

I look forward to any independent products they may produce for d20 games in the future.

My list of "must buy" authors:

Monte Cook
Sean K. Reynolds
Skip Williams
Jeff Grubb

Thanks for the wonderful hobby I enjoy today, and the hours of fun I have had for over 13 years.

Taren Nighteyes


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

Yep, I agree with an earlier post; it sounds like WOTC is cutting the high-price staff.  I wonder if WOTC believes that newer game designers can make quality products just as well as old-gamer designers can.

Why keep Jeff Grubb, Skip Williams, and other old-timers if you can get same stuff from new kids for a much lower price?


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 5, 2002)

*Change Sucks*

Layoffs suck too.

I think a lot of great points have been made.  I've wondered exactly how many more rule-heavy accessories and corebooks WotC could produce without modules and so-called fluffy material to back it up.  It's been said over and over again that modules do not make money for many companies.  This has been where smaller companies have filled in the gap, and admirably so.

The OGL remains, and it grows.  ELH is slated to be added, and according to Ryan Dancey, the chances of the whole shebang being rescinded is almost nil.  A layoff at WotC no longer necessarily means that fans will cease to see their favorite designers creating games for their favorite system.  While the loss of Skip Williams and Jeff Grubb at WotC still stinks, one hopes they won't have any trouble finding work elsewhere, producing the material that they enjoy.

Finally, change sucks only because we see change, in this case at least, as leading to something worse down the road.  That may or may not be the case, but then again D&D has been in worse straits.  What do these layoffs mean to me, personally?  As a consumer, it might mean that I'll buy less of WotC products.  Doesn't mean I'm not going to stop buying game material, and it doesn't mean I'm going to stop playing.


----------



## Allister (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *
> 
> well there was that campaign search thingy they put out.  and i guess all the subsequent material on that.
> 
> joe b. *





That's where freelance comes in. There's nothing preventing WOTC from having a methodology similar to how Ed Greenwood and the FR team works. Ed greenwood has his name on a large number of FR products but I don't think he ever worked for WOTC as a WOTC employee. He was freelance.


----------



## Ghostwind (Sep 5, 2002)

I could be completely wrong on this figure, but by my estimation, the number of laid off people represents about 7% of Wotc's workforce.  This number would be in line in terms of a general overall cut in overhead costs to counter poor margins and profits for the fiscal quarter/year.  I suspect Hasbro is taking steps to cut overall losses and are looking at some of their higher salary earners as areas to cut.  Again, my opinion and past experiences with corporate downsizing only...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 5, 2002)

Enkhidu said:
			
		

> *On the bright side, Skip and Jeff will have more time to create d20 products! I, for one, wouldn't hestate to pick up material by either of them, though that may be because I have a soft spot for their earlier work... *




Agreed! 

The name Grubb seems to have a strange siren call hold over my wallet.

I tried one of those wallet chains, but the call was too strong.  

On a more serious note- I wish all who have lost their positions and their families the best of fortunes.

FD


----------



## William Ronald (Sep 5, 2002)

Taren,

I  like your list.  I think we should support the authors we like.

I just heard that Stan! has been cut as well.  Check out http://www.stannex.com


----------



## Taren Nighteyes (Sep 5, 2002)

Names:

In the gaming industry, names like Monte Cook and Jeff Grubb are some of the reasons people BUY the books.

The names themselves are selling points that will boost the number of books sold.

WoTC is also allowing these "famous" individuals the opportunity to compete for a share of the gamer wallet.  With every layoff, they are decreasing sales (based on name recognition) and increasing the competition.

Sure, they will hire some lower paid designers to create new, even good sourcebooks - the market has gotten tougher to compete in.

Just my thoughts - from a Financial Analyst.


----------



## River (Sep 5, 2002)

Dumb da dumb dumb!
Dumb da da Dumb DUMMMMMB!

What a bunch on nit-wits.

Isn't this the point in the movie for the montage where all the people kicked out of the company come together to build a better rival company?

River


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

The official WOTC messageboards just went down.  They are upgrading to UBB 6.3.  Here is the message you get when you try to read the boards:

"The boards are down as announced last week for an upgrade to 6.3 UBB. We expect to be back up again at end of the day, barring complications. --Boards Admin ::elevator music plays:: (Thursday, Sept. 5 2 pm PT) "

If those boards dont come back up, that will be a really, really bad sign.  I am quite hopeful they will though.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 5, 2002)

Taren Nighteyes said:
			
		

> *
> In the gaming industry, names like Monte Cook and Jeff Grubb are some of the reasons people BUY the books.*




I am not sure if that is true beyond fans like us- people who participate in our hobby through this website and others like it.

I have some doubts the casual player even notices- last night I had to explain to the two casual players in my group who Gary Gygax is and what he did for d&d.

Respectfully submitted
FD


----------



## greymarch (Sep 5, 2002)

I agree.  The names Jeff Grubb and Monte Cook mean something to the hard-core, internet savvy players, but to most players, they are meaningless.  The books with good art, good production values, lots of crunchy stuff (rules, prestige classes, magic items, monsters, etc..) are what sell.


----------



## Cougar (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Allister said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Um, what do you expect them to do? There isn't anything else for them to write really.
> 
> ...




Explain to me why Jeff Grubb and Skip Williams have worked through TSR, WotC, and now Hasbro? Why weren't they laid off long before now? 

The scary thing to me, and I think a lot of people, is that the corporate machine that is Hasbro doesn't seem to care much for ANYTHING beyond sales. Not continuing customer support, not rich and detailed campaign books with few "crunchy bits". This may be smart in a corporate world, but I don't think the corporate world should be producing D20 or D&D. Let's ask Monte Cook and Sean Reynolds if they agree with me.


----------



## the Jester (Sep 5, 2002)

I just want to add Bruce Cordell to the list of must-buy authors.

Don't think he got the boot, though... not yet, anyway.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Cougar said:
			
		

> *
> This may be smart in a corporate world, but I don't think the corporate world should be producing D20 or D&D.*




I am very pro-corporation, but I would agree with this. 

It is such niche hobby, that is would be better served by being outside of the corporate mechanics.

FD


----------



## Squire James (Sep 5, 2002)

I guess it remains to be seen whether these particular layoffs is a dumb move or not.  My gut tells me it is pretty stupid to lay off a large group of "named" workers, note that profits are dropping, then lay off some more!  I mean, perhaps that first layoff CAUSED the profit drop?

Citing the economy is not good enough.  My experience is that D&D gets MORE popular when the economy is bad, because people who play have more time to play it!  The "dead days" of D&D just happened to be a long period of general prosperity in the U.S., and perhaps that is no coincidence.  While coorelation is not equal to causality, one should NOT ignore coorelation!

I can only shrug and say "it's their company".  If WotC goes under tomorrow, I have campaign ideas enough for 2-3 years.  Mostly, I'm concerned about whether or not I will still be a homeowner at the end of this year (well, yes, if I crack all my IRA's...).


----------



## Maraxle (Sep 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> It is such niche hobby, that is would be better served by being outside of the corporate mechanics.
> *



Well, if it stops being profitable, you can be sure that they'll spin it off or sell the rights.  Hopefully it'll go to a smaller company.


----------



## Cougar (Sep 5, 2002)

Are things that bad in Orlando for you, Squire James? I am here and haven't felt a pinch, but I am not sure what industry you are in.


----------



## PatrickLawinger (Sep 5, 2002)

Taren Nighteyes said:
			
		

> *Names:
> 
> In the gaming industry, names like Monte Cook and Jeff Grubb are some of the reasons people BUY the books.
> 
> ...




I am sorry, but the general gaming public isn't going to care who the author is. Yes, they do good work, but that only makes an impact with the people that actually know and recognize the names. Just a guess, but I would say that Monte Cook's Malhavok Press' best selling adventure or supplement has no where near the sales of the worst selling WoTC adventure or supplement.

The general gaming public, strangely, also isn't into the gaming news enough to have heard or even thought about the news.

This is not a death-knell for DnD, sorry, hate to disappoint, but DnD will be around for a while. WotC and a variety of other companies have been laying people off and going to contract (read: freelance) work to save on a variety of costs (mostly insurance). 

As someone that has been involved with running a business (until just recently) I can honestly say that insurance costs have gone through the roof. Liability, comp, everything has sky-rocketed. Paying someone the same "wage" as a freelancer can still save vast amounts of money vs having them as an employee. It does put the person losing their job in a bad situation though, they have to purchase their own health insurance, etc.

Personally, I don't like seeing these folks go, but my personal opinion isn't going to make their company profitable. 

Just some random thoughts,
Patrick


----------



## Cougar (Sep 5, 2002)

Now don't get me wrong, I feel as though a company, or in this case a corporation, should do what it has to do to keep it's profits up and costs down. All I am saying is I would have prefered to keep D&D out of Hasbro's hands. I would guess they bought WotC for Magic and Pokemon anyway. Like I said before, I hope they sell it. They are selling everything else.


----------



## Leopold (Sep 5, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *I understand that Stan! Brown is on the list as well. I understand that he had just been tasked with reinvigorating the playtesting program.
> 
> It will be interesting to see who inherits it.
> 
> Skip Williams has been with TSR and then WotC since... well, since forever. He's the only person to have worked on 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. I'm really surprised that he was amongst the layoffs.  His wife Penny was laid off, too.   *






what a bummer. Any idea on their future or the future of any of these folks? Do any of them plan to open up their own company or are they part of the WOTC outsourcing plan that I saw on the gamingreport page.


----------



## JDragon (Sep 5, 2002)

Well, along with most everyone here I think this sucks (at least in the short term) for D&D/Star Wars.  What will come out of it, we will just have to wait and see.  

I think to me the worst part on a personal level is they laid of Skip & Penny Williams, talk about trying to screw people now both of them are out of work at the same time.  

I know that if the same had happened to my wife and I when I got laid off in November we would have been out on the street or filling bankruptcy with in a month.  

Its one thing if you are at different companies and they both happen to do lay-offs, but dropping both people from the same company at the same time is just wrong.  


I wish the best to all that were let go and will do my best to support any products they put out in the future.

JDragon


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 5, 2002)

Cougar said:
			
		

> *Like I said before, I hope they sell it.*




It will most likely happen in the long run- d&d may make money, but it also takes a lot of money to put out a product. 

That is not a great combination in eyes of a lot decision makers.

But, if they do or don't, d&d will be healthy in for the short term due to great communities like this one.

FD


----------



## Cougar (Sep 5, 2002)

PatrickLawinger said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I am sorry, but the general gaming public isn't going to care who the author is. Yes, they do good work, but that only makes an impact with the people that actually know and recognize the names. *




I don't think people are worried about sales dropping due to name recognition so much as they are a serious problem with WotC as a subsidiary of Hasbro. Losing key people at a company is a bad sign.


----------



## Nikchick (Sep 5, 2002)

Well, I knew it was coming, and I'm still completely bummed out.

As of last night, friends of mine in R&D were remaining optimistic that cuts were going to be in areas of the company that Hasbro's infrastructure could take over: sales, marketing, accounting.  Perhaps those areas were cut as well, but it certainly seems to me that they've gone deep into the creative areas as well.  The list of confirmed laid-off "creatives" includes some of the most talented, hard-working people I've ever had the pleasure to know in my 15 years in the industry.  A dozen people in the graphic design group came to work today only to be told they had no job as of tomorrow, including the people who worked on card games, Star Wars, minis, and D&D, including Art Directors and supervisors, people in design and editing, people who have been there and been work horses for the properties the company owns (Jeff Grubb, Skip and Penny, Stan!--who is one of the nicest people I've ever EVER known) and who have *people skills* (unlike certain of the remaining managers I could name).  If the creative slack is expected to be picked up by the people who were moved up to management positions, I shudder to think what's likely to come out from the company; many of those creatives-turned-managers became managers because they weren't very good designers to begin with.   

They've retained a handful of talent on the creative side, but just a handful, no more.  I sincerely believe that Hasbro will not be satisfied with how the company is performing unless they can recapture the heady days of Pokemon and selling multiple hundreds of thousands of "core books"--something that will NEVER happen.  Hasbro itself is creatively bankrupt (witness its inability to spawn a hit toy and how it continues to go back to the well by "reinventing" GI Joe or "new and different" Furby creations). Not only do these layoffs cut the creative talent of WotC down to the bone, they also weaken the company's ability to have those new "break out" hits that are seemingly required for the company to be perceived (on the stock market at least) as a success.

I'm sad for all my friends who got the axe today, but I'm sure in the long term they're better off without the Hasbro shackles.  In the short term, though, my thoughts will be with them and I hope they all land on their feet and come out swinging.

Nicole


----------



## James Heard (Sep 5, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I am not sure if that is true beyond fans like us- people who participate in our hobby through this website and others like it.
> 
> ...




That may be true, but the authors they're letting go have enough pull to garner their own name recognition on their merits beyond the brand recognition. I mean, Gygax already has his name blazing on the top of a few products and that means people start looking for his name again when they like his products just like they do for WOTC labels and such even if they don't have any sense of history about what he actually has done for the hobby. If Salvatore started making d20 products, he'd sell them on the merits of his name alone just like Ed Greenwood does for products. Even though Monte Cook goes under the Malhavoc label, he's got a pretty sturdy brand recognition and so does Bastion Press. If Hasbro lets enough people go until "D&D" doesn't automatically mean "WOTC", but instead is associated with some other companies then it's going to be pretty rough for them. 

I mean, if you change Coca-Cola by diluting it's consistency and quality and another cola company comes out there with your old employees and starts making Coca-Cola like everyone likes it then you've effectively shot your brand name in it's foot in the interest of checking your bottom line. This wouldn't be a big problem for WOTC except they put out the OGL in the interests of supporting their line without having to pay for it themselves. 

I don't think all of this will have much impact in the short term, WOTC already has a pretty lazy schedule when you compare them to each and every other d20 publisher out there (and you really have to lump "everyone else" into the same bag when you're talking about things I think). On the long term I hope Hasbro realizes they're going to have to play damage control in the future and try to re-absorb their former employee's competing companies at some point to strengthen their own market share I think. 

Personally, I think if I were Hasbro I woud have just dropped a big chunk of WOTC on someone else that wanted to assume the risks rather than worry about the whole thing. Pokemon is probably never coming back until it makes it's revival fad period 5 or 10 years down the road. MtG seems to be on the decline, though I suppose some really nice widget or promotion could revive it again. D&D is probably a slow and steady market for Hasbro though, you really have to screw up a product to not get the numbers you're expecting (if anyone can correct me if I'm wrong?) because barring a sudden influx of gamers we're all a pretty outlined market. That means little growth in some ways, but it's fine cash flow (excepting to all the companies out there that seem to be either bleeding money or dripping in $$$)

If you managed to actually read this far without falling asleep I'll now sign off with an apology for talking too much.

JMH


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 5, 2002)

With all these lay-offs every few months, I have to say....

Who is left?

Honestly, we all know D&D will never die, but one has to wonder how long Hasbro will keep it.

Wonder what it is worth. 

Who can compete? White Wolf?

I wouldn't be surprised at all if 4th Edition had White Wolf's paw print on it in a few years.

_Note: All of this is just my baseless speculation with no real thought given to hard facts.   _


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 5, 2002)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> *I wouldn't be surprised at all if 4th Edition had White Wolf's paw print on it in a few years.*




Don't forget:

5th Edition
Race Books
Class Books
Alignment Books
6th Edition
6th Edition Revised
Race Books (Rev)
Class Books (Rev)
Alignment Books (Rev)


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Sep 5, 2002)

haha... yea.. 4th edition (Revised)   

WW actually does really good work, but their books fall apart easy...... and smell funny too.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 5, 2002)

Ashrem Bayle said:
			
		

> *
> Who can compete? White Wolf?
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised at all if 4th Edition had White Wolf's paw print on it in a few years.
> [/i] *




Ugh, I really hope not.

FD


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 5, 2002)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> *Just out of curiousity, what would happen to the corporate culture of WotC if the 2nd article's rumor is true about moving the operation to the home office? *




The culture of WOTC has been dead since Peter left. Well, really since before he left-- I suppose it was one of the reasons WHY he left.



			
				JDragon said:
			
		

> *Its one thing if you are at different companies and they both happen to do lay-offs, but dropping both people from the same company at the same time is just wrong.*




That is odd. This happened in my own little division: husband and wife were laid off at the same time. When someone realized what had been done, they actually brought the wife back to work for three months or so. She just sat there every day, doing nothing, collecting a paycheck.

My hope is that Peter comes back and "rescues" the D&D brand. I'm not worried about D&D-- it will live on, with or without WOTC/Hasbro, thanks to the OGL-- but it would be great to see Peter set up shop with all this old talent.

And then hire me, too, of course. 


Wulf


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 5, 2002)

PatrickLawinger said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Just a guess, but I would say that Monte Cook's Malhavok Press' best selling adventure or supplement has no where near the sales of the worst selling WoTC adventure or supplement.
> 
> *




And yet, this could be the best thing for our hobby.  A small company doesn't need to have the margins, revenues, and profits that a company like Hasbro requires.  As far as I know, Monte Cook has indicated that Malhavok has exceeded his expectations by a lot.  This bodes very well, IMO.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 6, 2002)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> *
> My hope is that Peter comes back and "rescues" the D&D brand. I'm not worried about D&D-- it will live on, with or without WOTC/Hasbro, thanks to the OGL-- but it would be great to see Peter set up shop with all this old talent.*



Why? He's the guy that gave in to pressure to sell his company to Hasbro. Then he's the guy who abandon his own company rather than continue to fight the parent company.

No offense but I prefer someone with guts and a rebel at heart.


----------



## LadyGargoyle (Sep 6, 2002)

Deleted - Accidently used my wife's account.    _James


----------



## Xeriar (Sep 6, 2002)

Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I am not sure if that is true beyond fans like us- people who participate in our hobby through this website and others like it.
> 
> ...




Casual players...

Who spends the money, hmm?  Casual players who just purchase the PHB, or people like me who have dumped over ten thousand dollars into the hobby as a whole (fear my library ?

Beyond which, who GMs these games?  Do the casual players care -that- much what they play?


----------



## LadyGargoyle (Sep 6, 2002)

deleted - double post - I give up. - James


----------



## Gadodel (Sep 6, 2002)

I wonder which company some of these folks will start working for?  Or will they get out of the gaming business altogether?

Hmmm...I'd like to see Skip Williams continue on, somewhere.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

James Heard said:
			
		

> *
> If Hasbro lets enough people go until "D&D" doesn't automatically mean "WOTC", but instead is associated with some other companies then it's going to be pretty rough for them.
> 
> I mean, if you change Coca-Cola by diluting it's consistency and quality and another cola company comes out there with your old employees and starts making Coca-Cola like everyone likes it then you've effectively shot your brand name in it's foot in the interest of checking your bottom line. This wouldn't be a big problem for WOTC except they put out the OGL in the interests of supporting their line without having to pay for it themselves.
> *




Sorry, I don't follow your reasoning. "D&D" is owned by WotC; whether the term becomes associated with other companies or not, only WotC can put out D&D core rule books. Layoffs and numbers/popularity of d20 publishers are irrelevant to WotC's ownership of the D&D brand. Every single one of us, every one, will buy 4th edition when it comes out.

Your Coca-Cola analogy is incorrect. What's being diluted? WotC's work is done. It's made D&D 3E. No one else can start "making Coca-Cola like everyone likes it" because no one else can make Coca-Cola. 

A more correct analogy would be D&D is Coca-Cola, and all the d20 publishers are making Rum and Coke, Jack and Coke, Southern Comfort and Coke, etc. Point being, they all use Coke, and each "X and Coke" sale sells more Coke, and increases the total number of people enjoying Coke-based drinks.

The OGL ensures the consistency of mechanics but no game company can make a d20 product that includes character creation and combat rules. Meaning, they all have to use the rules as found in WotC's core rulebooks. Meaning, if some third-party publisher creates a wildly popular setting, then that's GOOD for WotC, because everyone who wants to play in that setting will want a core rulebook. Cha ching, without the cost of developing and marketing the setting.

(apologies if I misunderstand the OGL)

-z


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

*more*

And sorry to rant on, but the layoffs are a GOOD THING for players. Free of stodgy WotC and its demands of huge sales with low risk, all these creative people are now free to go nuts. They can create what they want, when they want, how they want. Free of "design-by-comittee" and last minute changes by Legal and Marketing, these fine folks will create more creative D&D product, faster.

This is a good thing. I mean, look what Monte's been able to accomplish! And to great personal financial success, to boot! He's happier, wealthier, and we've had the opportunity to enjoy more of his stuff than we'd have been able to enjoy if he'd stayed at WotC.

This is zero comfort to the folks with the pink slips, however. What's best for D&D/WotC/gamers is not really what's best for the individual designers now out of a job. I truly, truly hope that they're able to find gainful employment, and that we gamers support them with by buying their stuff.

-z

PS: it'd be cool if a bunch got together and formed their own publishing house. A "United Artists" of games.


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 6, 2002)

*Moronic speculation...*

Read the subject line....all of this bemoaning comes off as the self-interested fanboys crying satan because their 'niche' markets and idols are not viable financially. Please don't place a moral quaility to what i'm sure were very pragmatic descisions that effect a very minor hobby. This MIGHT not be good news for some of you, but this mix of populism and neo-con style lauding of the 'little guy' is really pathetic....


----------



## Vaxalon (Sep 6, 2002)

Gadodel said:
			
		

> *I wonder which company some of these folks will start working for?  Or will they get out of the gaming business altogether?
> 
> Hmmm...I'd like to see Skip Williams continue on, somewhere. *




Oh, he will.

He already has contacts at Malhavoc, for example.

Will these people be able to make a living doing this stuff full time?  I hope so, but it'll be tough, I think.

It's my wager that WotC will be handling a lot of their creative work freelance.


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 6, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *
> The OGL ensures the consistency of mechanics but no game company can make a d20 product that includes character creation and combat rules. Meaning, they all have to use the rules as found in WotC's core rulebooks. Meaning, if some third-party publisher creates a wildly popular setting, then that's GOOD for WotC, because everyone who wants to play in that setting will want a core rulebook. Cha ching, without the cost of developing and marketing the setting.
> 
> (apologies if I misunderstand the OGL)
> ...




True, but of course WotC doesn't just put out the three core rulebooks.  They also have Forgotten Realms, Oriental Adventures and other game supplements that are not part of the OGL.  These products could be slammed very, very hard by a perceived drop in quality.


----------



## ForceUser (Sep 6, 2002)

Can we please stop talking about the mythical "4th edition?" It doesn't exist, and mentioning it does nothing but fuel speculation.


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Moronic speculation...*



			
				jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *Read the subject line....all of this bemoaning comes off as the self-interested fanboys crying satan because their 'niche' markets and idols are not viable financially. Please don't place a moral quaility to what i'm sure were very pragmatic descisions that effect a very minor hobby. This MIGHT not be good news for some of you, but this mix of populism and neo-con style lauding of the 'little guy' is really pathetic.... *




BS.   

We're saying that we don't attribute quality automatically to a company just because the title says it's a WotC product.  We recognize who are good designers and are more likely to buy products they've worked on.  As pointed out, there are other places to take our money.


----------



## Bugaboo (Sep 6, 2002)

If they were asked to leave the company, it's probably because they did something bad or just didn't see eye-to-eye with Hasbro's creative vision or financial plans. It's a good guess that they deserved it.

But if the ex-employees shape up and change their ways, the company *might* allow them to come back and help on 4th edition some day. It's possible. Hasbro has proven to be a considerate corporation before.


----------



## fett527 (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Moronic speculation...*



			
				jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *Read the subject line....all of this bemoaning comes off as the self-interested fanboys crying satan because their 'niche' markets and idols are not viable financially. Please don't place a moral quaility to what i'm sure were very pragmatic descisions that effect a very minor hobby. This MIGHT not be good news for some of you, but this mix of populism and neo-con style lauding of the 'little guy' is really pathetic.... *




Uh...maybe you should take your negativity somewhere else.  These messageboards are dedicated to this "very minor hobby" and if you think that way why are posting here?


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> *Can we please stop talking about the mythical "4th edition?" It doesn't exist, and mentioning it does nothing but fuel speculation. *




? 

Sure, it doesn't exist now. But 4th Edition will exist one day, as sure as there'll be another Survivor after Thailand. Since the discussion drifted over to the topic of the future of WotC and the future of D&D, it's logical to include in that discussion the certain eventuality of 4th Edition.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

Bugaboo said:
			
		

> *If they were asked to leave the company, it's probably because they did something bad or just didn't see eye-to-eye with Hasbro's creative vision or financial plans. It's a good guess that they deserved it.
> 
> But if the ex-employees shape up and change their ways, the company *might* allow them to come back and help on 4th edition some day. It's possible. Hasbro has proven to be a considerate corporation before. *




Hee hee. Good one.

And since when does Bugaboo have only 2 posts?


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 6, 2002)

Sure, there could be a 4th edition.  Doesn't mean Hasbro/WotC will be producing it.


----------



## WCT-1 (Sep 6, 2002)

Anyone have any news on how this layoff will affect Chainmail v2.0?  

One of the previous posts indicates that the miniatures division was affected.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 6, 2002)

There's a Chainmail 2.0????


----------



## fett527 (Sep 6, 2002)

I thought Chainmail was going by the wayside.


----------



## Fenrir (Sep 6, 2002)

Hey, there's nothing like the smell of a new White Wolf book....and mine have held together perfectly for years.

Personally, I think WW acquiring the D&D license could be the best thing now. WW is a company of gamers run by gamers- they know how to put out a quality, cost effective product. Their d20 branch, Sword and Sorcery studios, has been a critical and commercial success. It's been proven with the EverQuest RPG (at least by what I've seen, I don't own it and don't plan to) that they can put out a book with high production values at an EXTREMELY low cost compared to similar books. (Has anyone SEEN that thing? It could be used as a bludgeoning weapon, full color glossy pages, and clocks in at 25.00 at the local Borders). 

Although Justin Achilli is famous for his occasional jabs at D&D, he's smart enough to know that D&D equals a great deal of money for him. And since Sword and Sorcery enjoys a great deal of autonomy, they'd be able to do what they wanted.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

Chainmail was cancelled  a while ago.


----------



## Celebrim (Sep 6, 2002)

Anyone that would fire Skip and Stan! simply has no business sense whatever.  All Skip and Stan! are going to do is go out, produce that product that they know the fans would want, and make money.  Just having Skip William's name on the cover is worth $5 bucks.  I suspect Skip is going to become the biggest thing since, well, Monte Cook.

But you know what this means don't you.

The next step is rescinding the OGL.  I can hear this discussion in the Hasbro board rooms alread, "This D&D thing would be as big as Pokemon if they hadn't given it away."


----------



## gordonknox (Sep 6, 2002)

Didn't Monte predict more WOTC layoffs a few articles ago?

gk


----------



## Thaumaturge (Sep 6, 2002)

Chainmail was cancelled, but WotC stated it would have another mini game that was backward compatable and more closely tied to the D&D brand out in 2003.  I would point you in the direction of the WotC boards, but they are down.  There is much speculation on the type of game and the quality and composition of the minis.  This next game has no actual name yet, so people call it Chainmail 2.0.

Thaumaturge.

Edit: This is the press release from WotC on the matter.


----------



## The Sigil (Sep 6, 2002)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> The next step is rescinding the OGL.  I can hear this discussion in the Hasbro board rooms alread, "This D&D thing would be as big as Pokemon if they hadn't given it away."



Not to belabor the point, but Hasbro CAN'T do that.  Let's nip the speculation in the bud.  Hasbro can no more rescind the OGL than I can.  Anything that is OGC is stuck as OGC, under version 1.0a of the OGL, until it falls into the public doman (IOW, it's under the OGL forever since nothing will ever fall into public domain again).

The worst they can do is refuse to approve the remainder of the SRD - but since there are a plethora of OGC spells, monsters, and treasures out there already, they're screwed on that count, too.

Intentional or not, Dancey in his push for the OGL also managed to put the system "out into the public arena" and permanently out of the hands of Hasbro - or any other corporation that purchases the rights to D&D.  IMO this is a good thing... play your cards right and YOU could be the company making money off the system.  Survival of the fittest - and best games - makes for a better RPG industry, WotC notwithstanding.

BTW, I can't remember the last time I bought a WotC book over a 3rd-party book.  WotC has, IMO, already gutted themselves to the point of non-competitiveness... their stuff is dry and rehashed.  3rd party stuff is edgier and pushes the boundaries of the system.  It's anecdotal evidence to be sure, but it's evidence to me that WotC has already made the moves that seal its doom as relates to D&D remaining profitable.  I can't think that I'm the only one who is seeing his discretionary income going to other companies because "well, I compared the WotC supplement and the Company X supplement on the subject, and frankly, the WotC supplement sucked."

--The Sigil


----------



## UniversalMonster (Sep 6, 2002)

I can't believe Skip Williams is gone. Thats pretty much it. I mean Jonathan Tweet is still there- but really- for rules stuff, it was always Skip or Monte I would think of as the main-gun. 

This guy has been the Sage Advice guy since the TSR days too. Who is going to do Sage Advice?


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> *The next step is rescinding the OGL.  I can hear this discussion in the Hasbro board rooms alread, "This D&D thing would be as big as Pokemon if they hadn't given it away." *




They cannot rescind the OGL. Once it's OGL, it's OGL forever and ever and ever. This has been discussed at length many times over the past 2 years.


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 6, 2002)

*Craft Staff Corporate Feat*

Here's one for you all:

Craft Staff [Corporate Feat]
Prerequisites: Must fire the best part of your existing staff, leaving but a few remaining quality-conscious staff.
Benefit: (Short-Term)You save lots of money while removing the continual irratation of speaking with people who view the game as more than work.  You recieve a +2  D00D bonus to Kewl art and +2 short-term bonus to Generate Income rolls.
(Long-Term) You get to compete again those you fired.  You recieve a -4 Bonus to Overall Profit rolls.

*Special: Overusing this feat will cause you to loose your DnD game's profitabiltiy and sell it to another company.


joe b.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *
> The worst they can do is refuse to approve the remainder of the SRD - but since there are a plethora of OGC spells, monsters, and treasures out there already, they're screwed on that count, too.
> 
> *




Still, I imagine the d20 publishers would be nervous about the fact that after 2 years, some of the Core itself isn't in the SRD yet. But you're right - so much of it is in the SRD, it probably doesn't matter.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *
> Intentional or not, Dancey in his push for the OGL also managed to put the system "out into the public arena" and permanently out of the hands of Hasbro - or any other corporation that purchases the rights to D&D.  IMO this is a good thing... play your cards right and YOU could be the company making money off the system.  Survival of the fittest - and best games - makes for a better RPG industry, WotC notwithstanding.
> 
> BTW, I can't remember the last time I bought a WotC book over a 3rd-party book.  WotC has, IMO, already gutted themselves to the point of non-competitiveness... their stuff is dry and rehashed.  3rd party stuff is edgier and pushes the boundaries of the system.  It's anecdotal evidence to be sure, but it's evidence to me that WotC has already made the moves that seal its doom as relates to D&D remaining profitable.  I can't think that I'm the only one who is seeing his discretionary income going to other companies because "well, I compared the WotC supplement and the Company X supplement on the subject, and frankly, the WotC supplement sucked."
> ...




Dancey's efforts were intentional, the intentions being exactly as you spell out.

It sounds like your second paragraph is a slam on WotC, but it really just proves WotC's point. WotC's non-core stuff is... not good. So why spend money developing non-core stuff? Thus the layoffs. 

You erroneously equate D&D profitability with the sale of non-core books. WotC putting out fewer crap non-core books will make D&D *more* profitable: profit = revenue - expenses. Laying off employees and eliminating the cost of producing non-core books decreases expenses. Note that you said that people already don't buy WotC supplements; under your argument there's no revenue loss. Thus, if expenses go down and revenue stays the same, profit goes up.

This move does not "seal the doom as relates to D&D remaining profitable." It makes D&D more profitable for WotC, and likely will increase the number of the high-quality non-WotC supplements that you enjoy.

-z
WotC PR
(just kidding)

PS: look at this move rationally, and you'll see that it's good for gamers. And while that Craft Staff feat was funny, WotC and Hasbro have a responsibility to shareholders to view the game as no less than "work." Note that I said "no less than work", not "no more than work."


----------



## TiQuinn (Sep 6, 2002)

I don't know.....this is all assuming that sales of the core rulebooks will continue at a steady pace.  At what point do those sales dwindle?  Have they dwindled?


----------



## Darkness (Sep 6, 2002)

Peter said:
			
		

> *I can't believe Skip Williams is gone. Thats pretty much it. I mean Jonathan Tweet is still there- but really- for rules stuff, it was always Skip or Monte I would think of as the main-gun.
> 
> This guy has been the Sage Advice guy since the TSR days too. Who is going to do Sage Advice? *



Haven't they lately sold Dragon?

Hmm...


----------



## Thaumaturge (Sep 6, 2002)

> (Long-Term) You get to compete *again* those you fired. You recieve a -4 Bonus to Overall Profit rolls.




The new feat even comes complete with errata.  

Thaumaturge.


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 6, 2002)

*well*

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Long-Term) You get to compete again those you fired. You recieve a -4 Bonus to Overall Profit rolls.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The new feat even comes complete with errata.  

Thaumaturge.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sure, but im not going to put the errata in the SRD... that errata is IP for me!  

joe b.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 6, 2002)

Skip, theoretically could go on as "the Sage", Piazzo or whatever could hire him.

And while I admire his knowledge and command of rules related material, most of his creative work has been very mixed in quality. It seems Skip is very hit or miss...His FR module in Dungeon was fantastic..Deep Horizon has been heralded as the worst of WOTC AP series. Rod Of Seven Parts, excellent. Childs Play: pretty much total crap. I'm not sure having Skip's name on anything would make me buy it, but I would take a gander cause there is the off-chance he came up with another gem. That being said, I do have a lot of respect for the guy..heck he started as Retail Clerk at the hole in the wall Dungeon Hobby Shop back in the 70's!

Jeff Grubb on the other hand has had his mits in many a good work. He and Ed Greenwood were the original "guard" of the Realms. His work on both the original and current MotP which are highly regarded. I believe he also had quite a bit of authorship in ALQuadim, and Planescape. If I were a betting man, I'd  bet on Grubb over Mr. Williams for high quality D20 products that would sell on "name value". 

Also JD Wiker will be missed...he always struck me as the Gamer guy who just happens to work at WOTC...Not the Star Wars Line designer at some big corp entity...He always tried to keep an ear open to what the fans were saying on the boards. And when they had questions he'd get answers if he couldn't give them himself. JD just seems like a very down to earth , easy going fellow who living a gamers dream.

In any event, there's not a writer left at WOTC it seems now who could get me to buy  book on name value only. Jeff Grubb was the last old guard guy there whose work  I really admired and had any confidence in. I hope him and Monte get together, get a license and give us another Planescape, or anything for that matter.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

TiQuinn said:
			
		

> *I don't know.....this is all assuming that sales of the core rulebooks will continue at a steady pace.  At what point do those sales dwindle?  Have they dwindled? *




They've dwindled since the release, certainly. At it's release, the  Player's Handbook was ranked #1 on Amazon.com. Now it's ranked 360:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0786915501/

This is a finished product, so it makes sense to cut staff. Hunker down and live off the sales of core rule books for a few years. The game will be sustained by 3rd party folks. Then, when the time is right, hire more folks and produce the mythical 4th edition. 

D&D is a product, but it's also a franchise like Star Wars. Both have cycles. When a new Star Wars movie is in production, Lucas hires a ton of actors, lighting, and other movie people, and creates games, commercials,  promos, and merchandise. Then the movie comes out, and gradually those people are let go (or set to work on other projects) as the buzz dies down. Then they're hired back on for the next Star Wars.

Same thing with WotC and D&D. Spend a ton of money producing the core product and related products, then cut back as time goes on... until it's time for the next core product.

Also, WotC is more than D&D. It's also Pokemon, Magic, and other board games and RPGs. With the exception of Chainmail 2.0, all those other game franchises are done.. they only need the occasional supplement. So why keep all these expensive employees?

I really think WotC is in survival mode, where they're cutting back on new development and letting it all ride for awhile. The market is flooded with quality games; it's better to consistently make respectable money selling core books (and that's it) than it is to try to fiercely compete for a piece of the supplement pie.

-z


----------



## Nikchick (Sep 6, 2002)

Bugaboo said:
			
		

> *If they were asked to leave the company, it's probably because they did something bad or just didn't see eye-to-eye with Hasbro's creative vision or financial plans. It's a good guess that they deserved it.
> *




Ok, this was sarcasm right?

If not, this is the most uninformed, slanderous, ridiculous pile of bull I've heard yet today.

Puh-leeze.   

Nicole


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *ALQuadim, and Planescape. If I were a betting man, I'd  bet on Grubb over Mr. Williams for high quality D20 products that would sell on "name value".  *




Al Qa *FRICKEN* Dim!

Some d20 company should be waiting outside WOTC headquarters and snatch him up.

FD


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

Nikchick said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Ok, this was sarcasm right?
> 
> ...




Bugaboo is a professional troll- just ignore him.

FD


----------



## Nikchick (Sep 6, 2002)

WCT-1 said:
			
		

> *Anyone have any news on how this layoff will affect Chainmail v2.0?
> 
> One of the previous posts indicates that the miniatures division was affected.
> 
> Thanks in advance. *




The minis team took some hits, but they've kept on Mike McVey and the latest of the brand managers, so I guess they're still planning on *some* sort of minis game.

I wouldn't get all excited, though.  They're lopping 1/3 of the company off in this series of layoffs, and it's only a matter of time before the rest withers and dies as well.  Even if they launch a second minis game, there's no way they'll be able to sustain it.

Nicole


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 6, 2002)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *I can't think that I'm the only one who is seeing his discretionary income going to other companies because "well, I compared the WotC supplement and the Company X supplement on the subject, and frankly, the WotC supplement sucked."*




Hee hee... I'm so much in agreement that I spent my discretionary income establishing my own Company X!

Screw you Oozemaster! You hear me? Screw you straight to hell!


Wulf


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 6, 2002)

Celebrim said:
			
		

> *
> 
> The next step is rescinding the OGL.   *




Nope- they cant do it. They can refuse to add any more to it, but they cannot take back whats out there. That is in the license itself.


----------



## dcollins (Sep 6, 2002)

Geez, no more Sage!

In other news...



			
				The Sigil said:
			
		

> *Not to belabor the point, but Hasbro CAN'T do that.  Let's nip the speculation in the bud.  Hasbro can no more rescind the OGL than I can.  Anything that is OGC is stuck as OGC, under version 1.0a of the OGL, until it falls into the public doman (IOW, it's under the OGL forever since nothing will ever fall into public domain again).
> 
> The worst they can do is refuse to approve the remainder of the SRD - but since there are a plethora of OGC spells, monsters, and treasures out there already, they're screwed on that count, too.
> *




I think that this is more of a risk than you deem it to be. As you imply, none of the core spells, monsters, or magic items have been formally put under the OGL, and conceivably it's possible that they could refuse to do so. 

It's hard for me to imagine D&D lacking any of the core spells/monsters/magic items, and seeing the gap fill by 3rd-party creations which generally serve as support of that core. Moreover, I imagine that the number of current OGC 3rd-party offerings which depend on some part of those core specifiers is almost complete. For example, even the rules on "creature overview" (size and type), "magic overview" (casting spells, definition of terms), and overall "magic items" (trigger types, bonus types, stacking rules, creation rules) are _not_ under the OGC. All of those creations which use those definitions and terms would be formally actionable by WOTC if they decided on it.


----------



## Taren Nighteyes (Sep 6, 2002)

*What's in a name?*

I have seen a few here agree with my belief that "name value" is an important piece of the marketing puzzle.  I have seen others scoff at the idea....or downplay its importance.

Let me clarify my position:

The hardcore gamers tend to be the DM or players who have stuck with the game from 1st to 3rd edition.  (No offense to any who don't EXACTLY fall within these parameters - your a hardcore gamer if you say you are )

I buy the most books by far within my group of players.  At least 3 times as much, if not more.  Why?  Because I am the DM.  Any of the stuff my players buy I already have.  Why?  Because I told them to buy it, or they knew it was good on my recommendation.

I never claimed that name recognition would be the "end all be all" marketing plan.  It just helps quite a bit.  If the talent that has left WOTC got together and formed a company.....they would probably be very stiff competition for WOTC.

I truly hope this happens.  I would love to see a company kick Hasbro/WOTC in the teeth.  

Thanks,

Taren Nighteyes


----------



## RangerWickett (Sep 6, 2002)

Welp, then I guess it's time to start creating the 'backup' core rules.  First things - fireball becomes 4th level, polymorph other becomes 6th level (since it's instant death), and we give harm a saving throw.


----------



## Graf (Sep 6, 2002)

*J. Tweet*

Somebody said that there wasn't anybody at WotC whose name on the cover would cause them to buy a book. 
(I realize this is more a thread about the people who have left and not about those who are left but anyway....)

J. Tweet is still at WotC. He doesn't have a web page or his own message boards (OK he does have a large, weird web page but its not about D&D) and the fan recognition that comes with that. 

But he's been producing some remarkible stuff for eyars. Everway, Over the Edge, the PH and Chainmail. I have to admit I was more excited that he was making a new game than that it was D&D (OK that's not true. I was pretty excited about D&D but I was sure it would rock when I saw his name up first).

(I've never had the chance to play Chainmail and I know it was a bomb commerically but I'm sure that once you get away from spending hundreds of dollars on unpainted minis the -game- itself is fun).

[/tangent]


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

*clunk*crackle*

oops, there went another brick.

that makes - what - the fifth one in a year's time?

At this rate, there won't be a wall left.

Not to mention that certain people (such as Monte, Peter A, Ryan D, and others) saw the writing on said wall in early 2001.

I'm not going to slam the upper management making the past 8 months' worth of decisions, but - what in the world can their game plan possibly be? I am mystified.

My most fervent hope is that Anthony Valterra (assuming he is still there) pushes feverishly to get the rest of the SRD completed and released, before someone decides to put an end to the advancement of what could be the most influential license in gaming history.


----------



## Lizard (Sep 6, 2002)

gordonknox said:
			
		

> *Didn't Monte predict more WOTC layoffs a few articles ago?
> 
> gk *




Predicting WOTC layoffs is like predicting strife in the Middle East.


----------



## Rashak Mani (Sep 6, 2002)

WOTC no more...  now its called LiTC  = Leftovers in the Countryside.  Soon they will have to hire people in order to be able fire anyone.

  Dumbsizing...


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

*Predicting WOTC layoffs is like predicting strife in the Middle East. *[/QUOTE]

...Or rain in Seattle...


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: J. Tweet*



			
				Graf said:
			
		

> *But he's been producing some remarkible stuff for eyars. Everway, Over the Edge, the PH and Chainmail.  *




And let's not forget Ars Magica...


----------



## Breakdaddy (Sep 6, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *Predicting WOTC layoffs is like predicting strife in the Middle East. *



*

...Or rain in Seattle... *[/QUOTE]

Or that a tornado will hit a trailer park...


----------



## Gonzo the Mofo (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Moronic speculation...*



			
				jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *Read the subject line....all of this bemoaning comes off as the self-interested fanboys crying satan because their 'niche' markets and idols are not viable financially. Please don't place a moral quaility to what i'm sure were very pragmatic descisions that effect a very minor hobby. This MIGHT not be good news for some of you, but this mix of populism and neo-con style lauding of the 'little guy' is really pathetic.... *



        Nothing like having the pseudo-intellectual come along and set everybody straight.


----------



## Drkfathr1 (Sep 6, 2002)

I'm saddened like everyone else. My company does this kind of crap all the time, they get rid of the higher paid veterans that know what they're doing. You just can't replace experience. 

And its not that WOTC is unprofitable. They're making good money....they're just not making the ridiculously high profits they made from Pokemon, which was a slight fluke anyways. 

For a gaming company, to focus more on its management style than its designers is just ignorant. Sure you have to run things responsibly, but for GAMING, if you don't keep up the creativity and the design work, you've got NO product. Or worse, you've got CRAPPY products.

I'm glad now that I didn't make it to the next round of setting proposals....I don't think I'd like to work for WOTC at all. (Although $120,000 would be nice, I'd hate to be laid off in a few years after management had used me up and spit me out).


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: yep*



			
				jgbrowning said:
			
		

> *
> i fear that in 20 years DnD may morph into something so banal it will be unpalatable.
> *




I fear it will not take that long !

What scare's me the most (based not just on what is happening with WOTC but what is going on with my current employer [a bank]) is the speed these kinds of drastic changes can happen. At the bank I work for the same thing happened. We were one of the lead banks in our country but were bought out by an international giant bank and now, a couple of years later, the new management is kicking people out and reorganising the bank because: we're not making enough money (rings a bell?)

There are two things I hope for:

a) that D&D gets sold off and that somebody with a heart for the game and for its fan-community gets to buy it and take car of it

b) if a) doesn't happen, that D20 and the OGL saves this hobby of ours and allows people to at least carry on playing with new and exciting material.

Maybe the people that developed D20/OGL had foresight?


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *No offense but I prefer someone with guts and a rebel at heart. *




Yes, but this "Gutless Non-Rebel" now has a LOT of operating capital to spend on projects for which stock Share-holders are NOT in the chain of responsibility. For Peter, and for the WotC share-holders at the time in late 1999, it was a very smart and sensible move.

But once he sold, he couldn't "fight" anything. He wasn't president of the company any more, just the CEO, correct me if I'm wrong.

I've heard the stories (from John Tynes and others), and believe me - you won't find a bigger "RPG rebel" than Peter Adkison.


----------



## Wolf72 (Sep 6, 2002)

Bugaboo said:
			
		

> *If they were asked to leave the company, it's probably because they did something bad or just didn't see eye-to-eye with Hasbro's creative vision or financial plans. It's a good guess that they deserved it.
> 
> But if the ex-employees shape up and change their ways, the company *might* allow them to come back and help on 4th edition some day. It's possible. Hasbro has proven to be a considerate corporation before. *




"Bugaboo?! ... Now there's a name I haven't heard in a very long time."

"So you know him then?"

.........

and yes nikchick, it is sarcasm ... Bugaboo is nigh lejendary for his sarcasm and trolling, ... sometimes I understand, sometimes I don't.


----------



## paqman (Sep 6, 2002)

*Am I the only one to feel wrong about this*

Here is the latest news from Gamming report:
--------------------------------------------
RE: Reorganization

The past two years have been challenging ones for Wizards of the Coast. It is with great sadness that today we must announce some organizational changes. Today’s organizational changes are designed to help drive our business into the future to improve our performance and our long-term profitability.

Unfortunately, some positions have been eliminated. Employees leaving the company will receive a competitive severance program including pay and benefits continuation, career transition services and support. 

While these types of moves are always difficult, our competitive industry demands that we operate as efficiently as possible. For example, as part of Hasbro’s U.S. Games Segment, we can take advantage of the leverage afforded by utilizing shared services available across the broader Hasbro organization instead of maintaining duplicate functions at additional expense.

Wizards of the Coast will continue to lead by example in the hobby industry as the worldwide market share leader in the trading card game and tabletop role-playing game categories. We believe that the moves we are making today and throughout the rest of this year will help contribute to our long-term growth and profitability, as we continue to bring to market great games to consumers around the world. 

Loren Greenwood
Chief Operating Officer
Wizards of the Coast

-----------------

**NOTE to Morrus, if you feel you need to remove this post, I won't feel cheated, I just need to blow off some steam.**

Alright, I am usually a lurker here, I never say much, I am a professional in the 30s and consider my self a level minded person. I have played dnd in all it's forms for the last 15 years, but I sudenlly feel, for the first time in my life, the need to burst in an uncontrolable fit of sarcasm for something seen on the net.

Here goes, point by point (Sorry for those who don't want to see this, but for those who feel like venting I would suggest for you to participate):

>>The past two years have been challenging ones for Wizards of the Coast. 

You bet!!!!! with all the previous talented layoff you did I am not surprised, first you ditched Alternity at the place of doing a proper marketing strategy and after DnD is completed, you let go of all the great minds that could have continued creating great books for 40$ eachs!!!

>>It is with great sadness that today we must announce some organizational changes. 

HA! let me laugh!!! I am rolling on the floor!! As if you felt bad!!

>>Today’s organizational changes are designed to help drive our business into the future to improve our performance and our long-term profitability.

Is this some kind of sick joke, I mean how can you realistically expect to go forward when all your best creative minds are no longer there. Let me Guess, Pokemon D20 is on the way?? whooooo the flag ship of d20!! 

Look at Monte Cook and Jim Butler, two simple examples, these guys run successfull small companies and you let these guys go.

>>Unfortunately, some positions have been eliminated

Unfortunately!! Funny, very funny, nice corporate speach, did you get the content of your press release from the best 100 lay off speach resulting from the dotnet wave of death.

>>Employees leaving the company will receive a competitive severance program including pay and benefits continuation, career transition services and support. 

That is the minimum after all they created that you will continue selling for years and years.

>>While these types of moves are always difficult, our competitive industry demands that we operate as efficiently as possible. 

I fail to understand the efficiency here, no creative mind = no new quality product,  no new quality product = less and less interest in your material. People will turn to Bastion press, Malhavok press and other companies from guys who created the game in the first place.

>>For example, as part of Hasbro’s U.S. Games Segment, we can take advantage of the leverage afforded by utilizing shared services available across the broader Hasbro organization instead of maintaining duplicate functions at additional expense.

For once in your press release, I agree, but don't tell me that the likes of Jeff Grubs, JD Wiker, Bill Slavisecka are replicated elsewhere in hasbro. I could beleive you for clerks, janitors, administration people and the likes, but not the creative minds!!! What? your going to put Transformers and GiJoes peoples in Charge of DnD??? <Cobra commander screamin>REtreeeaaaat!!!</Cobra commander screamin>

>>Wizards of the Coast will continue to lead by example in the hobby industry as the worldwide market share leader in the trading card game and tabletop role-playing game categories.

I certainly HOPE with all my heart that no one ever follows your croporate style of dealing with you staff and brand because they will fail. The future of roleplaying is small companies of a couple of creative minds that works lovingly on products that they will be proud to release and won't be fired as soon as it is done. And I sure hope that you will release the DnD brand to one of the smaller companies that will take good care of the brand and not throw it down the toilet like you are doing.

>>We believe that the moves we are making today and throughout the rest of this year will help contribute to our long-term growth and profitability...

  let me tell you one thing. The move you are making today is one move too many for me. I have decided to boycott you from now on. I have all the books I need to continue playing the great games that you former staff created, and I will continue supporting all the small companies out there like Bastion press, Malhavoc press and Fantasy flight games that will continue delivering tremendous quality material. And you know why it is good? because they are the guys that made the game in the first place. YES! You made money with me, I guess that I have more than 600$ of books from you, revel in this victory because it is your last as far as I am concerned and rest assured that ALL my hard earned money will go to those I respect. 

>>..as we continue to bring to market great games to consumers around the world. 

My venting is almost done and I think that all I said is quite enough to explain how I feel about my doubt for you to be able to do such a feat.

In conclusion, you made dramatic layoffs for the last couple of years, and I will simply follow those you threw away and that I love and respect. Here is a list of names of those I love and respect for what they gave me to use at my gaming table, for  their devotion and loyalty to the gaming community (and that you let go BTW):

Monte Cook
Sean k. Reynolds
Jim Butler
Chris Pramas
Jeff Grubs
JD Wiker 
Bill Slavisecka  and
Ryan Dancey (IIRC he was only contractual but what the hell...)

PS : Once again I appologize to the rest of the d20 community but this had to come out. You can now Flame me, I feel I deserve it after having taken to 2 or 3 page down of forum space.

Beholder
http://www.rpgzone.org


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Am I the only one to feel wrong about this*



			
				Beholder said:
			
		

> *
> [snipped because it was all just too damn long to reprint ] *




Dude. Its only a game. Please calm down before you hurt yourself or a loved one.


----------



## Breakdaddy (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: Moronic speculation...*



			
				Gonzo the Mofo said:
			
		

> *        Nothing like having the pseudo-intellectual come along and set everybody straight. *




Hear hear Gonzo! I love being set aright by supercilious individuals who perceive me as part of the "unwashed masses" as well! If this fellow were so intellectually superior, he would have better things to do than troll enworld looking for places to post random depreciatory remarks.


----------



## paqman (Sep 6, 2002)

Don't worry, near the end of my post I was already cooling down. But it felt soooo good.

One thing I need to add, DnD as been the center of my bunch of friends. i have played with the same guys for  years and feel really attached to it. I guess that I blew a lead. 

As I said, I feel better now


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

SHARK said:
			
		

> *Greetings!
> 
> You know, in my opinion, getting rid of Skip and penny Williams is just sooo dumb, you know? I see people involved in things like this--as well as others--as intellectual, creative resources. Getting rid of such crucial resources is just stupid, and to my mind, can't be good for a company.
> 
> ...




There is one major difference. Your analogy is correct except for this: in the military: everybody gets paid the same, and the veterans get paid a bit more, but not extravagantly so.

In a corporation the situation is a bit different. And this goes for WOTC (games design) as for my current employer (where I'm in IT). The established veteran designers (wether games designers for WOTC or software designers/programmers for my employer) are just too expensive! (not my point, but the view of THE corporation!) So the corporation gets rid of this veteran EXPENSIVE talent and replaces with untested not-established CHEAPER new talent. The thing with WOTC is that these designers have a certain fame and recognition because they are published and have their names on millions of books. This creates emotion in the gaming community. The veteran programmers are just simply to expensive. And nobody will ever get emotional over their fate (except him and his colleagues) And now they're going to be layed off, their hell just begins! A bunch of them is 50+ of age which means they haven't got a change in the IT market but at the same time still have to work a considerable number of years to reach their pension.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Cougar said:
			
		

> *I CAN'T believe the people they have layed off. I wish Hasbro would just sell the D&D license if it is such a dog to them, instead of stripping away every person who has worked on it.
> 
> How do you lay off the people who wrote your CORE products?? *




They're keeping the cow and aregetting rid of the farmer. The license (the NAME D&D ...) probably still is worth something to Hasbor, but I guess once the people are gone, it will soon become worthless to them also.

It's just to hope that they have the heart to sell the license instead of letting it bleed to death. It's not he first time licenses have been bought to throw them in the bin (stuff like this has happened in the RPG industry! remember Last Unicorn)


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Sage? Gone?*



			
				Enkhidu said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As much as I hate to agree with you, I do.
> 
> But I can really see these decisions coming back to bite WotC in the future. Some of the separations between Wizards and their talent pool have been amicable (take Monte for example - he still does freelance work for them), but I'd hate to see them make a misstep and alienant someone that could be instrumental in putting together 4th Ed 7 years down the road. *




How can anybody be instrumental in creating anything if they are not asked to be involved or, as you say, are alienated by current decisions. I mean, seeing as the industry works nowadays, 4th edition will be done on request by the license holder, not (never) because somebody wants to do it. (Well OK, somebody who would like to do it can offer a proposition, but again, its the icense holder who decides.)

I do agree with you that it's sad that these people are kicked out, but hey: Garry Gygax didn't do DnD3E either, did he)


----------



## LoPaC (Sep 6, 2002)

Well, I know its been said before, but I send best wishes to Skip Williams, Penny Williams, Stan Brown, Jeff Grubb, and all others that got the cut.  But whos says that this mass amount of amazing talent wont get hired by another game product company?  Not to get all religious, but God works in the weirdest f**kin ways, so this could actually be the begining of some great products.  Ones made by people who know and play the game, not "bean counters" who stand over their shoulders telling them to put more "crunchy bits in the Forgotten Rums books" (I thought that was a great story, a classic perhaps).


----------



## (contact) (Sep 6, 2002)

> (Skip Williams) has been the Sage Advice guy since the TSR days too. Who is going to do Sage Advice?




The Director of Corporate Communications, or a Marketing V.P.


----------



## Oracular Vision (Sep 6, 2002)

Frankly, if they are just going to milk the Intellectual Property represented by the core books and expansions, why do they even need WotC? All the books to be released have already been written and are just waiting for release (Book of Vile Darkness, etc.) They don't need anyone except a shipping clerk and a PR weasel.

If Hasborg figures this out, then there will truly not ever be a 4th edition, because it would require up-front R&D, and there is no one left to do it by then.

Once a product has reached saturation, and is just in maintenance mode during the mature market phase, if new products are not being developed, the company will be trimmed to produce profits continuously until it is closed out. This is what large companies do, buy smaller ones and gut them and throw them away.

Someday, Peter will be able to buy the whole shebang for pennies on the dollar, and rebuild it again and laugh all the way to the bank, again. Smart man.


----------



## BluWolf (Sep 6, 2002)

I have been saying this for two years.

This whole thing.

ALL OF IT!!!!!!!!!!

Layoffs and all.........

was put in motion 4 years ago by Peter Adkison and Ryan Dancey.

Mark my words.

The whole plan is yet to be revealed but it is getting closer.

closer..................


----------



## Rasyr (Sep 6, 2002)

greymarch said:
			
		

> *The official WOTC messageboards just went down.  They are upgrading to UBB 6.3.  Here is the message you get when you try to read the boards:
> 
> "The boards are down as announced last week for an upgrade to 6.3 UBB. We expect to be back up again at end of the day, barring complications. --Boards Admin ::elevator music plays:: (Thursday, Sept. 5 2 pm PT) "
> 
> If those boards dont come back up, that will be a really, really bad sign.  I am quite hopeful they will though. *




They are still down....

What I find interesting is that little tag at the bottom which tells the version of the boards you are on says version 6.3.1.1

Guess they took them down out of self preservation......


----------



## Bugaboo (Sep 6, 2002)

An executive statement:

The past 24-plus months have been an business model enigma for Wizards of the Coast. It is with great sadness that today we must announce some positional eliminations. Today’s organizational changes are designed to help deliver robust changes and generate synergistic archetectures as we extend enterprise relationships through the upcoming future quarters and beyond.

Unfortunately, some personnel slots have been strategically downsized to enhance economies of scale. The sentient resources directly affected by this restructuring will be sorely missed at this point in time and possibly later, but the bottom line must be upheld: profit at all costs.

While these types of moves are always difficult, our competitive industry demands that we repurpose cross-platform deliverables and mesh customized outputs into efficient leveraging opportunities. As part of Hasbro’s U.S. Games Segment in the United States, we can take advantage of the brick-and-mortar gullibilities as well as emerging e-enterprises in the naive segment of the roleplaying games market. It behooves Hasbro to obscure these budgetary realities for as long as possible, even at the expense of benchmark intuitive portals into new product avenues.

Wizards of the Coast will continue to lead the gaming hobby industry in table-top simulations and social interactive entertainment enhancements as we reinvent extensible solutions and monetize visionary networks. It is our intention to maximize value-added infomediaries and to engage innovative users like those of you reading this prepared statement at this point in time.

A Wizards of the Coast Executive


----------



## Ashy (Sep 6, 2002)

Well, I am very sad to hear about these layoffs and I wish those without jobs all the luck in the world...

However, I do know one thing - it just got a whole lot harder to be a freelancer...


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 6, 2002)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> *Welp, then I guess it's time to start creating the 'backup' core rules.  First things - fireball becomes 4th level, polymorph other becomes 6th level (since it's instant death), and we give harm a saving throw.   *




Good idea!

I'll be removing Divination, Teleport, Commune, and all forms of Raise Dead.

They can keep Augury and _maybe_ Reincarnation, if I am feeling generous.


Wulf


----------



## Rasyr (Sep 6, 2002)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *
> Not to belabor the point, but Hasbro CAN'T do that.  Let's nip the speculation in the bud.  Hasbro can no more rescind the OGL than I can.  Anything that is OGC is stuck as OGC, under version 1.0a of the OGL, until it falls into the public doman (IOW, it's under the OGL forever since nothing will ever fall into public domain again).
> 
> The worst they can do is refuse to approve the remainder of the SRD - but since there are a plethora of OGC spells, monsters, and treasures out there already, they're screwed on that count, too.
> ...




Not quite correct... Here is what they CAN do

1) pull the d20 license. No more future products with the logo

2) rescind the gentleman's agreement on all the unreleased SRD material, causing ALL of those products which do use this unreleased material to recall it, and start from scratch, or trash it completely. (once they pull the gentleman's agreement, all they have to do is send letters telling folks that they are in breach....

3) refuse to release the rest of the SRD. The portions released cannot be called back, but the rest (which a LOT of folks are using under the gentleman's agreement) can be pulled back, not released, and then all they have to do is to send out letters telling folks that they are in breach of the license, and those companies then have to either fix, or pull their product.....

4) they can do the same exact thing with the d20 logo.... If you are using that logo, and they kill the license, I don't think that they can make you pull it off an existing product (that is in the market), but come the first reprint, or new product, and it would have to go away.....

Hasbro CAN make life miserable fo those who are doing d20.....


----------



## I'm A Banana (Sep 6, 2002)

Yar...this is sad, but not deadly...

Anybody who'se been fired: come work for 2 Euros and a Yank. We're Badass! And, y'know, we're....making a product...about BEER! 

I think 3rd party is really the best thing...

Think of the dissapointing Deiteis and Demigods and the "Duh! We like Feats!" of the Epic Level Handbook...

Then think of the richness of settings like Nyambe and Oathbound.

Really, there's little question to me...3rd party is the wave of the future. Even if they revoke what they can of the OGL, there's enough people out there to create it again, using a different name and maybe slightly different rules, but reviving the Generic Fantasy Roleplaying Game anyway.

The *one* think Wizards has going for it right now is that their rules are solid so far. I hope they don't drag D&D or the rest of the OGL down with them, but even if they do, it'll just mean we can get back to the days of 2e: Creative stuff, broken rules.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Sep 6, 2002)

Rasyr said:
			
		

> *Not quite correct... Here is what they CAN do
> 
> 1) pull the d20 license. No more future products with the logo
> 
> ...




Correct on all points.

With regard to the d20 logo, I would not be at all surprised to see an Open License logo. There's been some talk of this already; all it would take would be something like this and you can bet your ass the 3rd party publishers would rally around it. It makes sense for all of the same reasons it made sense for WOTC in the first place.

As far as the SRD is concerned, first, I think WOTC would have a hard time rescinding the gentleman's agreement, if it was challenged in court. I think they've allowed its use long enough that sticking the genie back in the bottle would be extremely difficult. Of course I'm not a lawyer, and I tend to give judges more credit for common sense than most of them deserve... 

Finally, when it comes right down to it, anything missing from the SRD can be created from scratch by using what is already available. Interesting to think that spells could take a totally different format... hmm...

All of this is idle speculation, however. I don't think this "catastrophe" will ever come to pass.


Wulf


----------



## William Ronald (Sep 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Nikchick:_
> 
> The minis team took some hits, but they've kept on Mike McVey and the latest of the brand managers, so I guess they're still planning on *some* sort of minis game.
> 
> I wouldn't get all excited, though. They're lopping 1/3 of the company off in this series of layoffs, and it's only a matter of time before the rest withers and dies as well. Even if they launch a second minis game, there's no way they'll be able to sustain it.




Nicole, do you, or for that matter anyone, know how many people have been cut from WotC in the last year or so.  It seems like so many of the people whose work I enjoy have left WotC.  I am beginning to suspect that WotC will not be able to meet Hasbro's expectations and may well be sold off in the future.  (I expect Hasbro to hold onto WotC while it is in their financial interest to do so.  No longer than that.)  Also, is there something we can do to show our support of the people who got canned.  I have been through layoffs and know how painful it can be.  (I especially feel bad for Skip and Penny Williams.  This has to be incredibly painful for them both with their long history at TSR then WotC and losing both jobs at once.) Too many good people, talented people, have lost their jobs.

Beholder, I know how you feel.   I have been playing D&D with some of the same people since 1982.  I have been with my friends through good times and bad.  So the hobby is tied into my friendships and memories.

I think D&D will survive.  Ryan Dancey received a HUGE round of applause at the ENnies when he received a special award for the OGL.  I think it was well deserved.  I think two things are likely to keep D&D alive and well:  the OGL and more importantly, the players and DMs who have a love of the game.

In my campaign, we tend to do a lot of our own stuff.  So even if someone decided to try to sabotage the OGL (probably can't happen, but I am not a lawyer), my group can continue on forever.

I suspect the people who lost their jobs will rebound and have a lot to offer us.  In fact, I would like to suggest that someone with a gaming company talk to some of the designers who lost their jobs about future projects. Heck, if someone had a product with some of the namees I saw on the "fired" list, I would definitely be reaching for the wallet.  (Maybe a special product with some money going to the people who were laid off at WotC.)

The key thing now is not to worry too much about the future.  I think D&D will survive because we, the buying and gaming public, have decided that it will survive.  That said, if I had the money, I would buy WotC in an instant -- and get out an SRD for everything!!!


----------



## EarthsShadow (Sep 6, 2002)

*OGL only*

What's to stop people from just going straight OGL?  I mean, take a look at Everquest RPG, which I just got, and I gotta say the system is better than the standard 3E system.  It uses the d20 system to the core, but because they didn't go with the d20 license they have all the free will in the world to create it however they wanted without worries.  

Even if they pull the d20 license, they can't pull the OGL/OGC, can they?  If the OGL/OGC stays, then all we as creative gamers can do is create strictly OGL games, which would just destroy 3E and the Core Rule books because frankly with the OGL, we wouldn't need them anymore.  Then Hasbro would lose more money and they would eventually sell D&D/WotC to someone who would really care about it, and then bring everything back anyways ya know.   

It's wishful thinking, but going OGL isn't a bad thing...its a good thing.  And if all thsoe who were just fired went OGL with their new products, that is one sure fire way they can stick it to WotC/Hasbro.  That would be awesome to see.

Plus, the decline of their PHB will decline even further with the release of d20 Modern.  I for one am waiting for d20 Modern to come out, I already have a really kickbutt setting in the works for the game.  

To rehash...Hasbro is stupid, Wizards never needed to go to Hasbro, a toy company for crying out loud, and neither deserve Dungeons and Dragons anymore.  Nope, they just do not deserve it.  With the OGL, unless they can somehow pull it, and if they can someone should mention that on these boards, if everyone went strictly OGL/OGC, then we would truly see some real d20 games that show the true versatility of the game.


----------



## rounser (Sep 6, 2002)

> Nope, they just do not deserve it.



You're remembering the rescue mission that WotC did on D&D back when TSR was dying?  Saving the intellectual property from being diced up by the lawyers?  Give them some credit for that.

Then again, maybe the people who did that have now all left.


----------



## EarthsShadow (Sep 6, 2002)

to be honest, I never supported D&D while it was under TSR and for the longest time I was hoping it would just die.  

I am one who loves 3rd edition because of the game mechanic and I was glad they made the 3rd edition and at the time they did deserve it.  Now, after what they have done and what Hasbro has done to the creators of the game that I do like now, they don't deserve it.  It's only been two or three years and its already on the chopping blocks once again by lawyers and the higher ups at Hasbro.  Go figure.  Let a large corporation get involved in the RPG industry, people that never play it and never will and see it as nothing more than a fad or something that isn't truly profitable, and see what happens...but, like someone has already stated, even though the cuts are a bad decision for Hasbro/WotC, they are good in the long run for the RPG industry as a whole, and that is something I am glad about.  

Do they deserve the game now, no.  Did they deserve it at first, yes.  Hasbro killed it for them.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Sep 6, 2002)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> *Yar...this is sad, but not deadly...
> 
> Anybody who'se been fired: come work for 2 Euros and a Yank. We're Badass! And, y'know, we're....making a product...about BEER!
> 
> *





2 Euros and a Yank, eh?  Sounds nice.  I'm no Skip Williams, but I'll work for beer. Waddya say? Gimme a job?


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

BluWolf said:
			
		

> *This whole thing.
> 
> ALL OF IT!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...




My friend, I think you are ascribing waaay too much intelligence to two human brains. 

That kind of planning would be way above everybody from Rockefeller, to Ford, to Trump, all the way to Iacoca.

BUT IF IT WERE...

I would duly owe Peter a Wayne's World style "I'm not worthy" kowtow...


----------



## Q1000 (Sep 6, 2002)

*Pain*

This is the real world, our economy slowly dies, we have forced reductions all around us. How many of you have survived a layoff? how many did not?

There is nuthing here to be upset about, this is life as we know it, will any of you care when HP completes there reduction plan, how about those guys at Consalidated Freight, show up on Labor Day to find there is no more work, no job because the company folded.

Notice the stock market, how many of your parants had there retierments wiped out?

The creative people will find other jobs in the D20 market, thats the legacy of D20, they can leave the parent company and still support the product line, with no corporate shill telling them what to do.

D&D will only be healthy when the economy bounces back. 

Welcome to the world of the real.


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

EarthsShadow said:
			
		

> *It's only been two or three years and its already on the chopping blocks once again by lawyers and the higher ups at Hasbro.*




Let's wait until the cow is dead before we write "hamburgers" on the menu...


----------



## EarthsShadow (Sep 6, 2002)

True.  I still say more companies should go strictly OGL and make their own games with their own character creation rules and things like that.  

I agree that things change over time, and people get let go.  It has happened to me, I accepted it (not really) but no matter what life goes on.  Their layoffs will only help the d20 market in the long run.  

Now, are there any odds about how long Ryan will stay with the company?


----------



## Graf (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: J. Tweet*



			
				ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And let's not forget Ars Magica... *




I'll go sit in the corner with the little pointy hat for that one.

Or if not for that then for forgetting James Wyatt and Bruce Cordell (unless I'm mistaken.. but I think they're still at wizards).


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 6, 2002)

Charles *Ryan* or *Ryan* Dancey?

You can't mean Ryan Dancey because he was let go before the summer along with Sean K Reynolds. Technically, he left a long time ago (2001) but he was contracted to work on the SRD and later Project Manager of the _e-Tools._

So far, Charles Ryan is still employed by Wizards and is working with Bill Slavicsek in designing _d20 Modern._ Of course, the third member of their Design Team, Rich Redman, was let go Thursday.


----------



## Incenjucar (Sep 6, 2002)

Bugaboo said:
			
		

> *An executive statement:
> 
> The past 24-plus months have been an business model enigma for Wizards of the Coast. It is with great sadness that today we must announce some positional eliminations. Today’s organizational changes are designed to help deliver robust changes and generate synergistic archetectures as we extend enterprise relationships through the upcoming future quarters and beyond.
> 
> ...




Wow.  That's a lot of buzz words.  At least they didn't say 'pro-active'.


----------



## Pramas (Sep 6, 2002)

William Ronald said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Nicole, do you, or for that matter anyone, know how many people have been cut from WotC in the last year or so.  It seems like so many of the people whose work I enjoy have left WotC. *




At its largest, WotC corporate was up to 700 or so employees. After this round of layoffs is done (and today was day one, the rest of the departments get their turn Friday), I would guess the staff will be less than 250. WotC is just not the same company I went to work for four years ago. RPG R&D is a smoldering ruin, spine design (the art directors and graphic designers who make the WotC books look so good) was gutted like a fish today, and the possibility that WotC will ever do anything innovative again has been reduced to near nil. It's a shame really, but corporate culture and gaming culture just don't coexist very amicably.


----------



## Paladin (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Pain*



			
				Q1000 said:
			
		

> *This is the real world, our economy slowly dies, we have forced reductions all around us. How many of you have survived a layoff? how many did not?*



I got laid off from WorldCom at the end of June, it's my fourth layoff in just over four years. I don't know if I'll survive this one, but if I do I'm pretty sure I'll qualify for a prestige class of some sort...... maybe Master of Layoffs?


----------



## William Ronald (Sep 6, 2002)

Chris, thanks for replying to my question.  If 100 people were laid off, WotC is loosing about one-third of its current employees.

I think the people who are left must be worried as well.  I wonder what WoTC can produce beyond what is in the pipeline.  Freelancers are good, but many of the people who left were big names in the hobby.  Chris, please let the people who were let go know that a LOT of people sympathize with them and wish them the best.  (I wish I could do something to help.  Elsewhere, I suggested that it might be a good idea to have some of hte people who were laid off work on a product together.)

Paladin, I understand.  I am switching careers after one layoff.

The key thing with a layoff is to not give up on yourself.  Job hunting can be hard and embarassing, but if you don't believe in yourself who will.


----------



## Friadoc (Sep 6, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *I understand that Stan! Brown is on the list as well. I understand that he had just been tasked with reinvigorating the playtesting program.
> 
> It will be interesting to see who inherits it.
> *



Well,

...as a playtester, heck my name (as well as my group) is in the 3rd Edition PHB, Forgotten Realms, Alternity's Gamma World Revamp, and other books, I can say that we've had one item in the past nine months, or so.

I'm hoping someone else gets it, but I'm really feeling the pain of the playtesting department - we've had zilch since Fiend Folio, before that was (three months or more) Races of Faerun.

Anyhow, it's sad to see this happen, that's for sure.


----------



## Cergorach (Sep 6, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *
> My friend, I think you are ascribing waaay too much intelligence to two human brains.
> 
> That kind of planning would be way above everybody from Rockefeller, to Ford, to Trump, all the way to Iacoca.
> ...




Didn't you know? Adkinson is an alias for someone called Darktooth...


----------



## Allister (Sep 6, 2002)

Geez, with all the Doom & Gloom, many would think that WOTC can't exist without D&D. The fact is that the health of WOTC is and has never been dependent on D&D. It's dependent on M:TG, so I wonder exactly how badly affected did that division of WOTC fare?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Sep 6, 2002)

Meepo, if you want to submit, I'm sure we'd recieve it amicably. 

You can stop by the Publishers forum, spout out whatever comes to your brain, and we'll go from there. I'm only a third of the group, but anybody who wants to put the power to the kobold is good in my book. 

That goes for everyone, I guess. ^_^;

Anyhoo, I've had my peace on this issue -- even if WotC/Hasbro does everything within their power to squish the OGL and the SRD as we know it, there's enough there (and, more importantly, the *idea* is there) that other publishers can and most likely will pick it up and run with it.

I wouldn't be surprised, with as amiable as most 3rd parties are, if they end up rallying around a new Set of Three for core books, probably controlled by the big guys, and put out something good.

Heck, Everquest did it. 

--J


----------



## Da Man (Sep 6, 2002)

*My Opinion*

Looking at it from a business perspective (i.e. I will join the ranks of the backseat drivers in this thread), I would say they are merely attempting to get this dawg to hunt where everyone else has failed.

Instead of allowing profitable divisions to support unprofitable ones, and eventually be forced to sell the entire machine, the current management seems intent on dumping that which is unprofitable and keeping that which is profitable (or, it could be that everything is profitable to some extent, but they have a certain profit margin that must be reached).

It also smacks of someone with much more business sense then DnD sense, which I think the division needed anyway.

My two cents worth? Ignore doom and gloom from the armchair company exec's in this thread (especially ignore from anyone who has posted a zillion times and clearly spends more time here then in the real world) and be excited that someone is trying to make this thing work for the long haul.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: My Opinion*



			
				Da Man said:
			
		

> *Looking at it from a business perspective (i.e. I will join the ranks of the backseat drivers in this thread), I would say they are merely attempting to get this dawg to hunt where everyone else has failed.
> 
> Instead of allowing profitable divisions to support unprofitable ones, and eventually be forced to sell the entire machine, the current management seems intent on dumping that which is unprofitable and keeping that which is profitable (or, it could be that everything is profitable to some extent, but they have a certain profit margin that must be reached).
> 
> ...




The problem is that D&D is profitable. They cut the D&D part of the company, when it was making money for them. They had, apparently, unrealistic expectations of what D&D could do profit-wise. They were disappointed in Pokemon's performance, basically, so they cut everything. Trying to make the dog hunt is a good thing to do - but don't expect the beagle to go lion-hunting.


----------



## Kieran (Sep 6, 2002)

Allister said:
			
		

> *Geez, with all the Doom & Gloom, many would think that WOTC can't exist without D&D. The fact is that the health of WOTC is and has never been dependent on D&D. It's dependent on M:TG, so I wonder exactly how badly affected did that division of WOTC fare? *




Yeah, but this is a D&D fan board. It's not very comforting to know that the WOTC corporate entity will go on with or without the game we love. Once all of the people that made it great are gone, what is WOTC but a company full of beancounters, anyway.


----------



## Psion (Sep 6, 2002)

someone said:
			
		

> *Geez, with all the Doom & Gloom, many would think that WOTC can't exist without D&D. The fact is that the health of WOTC is and has never been dependent on D&D.*




You speak as if most of us care about the fate of WotC. So long as D&D survives and prospers, that is all I care about.

I doubt D&D will go anywhere in the long haul... and d20 will ensure that the game continues to get support. But it would be best for the gamers if D&D itself is supported by a creative and vital company. Whether that company is WotC is immaterial.


----------



## Enkhidu (Sep 6, 2002)

Well, I just played catch up on this thread, and felt like a should add a few more cp's...

Earlier in the thread, Beholder stated that he would be boycotting WotC and buying strictly 3rd party material. His exact quote was "...YES! You made money with me, I guess that I have more than 600$ of books from you..." (apologies to Beholder if you object to me taking this particular statement out of context).

I'd say that's what Hasbro is counting on here. A large amount of people have bought all of the core books, splatbooks, and setting books that are out there that have been published by WotC. Hasbro knows this, and they know that the market is about ready to hit saturation. After all, how many PH's does one D&D player need, anyway? And how many 2nd Ed core books did you buy after your initial purchases (I would buy one every 5 years due to wear and tear myself - but I'm reaaaaly hard on books)?

I think the point is that Hasbro has figured out that D&D is a very cyclic beast, with large profit margins to be made when a new edition comes out, and small profit margins to be had in the interim. And, as we probably can surmise, Hasbro bought WotC for the Pokemon Franchise - at its peak a very high profit margin entity. My guess is that Hasbro just can't be bothered with the lower profit margin material in the low period of the cycle (like modules and sourcebooks).

Enter the OGL...

It could be argued that the OGL is simply allowing 3rd party developers to deal with the interim cycle profits that are otherwise too small for Hasbro to bother over, while still allowing WotC/Hasbro to retain the rights to sell the hottest selling material during the next peak period (which, if the cycle is consistent, will begin gearing up around 2008 or 2009 - I would look for the "mythical" 4th Ed to come out about 2010 or so).

Hopefully, someone with a little more knowledge about the real motivations behind these decisions will eventually come forward, but until then, we're stuck speculating (like I just did!).

Well, there's my two brass bits...


----------



## Mau'dib (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: My Opinion*



			
				Da Man said:
			
		

> *Looking at it from a business perspective (i.e. I will join the ranks of the backseat drivers in this thread), I would say they are merely attempting to get this dawg to hunt where everyone else has failed.
> 
> Instead of allowing profitable divisions to support unprofitable ones, and eventually be forced to sell the entire machine, the current management seems intent on dumping that which is unprofitable and keeping that which is profitable (or, it could be that everything is profitable to some extent, but they have a certain profit margin that must be reached).
> 
> ...




This might sound like a way to revitalize, say an armchair company, and try to make it more profitable by cutting out the highest paid personal but, making armchairs and armchair related products dosen't require the creativity of something like an RPG company.

Armchair limited makes money by making and selling THE SAME 10-20 models of armchair's and armchair related products while, at the same time, keeping expenses as low as possible.  Trying to impose this thinking on an industry that is always trying to come up with a new "model" of product every few months isn't really fair to the RPG industry.

Take for example Armchair Limited profits are down, as a way to increase profit they lay off some of the highest paid workers, in the short term this works the way they had hoped expenses are lowered, i.e. employees salaries.  After about six months however profit once again faces a downturn, this one even sharper then the first one, why?  Well as it turns out when they let all those veteran people go product quality took a sharp downturn as the newer people did not have the experiance to make the product as well as it was before the vets were let go, and they did not even have to think up new models of armchairs to make.  Maybe quality will improve after the new people are there long enough to learn all the ways to improve the product but, how long will that take?  And, once they do improve the product, will people that saw the bad product or where warned by others about the product bother to look at it again.

This is probably what Hasbro is going for in terms of the layoffs, what most gamers are worried about is the quality of D&D from WotC, yes I think that it sucks all those people got layed off, not only the names I know but also the people that don't have names I know.  I too worry about D&D will it survive as I know and love it?  I hope so but time will tell.(p.s. I don't have a million posts here so you must listen to me  mean slam dude )


----------



## Wolf72 (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: My Opinion*



			
				ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Trying to make the dog hunt is a good thing to do - but don't expect the beagle to go lion-hunting. *




that's a new quote I'm going to have to write down


----------



## Katerek (Sep 6, 2002)

I cant help it.  I have to post on this.

I understand why Hasbro is doing what it is doing, I don't agree with it, bu tI do understand.    They are clearly trying to make each division stand on it's own two feet, and that is a good thing.  The only thing that concerns me is what they use for measurement.  I cannot in my heart of hearts believe that they are honestly judging ANYTHING based on pokemon.  If they are, they are fools beyond belief.

Pokemon was a toy fad, and toy fads NEVER last.  As a toy manufacturer, I would hope they would know this.  As evidence, I offer you cabbage patch kinds, tickle me elmo, furby, atari, the death of superman comic, etc.  These pop culture fads don't last because their target audience, children, do not have attention spans that last, further more, at that age after a single year has gone by they are completely different people and their interests have thoroughly changed!

Pokemon could have been a gateway game.  A progression from Pokemon, to M:tG, to Mage Knight, to Table Top Games, to finally DnD is natural and I have seen it happening on a local scale to some great degree.

The same kids that were playing Pokemon two years ago have legions of Mage Knight figs, and I have already seen a few of them at the 'grown up' (loose term) tables that feature Warhammer and Battletech.  They will eventually get into the Pen and Paper aspect of it, but these things take time.

Assuming DnD lasts, and it will in some fashion or another, in two to three years there will be some type of re-release.  Probably an updated book or two with new art, designed for this new audience.  That will last 4 or 5 years and then we will see the new addition, which will go into pre-design about the time the new release comes along.

As for everyone who lost their jobs, that is truly Hasbrp's greatest loss, god forbid Corporations ever lay off the over payed imbeciles who make idiotic decisions in the first place.  The suits always lay off the working man first and it sucks but that is the way it is.

Ultimately if those folks wanna keep on designing and working in the game industry, I doubt it will take long to see their names under Green Ronin, or Malhavoc's banner.  Or some other equally top notch third party publisher.

My personal belief is that it will only be a matter of time before there are two or three third party folks out there giving Hasbro a run for its money on the d20 market.  And quite frankly, anything that raises the bar is good for the game, and ultimately good for us.

Oh and one last thing, if one of the big names win's the setting search, take that big bank roll and invest it.  Then in two or three years, use the captital to secure the financing necessary to buy DnD! THAT would be irony!


----------



## JeffB (Sep 6, 2002)

Actually I wanted to post this in the other thread but it was closed down...so just consider it some rambling...

You know I’m usually the last one to comment on this sort of thing (other than about specific folks who have been cut), but I think some folks here just don't see the forest for the trees.

Thing’s have not become better. Every layoff (what 3 or 4 in the past 2 years) has been bigger, and cut deeper into the creative pool. People are not being hired back. The core books were bumped up to the high prices (which signifies sales are starting to fall off). The release schedule gets thinner and thinner. This is not a sign of “health”. I deal with stuff constantly in my line of work, and I’ve been through several layoffs…fact is layoffs occur when something is going south. Then the reduced staff are expected to pick up slack… If things continue to go south, they layoff more folks, because they cannot afford to keep them around because the company is not making enough money. More layoffs doesn’t mean health…it means things are getting worse. Reducing your company from 700 to 250 people is not a good thing. While this MAY make Hasbro/WOTC healthy in the long run, it really bodes ill for the health of D&D. Selling off magazines that were supposedly so profitable and deemed as having better subscription rates than they had in years does not constitute health. As some have mentioned on another thread there ARE things that can be done that will totally screw the D20 market especially to smaller companies (which is the majority). Even Monte Cook mentioned the potential for some serious deep doo-doo in an interview he did on another gaming site. 

How bad does it have to get before folks will admit that D&D as run by WOTC/Hasbro is in the aforementioned deep doo-doo?  Will another layoff of 100 employees signify there’s finally a real problem?  Reducing the release schedule some more? Getting rid of more creative folk and demoting some higher ups in R&D? Selling off more divisions? Cancel some more lines?

Healthy companies expand, and grow, and produce more and/or better products. They don’t layoff people by the hundreds including veteran employees (wonder how this affects Skip’s retirement savings/plans if he had any), sell off divisions, the biggest gaming convention in the world, and produce less and less product.

Will D&D proper die? I don’t think so, but I’m not sure how anyone can’t see that D&D under WOTC/Hasbro is dying a slow painful death.


----------



## Maraxle (Sep 6, 2002)

[speculation]

I just had a random thought.  It's probably BS, but it's kind of interesting.  I am wondering what role, if any, the setting search played in this round of layoffs.

If all 11 winners came from the outside, did Hasbro/WotC decide that the R&D group wasn't innovative enough?  Was the setting search a way of having them interview for their own jobs?

[/speculation]


----------



## AussieMoose (Sep 6, 2002)

*Layoffs @ WoTC*

Unfortunately this is the way of the modern "business".

Ethics, Integrity, Loyalty, Experience and other outmoded concepts can be thrown away for "current and projected profit margins".

In regards to MTG (Magic:The Gathering), don't worry, they are making PLENTY off it, but does it compare to Hasbro profits? How about vs Harry Potter sales? Other market leaders?

D&D is still the small fish in Hasbro's barrel, even in the U.S. and Hasbro is VERY profit minded.

Some of their own problems have been caused by their inability to grow the business to new customers (think % growth) and to not PROMOTE the RPG sector, locally and on a worldwide scale.

I agree with earlier comments that WoTC will flick the current talent and hire "newbies" and cheap freelancers, on an Ad-hoc basis, as they need to.

It all comes down to the $$$ in a big corporation (despite the fact that a big corporation can cover more $$ than a small one.  )

Thats my 5 cents, if it makes any sense at all.

If not, assume I am a braindead aussie with a koala.


----------



## Cergorach (Sep 6, 2002)

Well, D&D and D20 are not the only games out there, neither is WotC/Hasbro the only games company. When i look at WizKids they seem to be doing extremely well. With the release of Mechwarrior: Dark Age (a mageknight version of battletech), they sold in the first two weeks more than 500.000 boosterpacks ($10 each) and more than 100.000 Starterpacks ($20 each). If the economy was down that much they wouldn't have sold so much IMHO. Also WizKids is Lisencing the Battletech Liscence to FanPro to keep producing (Classic) Battletech supplements. And do you know how many people there are fulltime emloyed to work on the CBT line? One (1) person, the rest is done by free lancers.

What has this to do with D&D? Well, i wouldn't be supprised that the entire D&D 'team' would end up being a single person that oversees consistency and 'quality', the rest being done by freelancers. What can freelancers not do that, WotC employees can do? Employees are expensive, freelancers a lot less so...

Not that i'm really happy with the prospect, but it would seem like the most cost effective strategy to me...


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Layoffs @ WoTC*



			
				AussieMoose said:
			
		

> *
> It all comes down to the $$$ in a big corporation (despite the fact that a big corporation can cover more $$ than a small one.  )
> 
> Thats my 5 cents, if it makes any sense at all.
> ...




It makes total sense- and that is the way it should be- or else there would be no stock market in the first place.

BTW- I want a koala.   

FD


----------



## AussieMoose (Sep 6, 2002)

*Totally unrelated to .. well anything*



			
				Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> 
> BTW- I want a koala.
> 
> FD *




Me too, but the furry, stoned little fuzzbags are endangered.

Do you know that they growl louder than dogs and are vicious little sadists? (when not stoned from too many eucalyptus leaves that is)


----------



## toberane (Sep 6, 2002)

James Heard said:
			
		

> *
> I mean, if you change Coca-Cola by diluting it's consistency and quality and another cola company comes out there with your old employees and starts making Coca-Cola like everyone likes it then you've effectively shot your brand name in it's foot in the interest of checking your bottom line.
> *



Actually, something similar to this happened with the New Coke debacle at the height of the Cola Wars.  (Unfortunately, this example goes against what you were trying to prove with yours.) 

Pepsi and Coke had been fighting for market share for years, and by the 1980's Pepsi was winning by a considerable margin.  Coke had just created Diet Coke, not by taking the sugar out of regular Coke, but by formulating an entire new drink that was diet and still tasted like Coke.  Diet Coke was the #1 selling diet drink, but even with those sales, Pepsi was still outselling Coke by a large margin.  Coke decided, "If Pepsi is what people want, then Pepsi is what we'll give them."  They discovered that if they replaced the nutrisweet in Diet Coke with High Fructose Corn Syrup, it tasted almost exactly like Pepsi.  So that became New Coke.

When the Coca-Cola co. did their research on the product, they found that in blind taste tests, people picked new Coke a lot more than either Classic Coke or Pepsi.  They were sure they had a winner.  So sure, in fact, that they decided to stop making the old formula of Coke after they announced the new Coke (I can still remember the announcement, so I guess that kind of dates me, huh?  )  And after they announced the New Coke, there was a huge public outcry.  How could they change Coke?  It was one of those things that was supposed to stay the same forever.  Despite numerous blind tests to the contrary, nearly every Coke supporter came out saying how much the New Coke sucked.  And the biggest coup of the Cola Wars came when Coca-Cola announced a return to classic Coke, and Coke's numbers immediately shot past Pepsi's.

So here's my point.  People didn't gate New Coke because it was bad.  They hated it because something had happened to the brand.  And when they began to buy it again, they didn't do it because Coke had gotten better tasting.  They did it because of the Brand.  Quality had nothing to do with it.  The content had little to do with it.  You  might say, "Yeah, but soft drinks are a little different from RPG's, " and you'd be right.  But what this says about human nature doesn't change.

People care about the name brand.  Why else would so many internet companies spend so much money trying to burn their brand name into people's heads?  If Skip Williams, Jeff Grub, and Stan! all go form their d20 companies, a few people will be immediate supporters, because to us, those names already read like brand names.  But most people don't even look at the title page of their DnD sourcebooks, and have no clue who wrote them.  They bought the books because they said "Dungeons & Dragons" on them, and they would have bought them if they had been written by Monte Cook or if they had been written by Joe Nobody.  

Dungeons & Dragons is the singlemost recognizable brand name in the RPG industry, followed closely by the Forgotten Realms.  Unfortunately, Hasbro knows this, and they also know that as long as they keep putting out products with these brand names on them, people will keep buying them. Sure, they might lose a few of their more fanatical supporters if the quality continues in a downward spiral, but when the average reading level across the country is 7th grade, they probably don't have to worry about the majority of the public being too picky.  Dungeon's and Dragons is not dead, at least not physically.  Spiritually, however...

I share in the feeling that is was an immensly bad move for WotC (read, "Hasbro") to lay off (or force to leave) so many of their best creative people.  I have played D&D for more than 2 decades, now, and I have many of the original products Skip and Jeff wrote.  I am no longer worried about Hasbro selling D&D.  If they did that, it would probably be the best thing for the hobby.  I am now worried that they will hang on to it, and squeeze all of the creative talent out of it until it is a lifeless husk, kept alive only on the merit of its brand name.  Because as long as the game is called Dungeons & Dragons, it will continue to sell regardless of how dubious the quality is.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Totally unrelated to .. well anything*



			
				AussieMoose said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Me too, but the furry, stoned little fuzzbags are endangered.
> 
> Do you know that they growl louder than dogs and are vicious little sadists? (when not stoned from too many eucalyptus leaves that is) *




I always suspected their cuteness factor was just to lure in their prey.

It works for models.

FD


----------



## Storm Raven (Sep 6, 2002)

toberane said:
			
		

> *People didn't gate New Coke because it was bad.*




No, they gated New Coke because it is easier to strike a bargain with it than Pepsi, 7-Up or a Pit Fiend.


----------



## Katerek (Sep 6, 2002)

Excellent point Toberane, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

It is too much of a pipe dream I suppose for DnD to be bought by someone who cares for a change.  It is a real shame what has become of our favorite past time.

Remember when all we had to worry about was mad mommas and upset churches?


----------



## AussieMoose (Sep 6, 2002)

*re: Toberone's Post*

I would just like to state that I agree emphatically with everything he said.

Hasbro holding onto D&D (and RPG's in general) is scary. They (read Execs not creative staff or many WoTC staff) don't understand the Genre. Simple as that. Their Marketing Gurus can't pin down the X sales factor, or what really motivates us, and most of them couldn't give a toss about roleplaying.

Many mainstream toys rely on impulse "must have" buying, RPG's don't always work like that, it is a slow buildup industry. (REALLY slow sometimes).

At the moment their is a bit of feast (as opposed to the WoTC famine) from all the other new companies doing OGL product, which sort of gluts the market.

Some sort of stabilising influence may be needed eventually so we don't just have endless piles of unnavigatable material.

I still think even a small company (but what small company could afford it) buying up the D&D Brand would revitalise it.

Only time will tell. 
People mourned the change to 2nd Ed, 3rd Ed and they weren't all bad, maybe WoTC will pick up again?

 
Wacked out Koala boy


----------



## toberane (Sep 6, 2002)

Storm Raven said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, they gated New Coke because it is easier to strike a bargain with it than Pepsi, 7-Up or a Pit Fiend. *




  LOL!

OK, so my fingers tend to hit the wrong keys when I type too fast...


----------



## FullTinCan (Sep 6, 2002)

BluWolf said:
			
		

> *I have been saying this for two years.
> 
> This whole thing.
> 
> ...




Ryan Dancey spearheaded the OGL and SRD.  Without this there would be D&D and other systems, and we would not have witnessed the revitalization of the D&D name (nor would we have d20 publishers).  

So Ryan purposefully created a competetive market, where WotC could take one of two routes.

1) Layoff everyone but a skeleton crew for R&D and milk the Core Rules.

2) Seek to compete against the smaller more agile companies through the relatively massive brand-name value of D&D.

Either way, the gamers win!  The designers may end up loosing, and some of them have (others will find new success, see Monte Cook).  It is sad to loose your job, but I am confident that the creative and brilliant minds such as those recently laid-off will have no problem gaining employment, both inside and outside of the gaming industry.

The main concern now is that the SRD be completed.  Hopefully there is still enough of the old guard to get this task done.  Fortunately, the "guts" of the SRD has been approved.  Unfortunately, almost every d20 Shop has used stuff covered via the "Gentleman's agreement" and if Ha$bro sees fit, there could be some nasty (yet very fruitless) litigation.

So in a nutshell, Ryan Dancey and his "minions" have provided hope to the gaming community at large through the OGL.  However, Ryan Dancey also introduced a mechanism that will force competition in a niche market, which competition inevitably results (in theory) in the survival of the fittest.


----------



## Zulkir (Sep 6, 2002)

Kieran said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yeah, but this is a D&D fan board. It's not very comforting to know that the WOTC corporate entity will go on with or without the game we love. Once all of the people that made it great are gone, what is WOTC but a company full of beancounters, anyway. *




Hey now, remember - when you use the word beancounter you have to use the name Anthony Valterra in the same sentence. We are not faceless. We have families, and are gamers, and are raising kids, go to cons and last week went to burning man. Real people here.

AV


----------



## der_kluge (Sep 6, 2002)

*points accusatory finger*

"It's all Anthony's fault!"

Heh, jus' kidding.

But, I have to ask - does Skip post here?  Just wondering if he's lurking or not.  Would love to hear his thoughts on all this.

I think what we should do is all pool our life savings and buy D&D from Hasbro.  If enough of us plunk down some change, we could all own it as a collective.  Anything is for sale for the right price.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

Katerek said:
			
		

> *Excellent point Toberane, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
> 
> It is too much of a pipe dream I suppose for DnD to be bought by someone who cares for a change.  It is a real shame what has become of our favorite past time.
> *




Yeah, it's a real shame that D&D is more popular than ever, that we have a single OS for games now (d20), that we've got our pick of a dozen extremely talented 3rd-party publishers who put out imaginative products. It's a shame that the rules were constantly updated and streamlined, that we were given pages and pages of official errata and a definitive FAQ. It's a shame that the RPGA became free. It's a shame that Dragon and Dungeon are now free to truly become a journal for the RPG industry, instead of just an outlet/advertisement for WotC products. 

Yeah, what a shame. I wish it was like the good old days, when  TSR--and *only* T$R--released D&D products and the vast majority of those products sucked. Or when you couldn't easily switch game systems, and a D&D player had to learn a whole new set of mechanics if he wanted to play Call of Cthulhu, and another set of mechanics if he wanted to play Vampire. I wish D&D was run by a bunch of gaming nerds, not business-savvy people. That way, we'd see slipped production schedules, sloppy layout and design, terrible editing, rules-creep, poor retail relations, and terrible public relations. And I wish Skip, Bruce, Stan!, and those other guys were still working for a company that stifled their creativity, instead of being set free to pursue their dreams and release innovative new content. 

(end sarcasm)

Good grief, what is the matter with you? How can a rational person not see that D&D is better than ever? That we've got more, better RPG products than ever before? That these layoffs introduce even more talented writers to the freelance/3rd party pool, which means we'll see even MORE interesting new products?

Wake up and make a Spot check for seeing the state of D&D, instead of merely failing your Will save vs. an irrational emotional reaction to the word "layoff".

-z

PS: The above, of course, is zero comfort to those who are now out of a job.


----------



## BluWolf (Sep 6, 2002)

Yes Mr. TinCan.

In 4 or 5 years we will all look back and realise we all owe a debt of gratitude to those two gentleman.

PS. I am not a Dancey fanboy. I don not agree with everything he says as if from on high. I do appreciate what his idea was and what the two of these gentleman have accomplished.

Quoted from Zar...


> Wake up and make a Spot check for seeing the state of D&D, instead of merely failing your Will save vs. an irrational emotional reaction to the word "layoff".




NICE!!! Man I laughed for a good 15 minutes on that one.


----------



## The Sigil (Sep 6, 2002)

Zulkir said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey now, remember - when you use the word beancounter you have to use the name Anthony Valterra in the same sentence. We are not faceless. We have families, and are gamers, and are raising kids, go to cons and last week went to burning man. Real people here.
> 
> AV *



Bean-counter or no, for the love of mud, Anthony, could you please push the rest of the SRD through the "approval" process so that we can end the speculation of "WotC could pull back the stuff in the 'gentlemens' agreement' and screw other d20 publishers?"



--The Sigil


----------



## Razz (Sep 6, 2002)

*Hasbro don't know what they're doing*

This is ridiculous. The lay-offs from before were completely uncalled for and now this?! 

I am suprised, too, that The Sage was among the lay-offs. Hasbro doesn't deserve to won WotC (or D&D for that matter). I think they need to let them go on their own or let another company buy WotC (a company that knows what they're doing).

The good news seems to be that these people can make d20 products. I never have and never will get d20 products. 

Because they're not official.

I keep hearing that there's a long story and explanation about all this. So why don't anyone explain what's up? I mean, if I were fired, I'd be spiteful enough to blurt out the entire reasons why.

The way I see it, it is the end of D&D as we know it Sure it'll still be around, but unfortunately it won't ever be the same.


----------



## toberane (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Zaruthustran's Comments*

My earlier comments were not directed at the state of D&D, but more at the state of WotC.  Unfortunately, 3rd party publishers, even with the rise of numerous d20 companies, don't sell anywhere NEAR as many books as WotC.  Many people refuse to play with 3rd party supplements because they are not "core products."  So it is a simple matter to see that d20 products written by Skip, Monte, Jeff, Stan!, and all the others who have left in the last couple of years will not get even half the circulation they would get if published by WotC.  

I am also a fan of the Forgotten Realms.  Jeff Grubb was one of the driving forces behind the Realms, particularly during 2nd edition.  Without him and some of the other talented game developers, the new 3E realms products are likely to be of much poorer quality than before.  And sure, they could still freelance, and sure, the new designers could be quite talented as well.  We won't know until it happens.

I applaud the work that the d20 community has done.  I know that there is some very fine work being put out by these companies.  However, that doesn't stop me from lamenting over the wreck Hasbro seems to be making of the Dungeons & Dragons game that I have enjoyed for 2/3 of my lifetime.  AS I said earlier, I don't worry that D&D  is dying.  I'm more afraid it's enslaved under a cruel master.

OK, that was a bit melodramatic annd silly.  But you get my point.


----------



## EarthsShadow (Sep 6, 2002)

*irony*

I would like to see Hasbro make some more bad decisions...okay okay we know they will...and then when they think its bad enough they then sell DnD to SSS/White-Wolf because then we would have our favorite game run by a group of people who truly love games, and even if you don't like the storyteller system, if you read their products they are definately written by gamers, for gamers, and that is what DnD needs.  Not some motherly corporation who only cares about the almighty $$$ becuz we all know that once the almighty $$$ is the only thing the company cares about, that's the end of it.  

I hope that some, if not all, of the creative talent goes to work for SSS, or Malhovic Press with Monte Cook, and they work together to create products that support the d20 system, but also support the OGL.  Personally, if I was one of them, I would go work for a rival company and then do my best to see Hasbro/WotC falter and eventually go down.  Why, because I am Lawful (Neutral) Evil like that, and if they fired me because I was making money, and not due to my lack of creative talent, then I would take my creative talent elsewhere and do my best to cause my former employers to suffer by creating the absolute best works I can for the other company, with the hopes of destroying Wizards in the process.   

Then I would save every cent I made, and when the time came, buy out DnD from Hasbro/WotC and rerelease it at its original price and also create a d20-rules lite version for younger kids.  Heck, if I want to get kids involved in the RPG industry, I would make a Harry Potter rpg, and when the next movie gets released, I would have a commercial for the game before the movie starts.  (This is my idea, and if it goes anywhere I want some of the credit and $$$ for it...)     I am sure Hasbro can understand that.


----------



## Arcane Runes Press (Sep 6, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Good grief, what is the matter with you? How can a rational person not see that D&D is better than ever? That we've got more, better RPG products than ever before? That these layoffs introduce even more talented writers to the freelance/3rd party pool, which means we'll see even MORE interesting new products?
> 
> *




While I agree with you that people are a bit too worried about the sky falling on their heads, I do have to take issue with the thought that laid off designers will automatically enter the freelance/3rd party pool. 

From what I understand, WotC folk make decent money. Not brilliant, but not too shabby either. 

The average freelancer doesn't pull down nearly the same scratch. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of the laid off creative types cut their d20/D&D output considerably, if not totally, as they head for greener pastures. 

Patrick Y.


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

Zulkir said:
			
		

> *Hey now, remember - when you use the word beancounter you have to use the name Anthony Valterra in the same sentence.*




HEY, EVERYBODY, THE BEANCOUNTER'S BACK! How ya been? 



			
				Zulkir said:
			
		

> *We have families, and are gamers, and are raising kids, go to cons and last week went to burning man. Real people here.
> *




Understood completely, Anthony. My main concern is for those other real people - the game designers and other staff that have no job lined up to go to after this week. I am glad, though, to see the information about the job location and severance packages.

I know you cannot speak for the company on this, but the signs we see from the outside of WotC are VERY disconcerting to us gamers. Does this mean that WotC is gearing down their product schedule to a mere trickle? Does it mean that we likely to see LESS freelancing, or more?

More importantly, what does this mean for the SRD? Depending on what happens to the D&D franchise, it is vitally important to your customer base to see the SRD official completed - at least the core rules. The "gentleman's agreement" has been solid over the past two years, but handshakes only go so far in courts of law.

Can we expect to see increased output on the official SRD chapters?


----------



## toberane (Sep 6, 2002)

*An observation...*

One thing I noticed about this particular round of layoffs that is different from the previous rounds of layoffs:  There seems to be more negative feedback from inside the industry on this round than there was on the previous rounds.  Maybe it's just my perspective, but after all the other layoffs happened, at least one or two of the visible "name" employees who had gotten their pink slips popped up on message boards saying things like "I was planning to leave anyway," and "The restructuring was a necessary thing," and stuff like that.  

This time, however, all I've heard sounds a lot darker, no former employees or current employees saying much of anything in WotC's defense.  Even Anthony Valterras comments seem to speak more of "I gotta look out for myself and my family" than they do of saying anything remotely Pro-Hasbro/WotC.  The question is, what exactly does this mean?

EDIT: Imay have taken AV's comments a little out of context, but upon reviewing his post, he didn't go out of his way to defend the company, only his job and himself.


----------



## NLP (Sep 6, 2002)

WotC still has what, some 250 employees left? Considering that WotC only produces 2 game supplements a month I am surprised they have that many around. 

What does the company really need? 4-5 to come up with some ideas. 4-5 more guys to implement those ideas by hiring freelancers and overseeing projects. 4-5 more guys to work on visuals and marketing. 4-5 more guys to work on editing and layout. 2-3 good in-house artists. 2-3 guys to call the printer and schedule distribution. What is that, like 25 guys? Triple the number to cover the novel and card game divisions and there you go.

WotC does not need employees for Dragon, Dungeon, or Polyhedron any more. WotC does not produce enough rpg material on a monthly basis to justify huge staffs. Heck, there are many smaller-press publishers that have more product gaming coming out per month than WotC does. 

I do not think WotC need 300+ employees to produce 2-3 game products, 2-3 novels, and 10 new Magic Cards per month. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Squirrel Nutkin (Sep 6, 2002)

Katerek said:
			
		

> *IAs evidence, I offer you cabbage patch kinds, tickle me elmo, furby, atari, the death of superman comic, etc.  These pop culture fads don't last because their target audience, children, do not have attention spans that last, further more, at that age after a single year has gone by they are completely different people and their interests have thoroughly changed! *



Now, I wouldn't call Atari a _fad_. That company and its consoles were killed off by mismanagement. I think Nintendo has already proven that the infamous video game "bust" in the mid-Eighties had everything to do with the suits running Atari, Mattel, Magnavox, etc. at the time.


----------



## Greybar (Sep 6, 2002)

Hmm... about 10 years ago if you talked to RPG players they would talk about how terrible T$R was, how Gary Gygax really wasn't that great (and he was a *gasp* wargamer anyway), et cetera.  Now people overlook his flaws (and every human has plenty of 'em), and he enjoys a cult of personality again, revered as the creator of the hobby.

I predict that if you wait another 5-10 years, everyone will be talking about the "Golden Years" of WoTC and 3rd edition D&D.  Don't worry Mr. Dancey, Mr. Valterra, and all the others.  You'll be demigods to the next generation ... just let the memories fade to gold.

It's just a lot easier for the mob mentality to kick in, and slam the WoTC people right now, while they are "faceless" and everyone is panicked, angry, and hurt.  Obviously they're all beancounters, icky manager-types, and demon worshippers (and not the fun kind of demon either!)

John


----------



## Katerek (Sep 6, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *
> 
> (end sarcasm)
> 
> ...




I think I misrepresented my intention.  By shame I was merely referring to the corporate aspects that our 'hobby' has taken on.

But thank you nonetheless for thw ever witty, if sarcastic, reality check.  You make some good points, points I largely agree with.

Ultimately I feel horrible for those facing the layoffs, I have been there and it stinks.  I have faith, however, that they will rebound.  The industry is to ravenous for talent and solid product right now, I don't suppose it matters too much what the label is.


----------



## JLXC (Sep 6, 2002)

I think too many Americans are SO used to Corporate EVIL that they are complacent.  Who cares if they let go everyone who helped create 3E?  Who cares if all the Real Thinkers are gone?  Who cares if THE SAGE is out of a job?  I mean really.... who cares?

Well I do.  I'm pissed about it.  I'm pissed that the company is becoming another T$R.  I'm pissed that so many of YOU are business jerks who love to see "business" in action.  I'm pissed that more of the let go employees don't vent their frustration at being let go.  I'm pissed at the complacent masses.  

Screw Business.  Screw Profit.  

If you don't understand THAT.... then Screw You too sell out.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *
> If you don't understand THAT.... then Screw You too sell out. *




Aww, somebody needs a hug.

How about this- some of us don't let our emotions dictate our opinions over matters we don't fully understand.

 

FD


----------



## JLXC (Sep 6, 2002)

True.  I would not want my concience to interfere with my decisions!  I mean business and dollars Is God.  Why can't I get that through my head?  I would hate for emotions and empathy to enter my thoughts.  I should accept the capitalistic evil of making people into numbers.  It's only business right?



Thanks for making my point.


----------



## Levekius (Sep 6, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *Yeah, it's a real shame that D&D is more popular than ever, that we have a single OS for games now (d20), that we've got our pick of a dozen extremely talented 3rd-party publishers who put out imaginative products.*




A dozen? Who? What? Where? There's a handful of *consistent* publishers out there.  



			
				Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *It's a shame that the rules were constantly updated and streamlined, that we were given pages and pages of official errata and a definitive FAQ. It's a shame that the RPGA became free. It's a shame that Dragon and Dungeon are now free to truly become a journal for the RPG industry, instead of just an outlet/advertisement for WotC products.*




Let's see what the new Dragon and Dungeon will look like before singing their praise. I think having official outlets to the game was actually a strength of the game. I do agree with you that less WotC product pimping would have been good, though. As for pages and pages of errata, on planet earth, this is considered *bad*. I'm glad that from wherever you are coming from, books full of gaffes are considered a good thing. 



			
				Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *Yeah, what a shame. I wish it was like the good old days, when  TSR--and *only* T$R--released D&D products and the vast majority of those products sucked.*




As opposed to being flooded by numerous 3rd party offerings, the majority of which suck just as much and sometimes even more. In effect, we have even more crap than we used to, the ratio of good to sucky product has about stayed the same, and more importantly, what little good stuff is out there doesn't gel well together. 

I like what D20 has to offer, but companies should work together and try and avoid the numerous overlaps that exist currently. Similar feats, similar prestige classes. It's getting annoying.



			
				Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *Or when you couldn't easily switch game systems, and a D&D player had to learn a whole new set of mechanics if he wanted to play Call of Cthulhu, and another set of mechanics if he wanted to play Vampire.*




Is there a Vampire D20 somewhere? 



			
				Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *I wish D&D was run by a bunch of gaming nerds, not business-savvy people. That way, we'd see slipped production schedules, sloppy layout and design, terrible editing, rules-creep, poor retail relations, and terrible public relations.*




You mean, slipped production schedule like the fabulous Master Tools a product that was late by *years*, not months or weeks, which later became the sucky E-Tools that retail at a way too high price and is 100% junk? 

And sloppy layout... I certainly don't think a professional worthy of that name would have put out the Monster manual as is. It is embarassingly amateurish.

Terrible editing, rules-creep... you've got a short memory. You've been babbling about (I quote) "pages and pages of official errata and a definitive FAQ". Yup. A real work of art. Most WotC's products are filled with errors. The pile of erratas is amusing.



			
				Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *And I wish Skip, Bruce, Stan!, and those other guys were still working for a company that stifled their creativity, instead of being set free to pursue their dreams and release innovative new content.*




You bet, I can't wait to see more idiotic Sage rulings. With a bit of luck, maybe "Skip" will release another Deities & Demigods. The last one with his name on it is a real gem. Nostalgia is great. But in the real world, many of the latest offerings signed Skip Williams have sucked. 

BTW, you make it sound like Skip, Bruce and Stan *weren't* free to pursue their dreams before the layoffs. Newsflash: this is America we're talking about. Nobody was pointing a gun on their head and forcing them to stay. If they had dreams of innovative new content, they could always quit their jobs. My guess is, they're not happy about being layed off. That's the cold, harsh reality.


----------



## Dire_Groundhog (Sep 6, 2002)

*ENWORLD CAUSES LAYOFFS*

Seeing as how the WOTC product line up is no longer featured on the right side of the news page, it seems obvious that this has affected sales and is the cause of the layoffs.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: Zaruthustran's Comments*



			
				toberane said:
			
		

> *My earlier comments were not directed at the state of D&D, but more at the state of WotC.  Unfortunately, 3rd party publishers, even with the rise of numerous d20 companies, don't sell anywhere NEAR as many books as WotC.  Many people refuse to play with 3rd party supplements because they are not "core products."  So it is a simple matter to see that d20 products written by Skip, Monte, Jeff, Stan!, and all the others who have left in the last couple of years will not get even half the circulation they would get if published by WotC.
> 
> I am also a fan of the Forgotten Realms.  Jeff Grubb was one of the driving forces behind the Realms, particularly during 2nd edition.  Without him and some of the other talented game developers, the new 3E realms products are likely to be of much poorer quality than before.  And sure, they could still freelance, and sure, the new designers could be quite talented as well.  We won't know until it happens.
> 
> ...




Not silly at all, and I get your point, if your point is that you think the departure of these folks will decrease the quality/number of official D&D products. And that D&D is enslaved under a cruel master. 

But still, even with these folks gone the number of official D&D products does not have to decrease. WotC could build and release new official material using freelance labor. Bonus for WotC: after the book is done, it doesn't have to continue paying the freelancer's salary.

-z

PS: I, like you, don't use/am not interested in non-core products. Not my cup of tea, since for me one of the main joys of D&D is designing new rules, feats, adventures, and settings.


----------



## Mark Plemmons (Sep 6, 2002)

NLP said:
			
		

> *WotC still has what, some 250 employees left? Considering that WotC only produces 2 game supplements a month I am surprised they have that many around.
> 
> What does the company really need? 4-5 to come up with some ideas. 4-5 more guys to implement those ideas by hiring freelancers and overseeing projects. 4-5 more guys to work on visuals and marketing. 4-5 more guys to work on editing and layout. 2-3 good in-house artists. 2-3 guys to call the printer and schedule distribution. What is that, like 25 guys? Triple the number to cover the novel and card game divisions and there you go.
> 
> ...




It's sad to see people get fired, especially when many of them are obviously very talented.   But from Hasbro's business end, it probably seems to make sense.   
I don't have any inside information, but I'd guess that they're moving towards what you describe above - more outsourcing and the use of freelancer writers.   

I suppose it's even possible that the d20 movement has inspired Hasbro's decision.  They may have seen so many tiny companies putting out so much product, and are wondering if they could do the same thing.  Only time will tell...

- Mark


----------



## BluWolf (Sep 6, 2002)

Originally from Dire_Groundhog 



> Seeing as how the WOTC product line up is no longer featured on the right side of the news page, it seems obvious that this has affected sales and is the cause of the layoffs.




Actually I think this is all just a delayed reaction too Eric Noah retiring.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *True.  I would not want my concience to interfere with my decisions!  I mean business and dollars Is God.  Why can't I get that through my head?  I would hate for emotions and empathy to enter my thoughts.  I should accept the capitalistic evil of making people into numbers.  It's only business right?
> 
> Thanks for making my point.
> *




You proved your point when your noble "caring for your fellow man" conscience led you to insulting other posters on this board.

FD


----------



## Katerek (Sep 6, 2002)

Reading all of this has really inspired my rogue prophet gene.

I think that alot of the changes recently are ultimately good.  Lay-offs suck, yeah, but that isn't what I am talking about.

I have said it before, and I will say it again.  When the d20 wars are over there will only be few top-notch publishers left.  I doubt WoTC/TSR/Hasbro will be amongst the top three.

My personal prediction is SSS (Necromancer and Malhavoc), Green Ronin, Paradigm, and the Iron Kingdoms Crew.  Those guys really have their stuff together.

As far as fanboy stuff goes, even though he didn't get laid off, at least not yet, if Bruce Cordell ever has problems, I will personally tithe parts of my pay check to him, I think his work comes out wrapped in gold and smelling like roses.


----------



## BryonD (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *I think too many Americans are SO used to Corporate EVIL that they are complacent.  Who cares if they let go everyone who helped create 3E?  Who cares if all the Real Thinkers are gone?  Who cares if THE SAGE is out of a job?  I mean really.... who cares?
> 
> Well I do.  I'm pissed about it.  I'm pissed that the company is becoming another T$R.  I'm pissed that so many of YOU are business jerks who love to see "business" in action.  I'm pissed that more of the let go employees don't vent their frustration at being let go.  I'm pissed at the complacent masses.
> 
> ...




So tell me, are you calling for WOTC to signifcantly raise the prices of their RPG material, and vowing to pay those higher prices to maintain to employment of the developers?  

Or is it only "Screw Profit" when you are talking about other people's money?

If you are calling the right to end a mutually voluntary business agreement “evil” then you are, if effect, calling freedom and liberty “evil”.


----------



## BluWolf (Sep 6, 2002)

While I am just as paranoid and conspiracy crazy as the next black helicopter spotter, I am continually amazed at the naive attitude with which most people seem to paint corporations.

Do I think corporations are going to sheppard our society into transcendental enligntment? No. That is not their role or function.

Everyone seems to think corporations care for no one and they only exist to make Ken Leigh (sp?) rich.

Corporatins exist for one reason and one reason only. To make a return on investment for their share holders. That is it cut and Mother F....... dry.

Now 20 years ago a share holder was usually a very ,imited portion of the population. But today a shareholder is largely JohnQ public. You, your wife, your parents, your siblings your friends.

Are there still incredibly wealthy individuals that hold large shares of companies? Yes.

But the LARGEST groups of shareholders are mutual funds and other retirement funds (state funds, pensions...).

So what do you want. Skip Williams looking for a new job or your grandmother eating cat food and living off Social Security.

(My apologies to Mr. Williams on his recent misfortune and I wish all the best on his next opportunity.)


----------



## PatrickLawinger (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *True.  I would not want my concience to interfere with my decisions!  I mean business and dollars Is God.  Why can't I get that through my head?  I would hate for emotions and empathy to enter my thoughts.  I should accept the capitalistic evil of making people into numbers.  It's only business right?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Rather than being overly emotional think about this. Sometimes if a company doesn't make layoffs they will go out of business, then EVERYONE is out of a job.

Have you ever run a business? I have. My wife has. The decisions are much tougher and more painful for managers than anyone likes to believe. It is so very easy to paint everyone "evil" when you know absolutely nothing about what is going on.

WotC was SAVED by Hasbro. Without Hasbro there is no telling who would presently own the various trademarks and products WotC had in their stables, or what, if anything, would be done with them. People seem to forget that WotC mismanaged themselves into the ground, and below. You can't lose over 30 million dollars in a single quarter and expect to maintain the status quo. WotC over-hired for numerous products, especially CCGs, based on insane cash-flow predictions. When those predictions didn't come through, they didn't re-evaluate until it was much, much to late. 

Was DnD a major loser lately? No, but that doesn't mean they had more people on deck than they could support. Have dictates demanding certain profitability/cash flow goals unduly influenced some product lines? Quite possibly, if so, that is a poor management decision. 

Frankly, some of the managers that I believe WotC REALLY needs to let go are still there, that is not a good sign, but certainly not any sort of death sentance for DnD, d20, or anything else really. In addition, it is my opinion that they should go, obviously not the opinion of their superiors, maybe I just don't know enough

I am rather tired of people making insulting posts. WotC made a decision you can agree with, or disagree with, but attacking other people on these boards is completely uncalled for. Posts such as this incite flame wars that serve only to drive people to Mortality.net and individual company boards faster than anything else. It might be time for the moderators to start cracking down again.

Patrick


----------



## bayne (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *I think too many Americans are SO used to Corporate EVIL that they are complacent.  Who cares if they let go everyone who helped create 3E?  Who cares if all the Real Thinkers are gone?  Who cares if THE SAGE is out of a job?  I mean really.... who cares?
> 
> Well I do.  I'm pissed about it.  I'm pissed that the company is becoming another T$R.  I'm pissed that so many of YOU are business jerks who love to see "business" in action.  I'm pissed that more of the let go employees don't vent their frustration at being let go.  I'm pissed at the complacent masses.
> 
> ...




You are just plain stupid. The problem with TSR is that they did exactly what you suggest here ("Screw Profit"). The end result of that is they ran the company into the ground and almost killed off DnD and almost lost everyone their jobs. That will always be the end result if the company is not cash positive. See Enron, WorldCom, etc.  The people that were laid off will have no problem finding other jobs exactly because of the market economy that we have here. In many cases they will get better jobs and also get to keep the two months severance pay that they have coming to them.

If you don't like how things work here then go back to whatever communist welfare state you crawled out of. I am sure you will be much happier living in poverty there than having to live here with the "Evil Corporations" that cause this to be the most prosperous nation in the world.


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *True.  I would not want my concience to interfere with my decisions!  I mean business and dollars Is God.  Why can't I get that through my head?  I would hate for emotions and empathy to enter my thoughts.  I should accept the capitalistic evil of making people into numbers.  It's only business right?
> *




JLXC - You need to move away from the Left Coast. It's corrupted you. 

I'm kidding. But in all seriousness, you need to take a perspective on this, just as I did. It sucks to lose your job. REALLY SUCKS. However, if the official response is to be believed, WotC gave all of the people layed off the following:

*Severance pay
*An employee benefits continuance option
*Career transition services (these typically include lining up unemployment services for the employee, and some companies even line up training for the employee)

While it ain't the same as a regular check, it isn't the same as "You're fired. Don't let the doorknob hit you in the butt" either. Some companies I know don't offer even this much.

And yelling "screw this, screw that, Screw the Man" doesn't help anyone, least of all the poor employees themselves.

To me, the important thing to do is push for the completion of the Core SRD, so that we can support those who wish to continue to remain game designers can do so, through us buying their products! The OGL is safe, and if the SRD is safe too, then the third-party industry has a chance to grow like it never has - because WotC won't be the ones putting out the cutting edge products afte this point, in my opinion.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

Levekius said:
			
		

> A dozen? Who? What? Where? There's a handful of *consistent* publishers out there.




Okay nitpicker, you've got me there. Touche'!



> Let's see what the new Dragon and Dungeon will look like before singing their praise. I think having official outlets to the game was actually a strength of the game. I do agree with you that less WotC product pimping would have been good, though. As for pages and pages of errata, on planet earth, this is considered *bad*. I'm glad that from wherever you are coming from, books full of gaffes are considered a good thing.




Very funny, wise guy. Too bad your observation is foolish. On "planet earth" everybody makes errors. Errors are bad. Errata is good. Think for a moment, and you'll understand the difference.




> As opposed to being flooded by numerous 3rd party offerings, the majority of which suck just as much and sometimes even more. In effect, we have even more crap than we used to, the ratio of good to sucky product has about stayed the same, and more importantly, what little good stuff is out there doesn't gel well together.
> 
> I like what D20 has to offer, but companies should work together and try and avoid the numerous overlaps that exist currently. Similar feats, similar prestige classes. It's getting annoying.




Yes, it's getting annoying. And the majority does "suck just as much and sometimes even more". So.. don't buy it. Don't use it. No one will mind, as that stuff is not official D&D product. 

Many of us use just the core rules and official D&D products. If WotC continued flooding us with crappy releases, we'd feel obligated to buy that stuff and use it. 

WotC, now, does not have to worry about overlaps, similar feats, similar prestige classes, and other annoyances. And neither do you, as that stuff is not going to be released as official D&D product. 

Honestly, which would you prefer: a dilution of D&D's quality through more and more crappy official D&D supplements, or a bunch more unofficial 3rd party supplements?

Note that I'm not saying all or the majority of 3rd party supplements are crap. You said that. But if it's crap, I'd rather it be unofficial crap.



> Is there a Vampire D20 somewhere?




Who knows? I assume there is, or will be. Does it matter? the only reason I pulled Vampire out of the air was because it's more recognizable than Deadlands. Point is, it's easier than ever to play in different game settings, thanks to d20/thanks to WotC.



> You mean, slipped production schedule like the fabulous Master Tools a product that was late by *years*, not months or weeks, which later became the sucky E-Tools that retail at a way too high price and is 100% junk?




Master Tools was developed by a 3rd party, genius. 

Furthermore, pre-WotC release schedules were far, far worse. My position is that D&D is *better* now than ever. My position is not that D&D is perfect now.



> And sloppy layout... I certainly don't think a professional worthy of that name would have put out the Monster manual as is. It is embarassingly amateurish.




Compare the crisp layout and organization of the 3E PHB to the nightmare that was the 2E PHB. Which is better?

Artistic style aside, which book is more clear, easier to understand, better value for your money? 

(In case you need help, the answer is the 3E PHB.)



> Terrible editing, rules-creep... you've got a short memory. You've been babbling about (I quote) "pages and pages of official errata and a definitive FAQ". Yup. A real work of art. Most WotC's products are filled with errors. The pile of erratas is amusing.




Are you actually saying that TSR's products weren't filled with errors? Well, since the point of my post was that D&D is better now than it was before, and you are attempting to refute that point... than yes, you are saying that TSR's products weren't filled with errors. Which makes you a person unfamiliar with reality. Or at least history.

Compared to 2E or any other RPG products on the market today, WotC's books are shining examples of clarity and function. Sure, they have errors--all game books have errors. And guess what? WotC corrected those errors through the publication of accessible errata documents. The "pile of erratas" is praise-worthy.

Now, as for the splatbooks... those books sucked. Thank goodness for the erratas--they at least corrected the inexcusable blunders of missing tables, blatant rules gaffs, etc. Which is why it's a good thing WotC is, apparently, focusing on the core books and fewer, better releases. 




> You bet, I can't wait to see more idiotic Sage rulings. With a bit of luck, maybe "Skip" will release another Deities & Demigods. The last one with his name on it is a real gem. Nostalgia is great. But in the real world, many of the latest offerings signed Skip Williams have sucked.




It's ironic (and a little sad) that you dismiss nostalgia and imply that I suffer from it, when you yourself are so drunk on it. Your belief that "In the old days, D&D was better... the RPG hobby was better" is nothing but the worst example of delusional nostalgia.

And what's with your anger toward Skip? Where'd that come from? Calm down, man.



> BTW, you make it sound like Skip, Bruce and Stan *weren't* free to pursue their dreams before the layoffs. Newsflash: this is America we're talking about. Nobody was pointing a gun on their head and forcing them to stay. If they had dreams of innovative new content, they could always quit their jobs. My guess is, they're not happy about being layed off. That's the cold, harsh reality.




Hee hee. Yeah, they could always quit their jobs and willingly enter the unemployed game designer pool during a recession. Yep, they sure had that choice. Yep. 

If you've got a good thing going with steady income, you'd have to be crazy to throw that away. Monte did it and managed to succeed, and Monte's crazy (he'd tell you that himself). Most people, however, would just stick to it and collect that paycheck. 

Look at you. Look at your job. Is it your dream job? I'm guessing not. So... why don't you quit your job and pursue your dream job as president of WotC? You have that choice. "Newsflash: this is America we're talking about."

Please.

Anyway, those guys did the smart thing and stuck it out at WotC as long as possible. My point was that at WotC, they had to play by WotC's rules. Now they don't have to do that.

Look, I appreciate your humorous reply. It's clear you care about the game, and so do I. But please, if you want to argue, stop (unsuccessfully) trying to attack my examples of how D&D is better now than ever before, and instead provide examples of how D&D is worse than ever before.

-z

PS: And of course those guys aren't happy about being layed off. Not sure why you brought that up.

EDIT: Actually, never mind. You win. Forget about it. I don't want this thread to morph into a 2e/3e debate or a war (see patrick's post above). Feel free to reply, or not.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 6, 2002)

Okay, guys. I know that you're probably upset and worried, but that doesn't excuse insulting other people on the board. Please stop personal attacks as of right now. Please try to maintain a modicum of politeness - and thank you, everyone who is already doing so.

This doesn't surprise me a whole lot. When Adkison made the decision to sell to Hasbro, he chose to get a major payoff for long-term employees as a tradeoff for giving up control. Everyone I spoke to at WotC expected that Hasbro would try to assume more control after a few years. I'm surprised and disappointed at the particular people who they've laid off, but not surprised or worried in the least that layoffs have occurred.

Incidentally, I'd say that there are more than "a handful" of consistent, competent d20 publishers at this point. An insistence that WotC is the only people worth buying from seems laughable to me. Other people certainly wouldn't agree.

Finally, my big concern is that public perception might mean less sales for d20 modern. Third party companies will be less willing to write for it if it seems to be in danger, and I imagine that WotC is banking on it as another source of significant revenue. I hope they aren't disappointed.


----------



## Henry (Sep 6, 2002)

Levekius:

Posting direct personal insults is not only bad form, but could get this thread closed in very short order.

Let us all please consider what we say before we say it.


----------



## Nine Hands (Sep 6, 2002)

Friadoc said:
			
		

> *
> Well,
> 
> ...as a playtester, heck my name (as well as my group) is in the 3rd Edition PHB, Forgotten Realms, Alternity's Gamma World Revamp, and other books, I can say that we've had one item in the past nine months, or so.
> ...




I completely agree, I have been disappointed in the entire playtest process in the last 7-8 months.  After FRCS and the ELH, I expected things to be a little better.  As a playtester, I like LOTS of feedback, even a private messageboard would do wonders (especially if they can support ALL of the members of the group).

Oh, well, we will see what happens in the future.


----------



## alsih2o (Sep 6, 2002)

jeez, who would wanna be in a business serving and providing goods to all these folks throwing around the "screw you" s???

 what does this help?


----------



## Ashy (Sep 6, 2002)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> *I'm only a third of the group, but anybody who wants to put the power to the kobold is good in my book. *




A third?  Don't cha mean a fourth!??!  Jeez, us mephits...er....tiefers never get any respect!


----------



## Leopold (Sep 6, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *Finally, my big concern is that public perception might mean less sales for d20 modern. Third party companies will be less willing to write for it if it seems to be in danger, and I imagine that WotC is banking on it as another source of significant revenue. I hope they aren't disappointed. *





i HIGHLY doubt this will happen. The masses have been screaming for a modern genre game and WOTC has answered their call. The ball is already rolling and it'll be impossible to stop unless they somehow decide to cancel the whole book...


The only issue with D20Modern now comes with the fact that it may or may not be released into SRD the day it's released....


----------



## Allister (Sep 6, 2002)

I'm wondering why more companies aren't pursuing D&D licenses. I mean, Ravenloft is currently licensed as is Dragonlance with rumours of Darksun being shopped around.

From all indications that I've read, even a low selling campaign setting such as Birthright generated more sales than most campaign settings from other companies. Probably only Vampire, Werewolf and a couple other settings would have sales greater than even a setting like Spelljammer.


----------



## EarthsShadow (Sep 6, 2002)

d20 Modern will be a very good thing, I know many people where I live who have already started working on modern day campaigns, the most common of which is DarkMatter type settings.  

This game will save them for a while, and I am sure that there will be many published modern day settings, hopefully mine will be one of them someday (it will be really good also for those who might be interested in something good).  Beyond that, I agree that bickering and fighting over this decision won't change the decision at all.  They are still let go, there is no changing that.  It just came as a shock, and usually after a decision like this it will take us a few days to get over the shock and deal with it, and that's all we have to do.

Move on, adapt to the new situation, and play the game.  It will only get better.  And I still favor the motion that WotC doesn't deserve the game anymore, some other company who cares for the game does.   But, I will still play it regardless.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 6, 2002)

Katerek said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I think I misrepresented my intention.  By shame I was merely referring to the corporate aspects that our 'hobby' has taken on.
> 
> ...




Wow, thanks for the kind reply. I agree that the hobby is more corporate, and sometimes that's a bit jarring. Here we have this fun hobby, but it's also a big business. Kind of like movies, or video games. I want the man behind the curtain to stay there, so I can just sit back and enjoy the game/movie/whatever--without recognizing how precisely said entertainment is crafted and targeted. 

Yeah, I too feel horrible for those laid off. I'm in the tech industry (like many of you, I'd guess) and am not unfamiliar with the pink slip. It sucks. I hope all those without a job rebound swiftly and safely. 

-z


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 6, 2002)

*obviously*

few on this board understand the concept of oppurtunity cost. It matters little that DND is currently profitable, but what its optimal profit would be with neccesary reforms.  To assert that an emphasis structural efficiency equates with irrational expectations is just hyperbole...I'm with Da Man on this.


----------



## Nathanael (Sep 6, 2002)

*There's a bigger picture here, IMHO...*

Sure, WOTC/HASBRO is a corporation and has to bladdy, blah blah. Look, the reason they lay off people is apparent: they want more money. Is it good business to make more money? Yes, no question. Is their decision going to make them more money? In the very short term, yes. But for who and at what cost?

The who: the top brass. Stockholders won't see more than a couple of cents per share. The result: less profit a year from now resulting in more layoffs and eventually the dissolution/sell off of a crippled company. This is not a guess. This is three years of history repeating itself over and over. The definition of insanity is 'doing something over and over again and expecting a different result each time.' Insanity is not good business.

Is keeping people on who don't produce good business? No. But why fire them and produce nothing when you can encourage them to create something new? Magic isn't an age old property, it was created when RPG's were on the downturn. Why can't these world class game designers be utilized to do something like that? Just because Skip and others have done D&D for the majority of their careers doesn't mean they're incapable of any other game design. And isn't HASBRO a company that sells 'games?' Interesting board games are very popular, and the only reason the company is losing money on them is the fact that they refuse to sell anything new, prefering to 're-envision' old concepts to death. As asked before, how many different Monopoly sets do you need? Again, repetition = insanity = bad business.

And let's look at the big picture. Laying off hundreds, and in some companies cases, thousands of employees creates a downturn in spending which prolongs recession, which creates layoffs, which creates a downturn in spending, which prolongs recession, which...

The point? The business cycle goes up and down naturally. The current business practices of major corporations throw it all out of whack. While the fed reduces interest rates to compensate for a recession, major corporations are making it worse by laying off almost everyone who actually does any work and keeping executive dead weight. All the corporations in question need to do is make a little less profit for one year by resisting massive, needless layoffs, and they can speed up economic recovery leading to more profit in the future. It's called balancing out the business cycle. But no, it's more important to make everything you can now. The long term is too far away, think quarterly, think short-term. As a result corporations are dominated by short sightedness.

It's a simple equation: people no spend, business no make money. I'm a graphic Designer, out of work for 7 months now. WOTC lays of close to the entirety of their Graphic design department. How less likely am I to get a job now? I'm not spending money on their products anymore because I have no money. Why did WOTC lay off those people? Because they're making less money. Rather circular, don't you think. 

I mention all of this here because I can't stand someone feeding me a line of bullsh*t like the steaming pile of manure that is the WOTC press release. Comments like 'We're doing it for long term growth,' piss me off. As already pointed out, and as any one with a lick of common sense knows, that's complete and utter crap.  And not even convincing crap. It smacks of 'talkin' to da rubes,' like we're too retarded to know the truth of the matter, to see the real world.

Fact is, these decisions are NOT good business. If they were, then HASBRO wouldn't be in the slump it's been in for the past decade. They bought WOTC to get Pokemon and Magic to improve their diminishing market share, applied the same screwed up business principles to it, and sunk it down with them. Not only are they sinking WOTC, but they, along with a lot of other corporations, are also sinking the US economy as well, in the name of personal profit. That should be the major concern for most of you, who like me, are unable to get a job, especially if we have experience and talent that make us worth more than a poverty line paycheck. 

So to all of you that say, 'that's business/the real world, so live with it,' I say you are the ones needing to take the blinders off. It's not about just D&D or WOTC, it's about everything around you that's affected by the economy. An economy being run into the ground in ACTUALITY by greedy, greedy men who would watch an entire nation starve before they gave up a million dollars from their billion dollar accounts. Real men, who we see on the news all the time nowadays. who actually laugh, on camera, at the Senate when being dressed down for their highly unethical business practices. I actually saw the ex-CEO for Worldcom do this as the nation watched, as if he were laughing at all of us. Probably because he knew that he would get a light sentence in some cushy federal pen and get out in a few years with more money than 3 third world nations combined...


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 6, 2002)

*You have to be kidding me*

Do you honestly believe that there is a supp that Wotc could produce that would enlarge the market to any appreciable degree. You have little sense of corporate history. It is in point of fact the conservative strategy that wins out 9/10. That counter-corporate culture bs is a sentimental pipe dream, especially in this case where we have a niche hobby that has remained rather constant over the long haul and shows no signs of breaking out. Wotc simply exploited demand more efficiently and whatever aggregate growth resulted from d20/DND 3rd has probably been brought squeezed to its utmost. When you can't raise gross revenue, the rational descision is structural reform to cut costs and thus raise profits. To expect anything more is laughable.


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 6, 2002)

*And on the Macro*

Your macroeconomic analysis is also trite, if technically accurate, because it has not real policy ramifications. You are talking about a very wide, diverse labor market in which any given entity has a miniscule effect on demand. You expect Wotc to take a policy step on their own initiative that would probably hurt them for some wider public benefit that they would be neglibible. Please grasp the concept of game theory and stop the sentiment.


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: ENWORLD CAUSES LAYOFFS*



			
				Dire_Groundhog said:
			
		

> *Seeing as how the WOTC product line up is no longer featured on the right side of the news page, it seems obvious that this has affected sales and is the cause of the layoffs. *




 I doubt it. Look up the statistics. The number of people on the net that actually go out and buy a product is relatively small. It factors very little into a company's overall sales.

As big as we like to think the internet is, it really is a lot smaller than it appears....or something like that.


----------



## Zulkir (Sep 6, 2002)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> *
> Bean-counter or no, for the love of mud, Anthony, could you please push the rest of the SRD through the "approval" process so that we can end the speculation of "WotC could pull back the stuff in the 'gentlemens' agreement' and screw other d20 publishers?"
> 
> 
> ...




I know we have been saying "soon" for a while now but this time I can say we have a person devoted to it. So this time - soon means real soon. Keep checking, spells should go up anytime now.

AV


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 6, 2002)

Bless your heart - thanks! And incidentally, it was great meeting you at GenCon.


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 6, 2002)

Levekius said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As for pages and pages of errata, on planet earth, this is considered *bad*. I'm glad that from wherever you are coming from, books full of gaffes are considered a good thing.
> *




All I can say about this is that the bigger the product (that is the more pages it has) the more likely there will be mistakes. There is not and never will be a product released that doesnt need errata (be it mistakes, typos, or whatever). It doesnt matter how many people look it over, someone is gonna miss something. It just happens. People make mistakes.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

Hey Anthony! Good to see you here. Thanks for the update.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 6, 2002)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> *
> 
> All I can say about this is that the bigger the product (that is the more pages it has) the more likely there will be mistakes. There is not and never will be a product released that doesnt need errata (be it mistakes, typos, or whatever). It doesnt matter how many people look it over, someone is gonna miss something. It just happens. People make mistakes. *




Yeah, you're right. Y'know, it's almost like WotC would've been better off not releasing errata - in other words, doing the same thing as most game publishers: ignoring it. It's as if people think that just because a company doesn't release errata, there isn't any.


----------



## Kieran (Sep 6, 2002)

Zulkir said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey now, remember - when you use the word beancounter you have to use the name Anthony Valterra in the same sentence. We are not faceless. We have families, and are gamers, and are raising kids, go to cons and last week went to burning man. Real people here.
> 
> AV *




True enough, Anthony. I've seen you around the boards enough to see that you love the game as well. Nothing personal was being directed toward you. I do get the feeling ,however, that  many decisions have been made since Hasbro took over that boost short term profits at the expense of the long term health of the game. In the last year or so, WOTC has lost almost all of the designers that made D&D successful. Though there are still some good people like Bruce Cordell left in R&D, the mass carnage in the department doesn't seem to bode well for future creative endeavours. I guess my initial thought was that only a beancounter corporate type with no love of the game would do something like that. I wasn't saying that _all_ corporate types were like that. While you may not be one of those, I'm sure that there are enough of them in WOTC/Hasbro to validate my opinion. 

Either that, or I'm just an idiot   We all know the saying about opinions on the internet after all...


----------



## Grazzt (Sep 6, 2002)

ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yeah, you're right. Y'know, it's almost like WotC would've been better off not releasing errata - in other words, doing the same thing as most game publishers: ignoring it. It's as if people think that just because a company doesn't release errata, there isn't any. *




Exactly Colonel...exactly.


----------



## James Heard (Sep 6, 2002)

Company X has gained rights to publish on the popular, yet nebulous genre of ABC. For this they hire John Doe and his books become wildly successful in the niche market. The brand of ABC is successful and other authors soon are hired to expand upon the brand with some mixed success, on the whole the business is doing fair. In a market downturn Company X looks over it's books and decides that it's brand ABC is doing well but there could be some cost managing on the brand. After all, other smaller companies are making much higher profit margins than X with the same sort of less well embraced authors than John Doe in X's own brand of ABC! Company X decides to let go John Doe, he's obviously an unneeded expense to the brand. Sales fall, but profit margins are up. John Doe goes to work for another company, and his success continues and their profit margins increase. Company X decides that new blood is what drives profitability and starts firing more people, until eventually no one wants to work for them because they can be just as successful writing for brand ABC at another company without worrying constantly about the pressure of constantly worrying about their pension.


----------



## Zulkir (Sep 6, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *
> I know you cannot speak for the company on this, but the signs we see from the outside of WotC are VERY disconcerting to us gamers. Does this mean that WotC is gearing down their product schedule to a mere trickle?
> *




Currently there is no planned change in the schedule. I will be revamping it to make sure we can hit all of our deadlines. I believe we can but I also believe in double checking.



			
				Henry said:
			
		

> *
> Does it mean that we likely to see LESS freelancing, or more?
> *



More. Some of you might want to see this as an opportunity to get work from WotC. You will want to have some history of publication, even magazine publication, and you will want to send a resume and portfolio to Bill Slaviscek. 


			
				Henry said:
			
		

> *
> 
> More importantly, what does this mean for the SRD? Depending on what happens to the D&D franchise, it is vitally important to your customer base to see the SRD official completed - at least the core rules. The "gentleman's agreement" has been solid over the past two years, but handshakes only go so far in courts of law.
> 
> *



SRD is moving forward. Spells should go up soon. We have an intern dedicated to getting it finalized.

AV


----------



## kenjib (Sep 6, 2002)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> *There is not and never will be a product released that doesnt need errata (be it mistakes, typos, or whatever).*




...except for the Tome of Horrors.


----------



## Breakdaddy (Sep 6, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *Okay, guys. I know that you're probably upset and worried, but that doesn't excuse insulting other people on the board. Please stop personal attacks as of right now. Please try to maintain a modicum of politeness - and thank you, everyone who is already doing so.
> 
> This doesn't surprise me a whole lot. When Adkison made the decision to sell to Hasbro, he chose to get a major payoff for long-term employees as a tradeoff for giving up control. Everyone I spoke to at WotC expected that Hasbro would try to assume more control after a few years. I'm surprised and disappointed at the particular people who they've laid off, but not surprised or worried in the least that layoffs have occurred.
> 
> ...




Aww man! I was just about to break out the popcorn and sit back to enjoy the rest of the show! Now you've got everyone being polite


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: There's a bigger picture here, IMHO...*



			
				Nathanael said:
			
		

> *Fact is, these decisions are NOT good business. If they were, then HASBRO wouldn't be in the slump it's been in for the past decade.
> *




Ok-

1) You don't know enough about the situation to know if it was a good or bad decision. In truth, only time will tell.

2) You are wrong due to the assumption that the long term profit of d&d was a concern of Hasbro. 

Complete speculation follows:

As you did say- MTG and Pokemon are not as popular as they used to be, but there are multiple reasons for that. Hasbro's involvement does not look like it is one of them- especially considering from all word from WOTC is that they have been pretty hand's off.

Hasbro has been in the toy market long enough- it knows that some toys will become popular and eventually disintegrate. There are very few toy lines that survive the long term.

I suspect they aquired WOTC with the same mind-frame. They would ride out the popularity of MTG and Pokemon, and when it is no longer popular- they will can it for the time being. 

Do they want it to crash? No, of course not, but there is also little they can do to keep those card games going. 

How is d&d involved? It is just a side show, and a very small one at that.  It does not bring enough profit to merit any attention from Hasbro. Plus, it has possibly given the same disintegration appearance- with the core books being big sellers and subsequent books being not as big.

As WOTC is told to cut operating expenses, then they need to do it with their boss in mind. Does that mean they sink MTG and Pokemon? No, they cut from the cash cow that does not need to eat so much grass.

Is it going to hurt d&d in the long run- possibly, but since Hasbro is not interested in the long term- it is not an issue.

That is why I said in the beginning that d&d is probably never going to do well in a corporate environment. 

It is not a matter of the "evil pursuit of profit". It is not a matter of the corporate workers loving it more/less then small business workers. 

It is a matter of corporate mechanics. 

D&D requires regular R&D and expensive investment to produce regular books, and the market is too small to garner more then a footnote of support from a company such as Hasbro.

/complete speculation done.



> So to all of you that say, 'that's business/the real world, so live with it,' I say you are the ones needing to take the blinders off.




 Why bother getting into a flame war?

I will say one thing about your final rant on those "greedy, greedy men". The CEO of Hasbro made 1.1 million dollars last year. That is a good chunk of change, but not extravegant when compared to other corporations of the same size.

FD


----------



## Tiefling (Sep 6, 2002)

Is there any reason why WotC/Hasbro would want to kill the finalization of the SRD? I can't think of anything they would gain, and it would take a day at least to get the stuff off the site, email the dozens of publishers to tell them to stop using it, etc. That means money.


----------



## Katerek (Sep 6, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Wow, thanks for the kind reply. I agree that the hobby is more corporate, and sometimes that's a bit jarring. Here we have this fun hobby, but it's also a big business.
> 
> -z *




No problem.  I figured that it is far more resourceful and mature to reply kindly than to call someone a "stupid poo-poo head" or whatever kind of drivel tends to get passed around on MB's.  Also, you were absolutely right.  Kinda hard to argue with that. 

I also think you summed it up best, our hobby is now big business.  It's going to be a long interesting ride.

As for other things:

We can all wax poetic and prophetic about the macro and micro economical reasonings for lay-off, downsizing, reductions in force or whatever they call it now for as long as want but it isn't going to change anything.

We may not personallyknow those that were affected, be we still treat this big business as a hobby.  Those folks are going to have rough weekends and rougher days ahead until they find that security that they once had.

I don't know about y'all but I see every employee at wotc as a friend.  If it wasn't for them and the things they have done over the years, I wouldn't have had all of the terrific experiences I have had with my local friends.

Since I have been gaming now for over two decades, almost every friend I have I have gotten through gaming.  I married one, later divorced; I have been to a wedding or two, evn a few funerals.  Gaming is my life, and I am not ashamed to admit it.  Most of the most enjoyable times of my life can be equated to a handful of dice and a table surround by dear friends.  

Gaming has been the one constant that many of us have had throughout our lives.  I never mattered where my parents moved me off to, or what city my job drug me to, I could always fine a local band of gamers and therein share a common connection.  It helped me adjust and find a since of belonging more than once.  This was never done without hard work and effort on some game designers part.

The folks who work in those companies helped me have those times and for that I am eternally grateful.  I feel for them, and hope them nothing but the best.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

toberane said:
			
		

> *
> ...  Because as long as the game is called Dungeons & Dragons, it will continue to sell regardless of how dubious the quality is. *




Actualy that's the ONLY thing that worries me at the moment. HASBRO CAN KILL D&D the BRAND. Look what happened to Last Unicorn. They were bought and there product line died. The couple of books that were finished but not yet released were dumped and nothing is heard from them ever again.

If HASBRO was truly evil, they would take over the D&D license from WOTC, drop this dead puppy and sit on the license. That would kill D&D. 

People would still buy [ x ]'s product (substitute with any of the names that got laid off). Those that already know and like them. But the new kids, the kid that would have become a gamer because there was this near mythical brand-name: D&D, would now longer be interested in these [ x ] products. They would find another BRAND.

To those people outside the hobby, D&D is like a lighthouse. If there is one term or name that they know in relation to RPG's, it's D&D. And even though the OGL is a great gift to the gaming community, those that are interested in becoming part of said community will loose a beacon, a lighthouse if ever D&D would disappear.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

*Re: irony*



			
				EarthsShadow said:
			
		

> *... and if they fired me because I was making money, and not due to my lack of creative talent, ... *




I'm shure these people were NOT fired because of lack of creative talent. They were fired because in the current games market (seen through the corporate glassess that have to balance a bookkeeping) these people are TOO EXPENSIVE. 

It's happening on all levels all over the world. Economy weakening and corporations need to show the're economicaly viable which means they need to make a profit. And having a staff of very talented BUT VERY EXPENSIVE employees might assure quality, it does not assure PROFIT.

The exact same thing is happening with my current employer. The IT department has to go. Why? Because on average our programmers, analysts and systems DESIGNERS (there IS creative talent even in IT) are over 35 years of age and TOO EXPENSIVE.


----------



## Cergorach (Sep 6, 2002)

Zulkir said:
			
		

> *
> SRD is moving forward. Spells should go up soon. We have an intern dedicated to getting it finalized.
> *




Thank god for interns!

On a different note, now i understand all the layoffs, they are being replaced with interns ;-)


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 6, 2002)

*It comes down to this*

If you want those that were layed off to be retained and Wotc to continue with the level of 'support' or 'quality' however you define those things, please be willing to pay for it and ensure that a significant portion of your fellow customers would as well. Otherwise, you grand judgments come off as disingenuous and childish, as your asking those who pay the costs of production to sacrifice for your hobby. Thank you.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

JLXC said:
			
		

> *I think too many Americans are SO used to Corporate EVIL that they are complacent.  Who cares if they let go everyone who helped create 3E?  Who cares if all the Real Thinkers are gone?  Who cares if THE SAGE is out of a job?  I mean really.... who cares?
> 
> Well I do.  I'm pissed about it.  I'm pissed that the company is becoming another T$R.  I'm pissed that so many of YOU are business jerks who love to see "business" in action.  I'm pissed that more of the let go employees don't vent their frustration at being let go.  I'm pissed at the complacent masses.
> 
> ...




Hey, I can assure you that MOST people feel your way, but the decisions are mate by the suits and the suits DON'T to screw business and they definatly DON4T want to screw profit. That's just the whole deal.

WE GAMERS: wan't our game as interesting, abundant and (lets face it) cheap as possible, because we want fun, and as much off it as possible

THEM SUITS: have to face the governement (taxes, bla bla all these obligations), distributors, printers, stock space, salaries, ...

The thing is they are looking from a totaly different perspective. No matter how harsh this may sound, for the suits, the people that have to run a business, employees are just another whole where money is drained. SIMPLE FACT OF LIFE.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 6, 2002)

Mark Plemmons said:
			
		

> *... more outsourcing ...
> - Mark *




THANK YOU! Finaly someone used the O word. I've refrained so far of using this term as I've been a near victim 2 years ago and  will be a victim by the end of this year and I've been scared, enraged, angry, ...

Why? Because: a it's the fad of the moment, all corporations are doing it. Believe me when I say that certain firms who'se core business is strategic outsourcing have themselves outsourced part of the company.

In the end nobody is actualy going to work for the firm they are doing the work for. In the end everybody is going to be outsourced. The scary thing is that outsourcing can only be profitable if the firm that handles the outsourcing can do the same job at a lower cost. What else is the point in outsourcing? Which in return means that quality HAS to drop!

I'll add one more scary thought: People are no longer allowed to care for their job. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY REAL: an ex-colleague who was outsourced 2 years ago but still works for us was warned off by his new employer to stop being concerned of his old job and start being more concerned with his new firm. They even penalized him for doing so (part of their salary is variable...)

SCARY!


----------



## Staffan (Sep 7, 2002)

drakhe said:
			
		

> *Actualy that's the ONLY thing that worries me at the moment. HASBRO CAN KILL D&D the BRAND. Look what happened to Last Unicorn. They were bought and there product line died. The couple of books that were finished but not yet released were dumped and nothing is heard from them ever again.*



Actually, WOTC definitely wasn't interested in killing off LUG or anything like that. It was more something like this:
1. LUG have the Star Trek license and the Dune license (they haven't published Dune though, due to the Herbert estate riding them real hard) and are bleeding money.
2. WOTC says "Hey, we want that Star Trek license. Let's buy the company that has it now." They ask Paramount if that would be OK with them, and Paramount say yes. Nothing is in writing though.
3. LUG says "OK, you can buy us. But we have this RPG that we've been working on forever and the fans are almost knocking over the doors. You'll have to promise you'll release it." WOTC replies, "sure".
4. WOTC pays the owners of LUG a bunch of money, assumes ownership and hires on the LUG staff as "WOTC South".
5. Paramount says "Hey, wait a minute! We don't want the same company making both a Star Wars and a Star Trek RPG! Let's yank the license from WOTC and give it to Decipher, the guys making the Trek CCG."
6. WOTC says "WTF? Darn, we should have gotten that promise in writing. OK, at least we got Dune out of it." WOTC releases a limited edition of the Dune RPG and promises to release a d20 version as well, and make a few supplements.
7. The Dune license runs out. With the upcoming Dune miniseries on Sci-fi Channel, the Herbert estate now wants a lot more money for the license. WOTC thinks "They caused a whole lot of problems for LUG by being picky about the license, and the Dune universe isn't *that* good a license. It ain't worth it.", and won't renew the license.
8. WOTC and Hasbro start going into the red, and decide to cut back on staff. Among those laid off by WOTC are most of the people that came on board when they bought LUG - they were basically hired to do Star Trek, and WOTC aren't doing Star Trek.


----------



## kenjib (Sep 7, 2002)

drakhe said:
			
		

> *
> The scary thing is that outsourcing can only be profitable if the firm that handles the outsourcing can do the same job at a lower cost. What else is the point in outsourcing? Which in return means that quality HAS to drop!
> *




Not necessarily true.  One of the primary benefits of outsourcing is economy of scale.  Is a medium sized non-tech business going to hire the staff to set up and run it's own HR department?  The alternative is to pay another company to do it for them.  Theoretically all that outsourcing company has to do is add a small amount of additional capacity and staff to their current, established, systems and give their clients access.  The large outsourcing company can afford better equipment and software through volume licensing as well having significantly smaller implementation cost, thus providing more features for a lower price.

Why should a company in the publishing business (or almost any other business for that matter) require IT expertise to keep running?


----------



## Coreyartus (Sep 7, 2002)

*The Quandry*

I have just spent the last couple of hours reviewing this thread, and I think I finally realized something.  

Think about this:

I work in the arts.  Theatre to be exact.  There has been a long-running debate on the national level that business practices have killed artistic expression, that a good theatre is not measured by how much profit it makes but by it's social impact and presence as an honored and valued institution in it's community that enlightens the citizens in an entertaining and thought-provoking way, raising the quality of their lives.  The idea is that simply determining the success or failure of an arts institution by the business standards of profit/loss is stupid:  that's not what art is about.

By extension, I have come to see that almost everything in our lives (including our beloved game) has become infiltrated by profit/loss standards of measurement, or some other neo-business ethics...  New projects, different ideas, original thoughts are quashed/celebrated based on their cost effectiveness and convenience.  Too expensive to produce a new book?  Chop out a couple chapters and then we can talk.  What about 18 songs on the CD instead of 15?  Sorry, too expensive.   But make sure you get it done by June because we will maximize our profits if we can make the Christmas rush...  Who cares if you can't find a ski cap in January because all of the stores are now carrying their spring lines?  But do we really need to purchase Christmas ornaments in September?  Or, on the extreme end, we couldn't possibly afford to produce that life-saving cancer drug because our profit margins wouldn't be big enough for our stock-holders.  And your nephew will just have to suffer because the insurance company won't pay for that ear surgery.

My point is (and I'm sorry if I lost some of you), way way WAY too many decisions in our lives are already made for us due to business ethics of profit/loss.  And as gamers, it sticks-in-our-craws that a major source of our entertainment is being undermined by a business that can't see anything except in terms of larger profit margins.  What is really as issue here is that we feel our game has become simply a product to be shunted around from company to company, and that's not how we feel about it on a personal level.  D&D is a major part of our lives, and it hurts to see that the company who controls it doesn't feel the same way.  Simply put, it's a product owned by an impersonal company that will never see it from the personal perspective we all do.

My frustration, and I think a lot of you feel the same way, is that we are tired of seeing D&D treated as something we feel it shouldn't be.  To us, it's not simply a book to sell and make a profit from, and we yearn to see it in the hands of a smaller company that perhaps would feel the same way, approaching our hobby as we do:  a creative personal expression that allows us to have an entertaining social experience with friends.  

It's great when you can make a living doing art, but as any artist knows you don't do art to make a living: you do it because you have to--you simply don't have a choice.  I suspect some of us might think of D&D in the same way, and don't think twice about adding that great supplement to our long wish list of future purchases.   

And it's just plain sad what has happened to it.

--Coreyartus


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 7, 2002)

Zulkir said:
			
		

> *
> SRD is moving forward. Spells should go up soon. We have an intern dedicated to getting it finalized.
> 
> AV *



Well, make that intern sweat and have the remaining SRD sections (draft already provided by Ryan Dancey) finalized *yesterday.* And that includes the Vitality/Wound health system.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 7, 2002)

Staffan said:
			
		

> *
> Actually, WOTC definitely wasn't interested in killing off LUG or anything like that. It was more something like this:
> ...
> *




Thanx for the details, makes stuff a lot clearer.
Doesn't remove the potential though. Hasbro can still
sit on the license, chocking it to death. Lets just hope
there civilized about the whole deal.

Why am I so scared? Because its suits making the decision
and I've had bad expieriences before. A couple of yours ago
we were also bought by another larger company and they promised us NO CHANGES. Well, 5 years later: were bledding to death!


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: The Quandry*



			
				Coreyartus said:
			
		

> *It's great when you can make a living doing art, but as any artist knows you don't do art to make a living: you do it because you have to--you simply don't have a choice.  *




That is a beautiful sentiment.  I agree with it fully.

*



			And it's just plain sad what has happened to it.
		
Click to expand...


*
It's only happened when all D&D RPG products released are junk.  And that hasn't happened yet.  WotC may not be the publisher (or heck, maybe it will, it isn't like the current staff have been lobotimized), but the OGL/SRD will ensure that gaming will continue.  There are several fine companies out there that have good games.  I think we're covered.

Look, when some guy publishes a game about Confederate Dixies weilding laser swords and riding T-Rexes  -- under the D&D rules! --  that's a sign that everything is in good (if not weird) hands.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: The Quandry*



			
				Coreyartus said:
			
		

> *
> I have just spent the last couple of hours reviewing this thread, and I think I finally realized something.
> 
> Think about this:
> ...



True, but you still need money to fund your theater project and your time, especially when production crew and actors have bills to pay such as rent, electricity, grocery expenses, etc. It would you be great if you can cater to rich patrons who would be glad to grant you donation for the service you provide.




> *My point is (and I'm sorry if I lost some of you), way way WAY too many decisions in our lives are already made for us due to business ethics of profit/loss.  And as gamers, it sticks-in-our-craws that a major source of our entertainment is being undermined by a business that can't see anything except in terms of larger profit margins.  What is really as issue here is that we feel our game has become simply a product to be shunted around from company to company, and that's not how we feel about it on a personal level.  D&D is a major part of our lives, and it hurts to see that the company who controls it doesn't feel the same way.  Simply put, it's a product owned by an impersonal company that will never see it from the personal perspective we all do.*



True. But what can they do? Delay paying the printers? Postpone overhead payment? Hold employees' payroll until the money really start flowing in? When it comes to running a business it is never easy, trying to balance revenue with expenses and hope that in the end you have enough money to pay your employees so they can pay their bills (salary based on seniority and positions), and you have money to pay your bills.

After all, it would be cruel to pay a company's accountant the same salary as a mail clerk working in the basement.




> *My frustration, and I think a lot of you feel the same way, is that we are tired of seeing D&D treated as something we feel it shouldn't be.  To us, it's not simply a book to sell and make a profit from, and we yearn to see it in the hands of a smaller company that perhaps would feel the same way, approaching our hobby as we do:  a creative personal expression that allows us to have an entertaining social experience with friends.*



To us gamers, yes. But to those who make a career in writing those books and providing such thing to us, it's a business, and they have to treat it as such else they will no longer be in business. Now as a small company that may be great, but then you lose wider access to the distribution network. You also lose acccess to bigger funding from a parent company. Small company can still suffer the same problems as big corporation, although they may not have any backer.

Trust me, even the printing company don't give a damn. All they care is that the company pay the bill for their service (printing out the books).




> *It's great when you can make a living doing art, but as any artist knows you don't do art to make a living: you do it because you have to--you simply don't have a choice.  I suspect some of us might think of D&D in the same way, and don't think twice about adding that great supplement to our long wish list of future purchases.
> 
> And it's just plain sad what has happened to it.*



Which is probably why you'll find more starving artists who have no choice but to take a second job to make ends meet. If that's the career lifestyle you want, then knock yourself out.


----------



## Q1000 (Sep 7, 2002)

Its official, to many of you still live at home with your parants. 

This layoff is not an indication of the health of the hobby but it is an indication of the state of the union. If the economy is strong then I would be worried, but it is not. Look at the stock market, look how weak thiengs are.


----------



## coyote6 (Sep 7, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *An insistence that WotC is the only people worth buying from seems laughable to me.*




To me, too. OTOH, saying that WotC hasn't produced anything worth buying since the core books (or FRCS, or whatever) also seems laughable to me.




			
				drakhe said:
			
		

> *In the end nobody is actualy going to work for the firm they are doing the work for. In the end everybody is going to be outsourced.*




Read _/Slant/_, by Greg Bear.


----------



## Coreyartus (Sep 7, 2002)

Is there no one amongst us then, in all of our infinite geekness, that can convince "someone out there" to either: 1) purchase the D&D line from WotC/Hasbro, or 2) find someone who can be convinced to purchase it and run the company like any other hobby-inspired company instead of a mega-corporation?  

Let's face it, business has changed.  It's not about producing a product anymore that you can be proud of (and that people will buy because it's a quality piece)--it's about mass-production and getting rich quick.  Statistically, it's been proven (and I'm sorry I don't remember where I heard this) that business in the United States has changed overwhelmingly since World War II from item-producing companies to service-based industries that simply re-sell or market other products, skimming off the top.  We don't actually make anything anymore (it's all done overseas).  Why should Hasbro feel any pride in actually creating something when they can simply buy out the little business that happens to make what they want to sell and make huge profits mass-marketing it?  

I don't have much faith in Hasbro's business rationalizations for the recent layoffs or their past actions, based on the fact that they've proven over and over again they just don't care.  When the going get's tough, people and products are simply dispensible.  The size of the company dictates what their actions have to be, and a smaller company (run by people who do care) has more flexibility.  C'mon, look at the Great Depression, for example.  Thousands of companies didn't shut down because they weren't making ENOUGH profit, they simply weren't making profit period.  There's a big difference.  If a smaller company owned D&D, then a period of low profit margins might be more easily accepted because the people in charge (who actually know the industry) would understand that it's to be expected. The expectations of gargantuan mountains of profit simply aren't there, and they don't get lulled into a sense of unrealistic expectations when they do happen.  But Hasbro will never understand because they simply don't do business that way:  big business is quick, fast, dirty, and heartless.  In a word:  Greedy.  

How much profit does a company have to make?  Everyone who is reading this thread knows that the smaller d20 companies have proven life can be very comfortable in the shallow end of the pool.  It's simply a different mindset--why would anyone go into the RPG business with expectations of making the amount of money the 3E core books have made?  It can't happen!  Everyone knows that, so they don't over-extend themselves with a sense of false security, getting bigger than they should, causing problems down the road (like what's happening now with WotC).  Small RPG companies can't afford the risk!  So they simply don't.

Surely there is someone out there...  We've all grown up with this game, we're in our 30's and 40's (some of us)... Didn't any of us save any money?  Oh, no, wait--we all spent it buying stuff to play the game we love.  Shucks.

--Coreyartus


----------



## Thorin Stoutfoot (Sep 7, 2002)

Coreyartus said:
			
		

> *Surely there is someone out there...  We've all grown up with this game, we're in our 30's and 40's (some of us)... Didn't any of us save any money?  Oh, no, wait--we all spent it buying stuff to play the game we love.  Shucks.
> *



The kind of money you can save by bringing lunch to work and not eating out only saves about a quarter million to half a million dollars, at best, by the time you're in your 30s. Maybe if you got rich during the dot com era, you can afford to buy D&D ($50 million).

But to be honest, if I had $50 million and a modicum of business sense, I probably wouldn't invest it in RPGs. Tabletop RPGs just don't make very much money. Computer RPGs make a lot more money. Of course, the best is to start a company like Id software. 7 people, $500 million in revenues. Now that's something that returns value on investment.


----------



## Ezrael (Sep 7, 2002)

Actually, I have quite a bit of money saved. In fact, I feel kind of ashamed that as the economy slumps, I'm actually making money. But I don't have *nearly* enough cash to buy D&D from Hasbro. For all the talk of this being a small hobby, that the game is small potatoes to Hasbro, it's well and truly out of *my* reach. I don't have a trading card game making me millions I can use to get venture capital (or however Peter swung it) so that I can buy the D&D properties from a huge company that's demented enough that it puts statues of Mister Potato Head all over Rhode Island (it runs that state, I sometimes think, like it's own private fief) and rich enough to weather such insane behavior. I have no idea how much money D&D is worth, but it's got to be millions of dollars just for the licensing of the name for games like NWN and Icewind Dale II.

However, if enough of us got together, we could create an entity that *could* offer Hasbro sufficient money to buy the game...and it would be even easier to come up with enough money to do what Pazio did with Dragon and Dungeon, create a house that would run D&D autonomously. At least, my deluded brain seems to think it could be done.


----------



## Olive (Sep 7, 2002)

just so people know... the wizards boards are working. i can never figure out why people start acting like the world is over everytime the wizards boards go down!


----------



## Levekius (Sep 7, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *Levekius:
> 
> Posting direct personal insults is not only bad form, but could get this thread closed in very short order.*




Please, point to those personal insults. 

I just didn't buy his arguments and explained why.


----------



## AussieMoose (Sep 7, 2002)

*Bigger picture here...*

Please don't take this wrong here, but speaking of bigger pictures how bout remembering that Hasbro is in more than 1 country?

For instance, in little old Australia, Hasbro's WoTC dept only has approx 6 staff and last I checked 1 was a magic player - thats it.

Also, Hasbro plays the game in Australia by US rules, the Aussie market is quite different, yet they fail to recognise this and do things the way they are done in the US.

So if the US starts layoffs, restructures, product minimising, then Australia will soon be back to using Distributers, no market support, no offical presence etc. 

Mind you, they have never advertised the RPG sector at all as it is too small too bother about, cause no one has ever promoted it, cause.... talk about cycles.

So feel pity for small countries like Australia who have 6 WoTC people here, and no one from any other RPG company here. (unless there are some lately?) New Zealand and other countries have the same problem - Ass end of the world, if America sells well, we miss out totally until the 2nd or 3rd reprint. (not that bad of course)

RPG industry here has no say, no voice really. (No GenCon etc either)

My rant.  LOL


----------



## Levekius (Sep 7, 2002)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> *It's ironic (and a little sad) that you dismiss nostalgia and imply that I suffer from it, when you yourself are so drunk on it. Your belief that "In the old days, D&D was better... the RPG hobby was better" is nothing but the worst example of delusional nostalgia*




You won't ever find me saying that. In fact, my position is a bit similar to yours: D&D in its actual form is better than it has ever been (although I'll add the early days of OD&D were also great and a major success). 




> And what's with your anger toward Skip? Where'd that come from? Calm down, man.[/B]




There's no anger. I just think his name on a product is usually enough reason for me to *worry* about the content, instead of an incentive. He's awful.




> Look, I appreciate your humorous reply. It's clear you care about the game, and so do I. But please, if you want to argue, stop (unsuccessfully) trying to attack my examples of how D&D is better now than ever before, and instead provide examples of how D&D is worse than ever before.




I only pointed out what didn't make sense to me. Most of it still doesn't make sense. I couldn't point examples of how D&D is worse since it isn't, IMO. I just don't think there is a need to manipulate the truth to arrive at that conclusion. If you appreciate my humorous reply, it'd be better if you weren't calling me names either  

For the record: several roleplaying companies are able to produce books with much less erratas needed. (Others are even worse, but it is delusional to pretend WotC isn't in need of better playtesting/editing/proofreading) I think we can both recognize the merits of WotC without going overboard. For a company of this size, their editing ability is *abyssmal*. 

Master Tools *is* a WotC project. It is commissioned by them. It has been monitored and financed by WotC and it seems a *lot* of what went wrong is due to WotC's unwillingness to finance and back it appropriately. They do share responsibility for what went wrong and there was also a revoving door of people heading the project (Dancey was one of them for a while). It is very clear that WotC must share at least equal part of the blame for this one, no?

Master Tools is also but one example. Chainmail is another failure.
The instability at upper management is directly affecting WotC's ability to plan in the long term. Another recent example are the electronic version of older products. 



> EDIT: Actually, never mind. You win. Forget about it. I don't want this thread to morph into a 2e/3e debate or a war (see patrick's post above). Feel free to reply, or not. [/B]




I don't wanna win anything. There is no 2e/3e debate here because it seems we both agree that 3e is a better product, and it would be pathetic for a diehard 2e fan to lose time here, don't you think? 

The reason I'm debating with you (I am not here to systematically attack and destroy everything you have to say) is that I do not agree with some of the views you have expressed. 3e has a lot of good things going, and some things that can be worked on., There's always room for improvement and right now, WotC (though in big part because of Hasbro) do not have a clear plan and are not handling 3e as effectively as they could. Some things also need to be improved in the 3rd party publishing department.


----------



## Lizard (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: The Quandry*



			
				Coreyartus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Try eating 'creative personal expression'.

I notice that among all of these passionate suggestions for how to save D&D from the corporations, there is little, if any, talk of how much money YOU'RE willing to pay to keep the creators fed, clothed, and in something resembling a house while they avoid having their souls sullied by concerns of profit. Rather than talking boycotts, why not talk about setting up paypal accounts where those who believe games should be freed from corporate tyranny can DONATE MONEY so that all the creators who should be free to follow their muse unfettered by trivial concerns like 'will anyone actually BUY this?' can do so?

I also have to wonder what percentage of those on this thread bemoaning corporate greed have files on their hard drives from warez groups or P2P programs...

Let's propose a plan...

If you don't live in someplace like the Bay Area or NYC, you can live tolerably -- not well, not luxuriously, but tolerably -- for, let's say, 35K a year. If 1000 ENWorlders each contributed 35 dollars -- about the cost of one game book -- you could support one newly-fired WOTC staffer for one year. In return, said ex-staffer could place their creative work entirely under the OGL.

Is this going to happen? Hell no. Whining about other people's greed is one thing; ponying up YOUR OWN MONEY is something else.  (Nor do I know of anyone, offhand, who'd go for it, though I can't help but think someone would...from what I've seen, 35K is nice money in the game industry, though it would come sans health benefits, etc)


----------



## kreynolds (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> *I also have to wonder what percentage of those on this thread bemoaning corporate greed have files on their hard drives from warez groups or P2P programs... *




You should complete that statement with _"have files on their hard drives from warez groups or P2P programs...of products they *don't* own."_

I have a boat-load of them, but I own every single product that I have on my machine. It's about convenience, of having the books available on my laptop or desktop, indexed, searcheable, readily available at the push of a button, and especially when I'm away from my books. It's no different than Core Rules 2.0. Actually, there is a difference. Scanners are affordable these days. Back when Core Rules 2.0 was released, you'd have to give up your first born to get a scanner. 

Do I share them? Nope. Do I give them away? Nope. Do I have a right to make/have a copy of them for my personal use? Damn right I do.

Be careful with blanket statements like that. They only serve to piss people off.


----------



## TeaBee (Sep 7, 2002)

Ok, anyone want to start a pool for when the next heart-wrenching round of WotC layoffs will happen?

I'll say... February 14th. Because Hasbro has so much love to give...

Does anyone doubt that it will be "when" the layoff happens and not "if" it happens?


----------



## Maggan (Sep 7, 2002)

*Question and food for thought*

It's interesting reading everyone's opinions. I agree with some, and not with others. I guess being one of those evil ;-) guys who actually have been firing creative people to have me and my friends' web besign company survive these bad times when money aint pouring in, gives a somewhat different perspective on things. We're down from 17 to 8. And why? To be a more profitable AND creative company. Hey, some of you are thinking, that don't add up! Cutting creative talent is bad! Bad, I tell you!

Actually, not always.

Ok, WotC are firing people from the creative department. Sad, but IMO not proof of D&D going down.

Has anyone considered that WotC R&D might have been to big for its own good?

My question to all of you is: how many people do you feel need to be working in the creative department at an rpg company to produce a high quality rpg, such as D&D?

1?
5?
15?
20?

After all, Monte is doing his thing alone. With the help of Sue and some freelancers. They've released something like 6 good books.

How large is Necromancer Games? Clark and Bill, and a couple more, and some freelancers. They've released 11 books as far as I know.

Sword&Sorcery? Atlas Games? And so on... and WotC still has Chris Perkins, Bruce Cordell, Dave Noonan, Andy Collins, Ed Stark, Rich Baker, Charles Ryan, Michele Carter, Gwen Kestrel, Kim Mohan and James Wyatt on the board. As well as mister Tweet, even though he's not doing design at the moment.

That's at least eleven people. Compared to other companies this is a huge R&D department. But  compared to how big it's been, it seems small.

So, do I really have a point to make? I don't know, but IMO, a small and tightly knit creative department is probably better suited to produce good, solid, and consistent material, than a creative department made up of 30 or so odd people.

And WotC probably has at least something like 11000 people willing to work with them as freelancers, judging by the setting search result.

Ok, if I was head honcho, I would set things up like this:

WotC would keep a tight crew, one line editor/protector for each campaign setting and system (Greyhawk, FR, d20 Modern (I would consider dropping this lines though), Star Wars). Attach two designers/rules editors to each line editor, and create a central art/design department with one Art Director and a couple of good, solid in house artists. Farm everything else out to freelancers. These freelancers would not only be writers or designers, but proofreaders, playtesters, illustrators and whatnot, but the point is, use freelancers. And run a tight ship when it comes to creative direction. Settle for four major and four medium releases a year for core D&D, and two major and two medium releases for the other lines, and schedule a low but continuing level of web support for all product lines. (And then I'd hire Ryan Dancey to command the ship.)

I would leave the minor print releases and strange experiments (such as Nyambe, an excellent product, but a niche product if I ever saw one) to the d20 community.

This could, even should, tighten up quality control and make production cheaper. So, a smaller group might actually be the same as better games that cost less. Sounds good, eh?

And maybe, maybe, maybe, that's what WotC are doing? But I still can't figure out why Skip Williams had to go... maybe he failed the RPGA Dungeon Master test...? I know I did... 

Of course, cutting the creative strength of a company might kill it as well. But it doesn't have to be that way, if the cards are played right. We'll just have to see.

M. (watching the LotR DVD as I'm writing this, and it rocks!)


----------



## James Heard (Sep 7, 2002)

Okay, so being up late and curious I went to the Hasbro website to see what Hasbro was like in all it's enormity up close and personal. I noticed a few things that I thought would be interesting to everyone else that might be curious but not curious and struck by insomnia enough to go hunting down their curiosity:

1. Wizards of the Coast is always referred to by the things it makes: Pokemon and MTG. Except for in a small link in Games (that links to the Wizard's website), D&D might as well not be on their radar.

2. Not only are profits down, but they owe a billion dollars and change outstanding. At least I think that's what it said, but they don't teach us much about reading suit-speak in art school.

3. Profits are up because profits are down and they're selling off the properties that made them profit by re-aligning managers. That doesn't make much sense to me, but again - my business sense is mainly in "I wouldn't pay that much for this, but I'll surely try to sell it to you for that much".

4. I didn't know Avalon Hill was owned by Hasbro. I suppose thats why AH stopped making good wargames?

5. No contact information is possible with Hasbro on it's website that I could find. You can write them snail mail or you can phone them at office hours, but apparently they when they sold off their electronic games division they sold off anyone who could look at email?

6.There is no six, I just wanted to see if anyone was listening.

7. Most of the company newsletter thingee seemed to stress the declining profitabilities and volatilities of the toy market. Hasbro apparently lost money on Furby (after making a load), lost money on GI Joe (after making a load) and lost money on Pokemon (after..you get it). It reminds me of professional gamblers sort of, maybe thats the way the international toy market is though. I think if I were a multinational toy company I'd rather own Barbie though, if nothing else because my daughter really loves those things. Still. Amazing.

8. If all Wizards is in the minds of Hasbro execs is MtG and Pokemon (because they're faddish or still in the declines of a fad and that's what Hasbro really traffics it's properties on, not caring to play a steady hand when BIG MONEY can be had by just jumping around from slot to slot), then maybe soon they'll devalue WOTC enough that the property is buyable again by mismanagement. If they go, "All the real profit is in CCGs, lets strip D&D and maximize profits!" and then CCGs come out of their fads entirely - reducing profits then they'll be holding onto a company theoretically devoid of worth - the CCGs will be crap and the D&D will be crap and they'll be looking for a way to maximize their bottom line again like they were with their computer games division. 

9. Eight was really just me making an observation, if they have anything like this on the Hasbro website they're probably shredding it as we speak.

10. Learn to sleep. It's really good, and good for you.

JMH


----------



## Buttercup (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Try eating 'creative personal expression'.
> ...




Amen, brother.  In fact, threads complaining about the high price of RPG books surface regularly, and are usually filled with strident, up-the-organization ranters.  So here's what it comes down to:  I don't want to pay reasonable prices for products, but I don't want any staff to be fired because costs can't be covered.



> *
> I also have to wonder what percentage of those on this thread bemoaning corporate greed have files on their hard drives from warez groups or P2P programs...*




Again I say amen.  Why is it so hard to understand that products created by human beings have to be paid for, if you want to see similar products in future? And when did it start being ok to steal whatever intellectual property you want, just because you can?


----------



## Buttercup (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: There's a bigger picture here, IMHO...*



			
				Furn_Darkside said:
			
		

> *
> All sorts of eminently sensible things that will not make a whit of difference.
> *




Let's give up now, Furn.  It's hopeless.


----------



## Henry (Sep 7, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Well, make that intern sweat and have the remaining SRD sections (draft already provided by Ryan Dancey) finalized yesterday. And that includes the Vitality/Wound health system. *




Spoken like a true WotC CEO. 

Anthony - thanks for the responses. I know this is probably tough for you - I don't doubt you've got friends and acquaintences in the last layoff and, as a co-worker if nothing else, it is damned tough to watch someone you know walk out that front door and not return.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: There's a bigger picture here, IMHO...*



			
				Buttercup said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Let's give up now, Furn.  It's hopeless. *




*chuckle* You are correct, as always, but I am so enamored with hearing myself speak that I can not stop it.   

FD


----------



## Breakdaddy (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Buttercup said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Amen, brother.  In fact, threads complaining about the high price of RPG books surface regularly, and are usually filled with strident, up-the-organization ranters.  So here's what it comes down to:  I don't want to pay reasonable prices for products, but I don't want any staff to be fired because costs can't be covered.
> 
> ...




Intellectual property theft, is that like what an Illithid does to a human slave??? 
Actually, I find IP theft fun!


----------



## Lizard (Sep 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				kreynolds said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You should complete that statement with "have files on their hard drives from warez groups or P2P programs...of products they don't own."
> 
> *




Fair enough. I assumed that was implied.


----------



## Mobius (Sep 7, 2002)

> Try eating 'creative personal expression'.




You seem to be painting this situation as an either/or.  There is plenty of ground in the middle where comfortable profit is to be had while still making a decent product in alliance with your artistic principles.  In fact, that is how *most* business operates.  

If the US is anything like Canada, the vast bulk of the companies are small or medium business and are privately owned.  What this means, in general, for these companies is that the owner often still runs things, sees the products, meets the customers, etc.  This hands-on experience changes how he or she does business (for the better, IMO).

The absentee shareholder of the big corporation, though, has literally no connection to the company he owns a part of except for the annual statement he receives in the mail.  If he holds the company as part of a mutual fund, he doesn't even get that, but rather receives a statement lumping all his shares under an umbrella fund name.  If the shareholder is exceptionally civic-minded, he will attend the annual meeting, but this is very rare except when the company is in dire straits.

Does this affect how the company does business?  Of course it does.  In my opinion, ownership without responsibility breeds irresponsible corporations because the incentive to actually care about the workers and customers is gone.  You don't see them every day, meet them for golf, attend the company picnic with them, etc.  You certainly don't have any pride of ownership over the products because you don't have a hand in how they are made. 

The big business, in so many words, is just a big, impersonal, abstract, money-making tool to a shareholder.  Small business, though, is very personal, concrete and community minded in comparison.  

I don't think, then, that Coreyartus was necessarily against capitalism as a concept, but only a certain type of it that gets most of the press.


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 7, 2002)

*Mobius..*

You obviously don't understand what profit and thus price 
represent and they function in a market conomy. Price is a SIGNAL of aggregate preference. Let me make this simple for you, by maximizing profits a company is infact WHAT PEOPLE WANT AND IN AN EFFICIENT MANNER and thus increases the VALUE of an economy. There is a reason those small businesses you laud are small and appeal to a very limited market; they don't create what a large number of people want. That is fine for the individual entr who prefers that lifestyle, but to say it holds a societally more valued role that the cooperative enterprise is asinine.


----------



## Mobius (Sep 7, 2002)

> Let me make this simple for you, by maximizing profits a company is infact WHAT PEOPLE WANT AND IN AN EFFICIENT MANNER and thus increases the VALUE of an economy.




Thanks for simplifying that for me.  I would have never gotten that on my own. 

What about marketing and branding, then?  The actual value of the products isn't increased at all.  The  efficiency of the company certainly isn't increased, either.  When you walk into a shoe store and pay $120 for a pair of sneakers, ask yourself if what the market actually 'wants' is to pay that amount for a pair of $6 sneakers, or whether the desire to do so was artificially created through a good branding campaign.  When you run into companies practicing psychological warfare on their customers in order to increase their profits, your explanation of the market falls down.

It also points to a cogent aspect of humanity: value is a relative term.

Take, for example, the war that is playing out across Canada and the US right now, but which never makes the news.  Wal-Mart faces almost routine opposition in any town where they seek to install a store.  By your definition of selling what people want - judged solely by sales - Wal-Mart is a valuable commodity, so why the opposition?  Some people's perception of value is very different from the perception of value held by Wal-Mart, obviously.  Some look at the intangibles that Wal-Mart neglects to measure or openly disregards:

1. the net loss of jobs in the community
2. the loss of overall autonomy as owners become workers
3. the drop in the average wage  
4. the loss of locally circulating currency to a head office far away 

...all aspects of Wal-Mart moving into town, and they don't like what they see.

Judged by your criteria, Wal-Mart is a great company.  Judged by the criteria of its opponents, Wal-Mart is one of the worst.  Both judgements were based on a completely differing set of ideas towards 'value'.


----------



## Ezrael (Sep 7, 2002)

Mobius, that was one of the most restrained responses to a thinly-veiled personal attack I have ever seen. I just want to applaud you for that, and for a very cogent explanation as to why bigger isn't always better, even in business.


----------



## Buttercup (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Breakdaddy said:
			
		

> *Actually, I find IP theft fun!  *




Thank you for proving my point.  In my world, being a thief is nothing to be proud about.


----------



## bayne (Sep 8, 2002)

drakhe said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey, I can assure you that MOST people feel your way, but the decisions are mate by the suits and the suits DON'T to screw business and they definatly DON4T want to screw profit. That's just the whole deal.
> 
> ...




I can tell you never been in a management position in any company. The "suits" you describe are a fantasy.


----------



## Mobius (Sep 8, 2002)

Thanks, Ezrael, you made my day.



> The "suits" you describe are a fantasy.




What a pregnant statement!  You should elaborate on this one, I think, so that we all know what you know, too.  I, for one, am very interested to hear what you have to say ... and not in a negative tone, either.


----------



## Coreyartus (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*

"Why is it so hard to understand that products created by human beings have to be paid for, if you want to see similar products in future?"

I don't mind paying for what I like.  I don't mind paying a lot of money for it either--if I want it bad enough I'll find a way to get it.  What I'm angry about is the big-business need to manipulate that simple transaction of creating a product and then selling it with aritificial standards of measurement, mass-production and saturation of a market, regurgitating endless spin-off variations of the same product that water-down the original product's idea, and generally stepping in to "help".  Let it be.  

RPG's are a niche market.  D20 companies makes specific products for a specific group.  Why think of it as anything else?  Do the best you can with the realities of the situation, and don't puff yourself up to the point of inevitable collapse.  Smaller companies know their limits, know the industry, know what they can creatively accomplish, know their audience...  Hasbro simply doesn't and never will.  And no fill-in-the-dot product consumer return-by-mail card will ever tell them that.  And they aren't interested in learning.  Hasbro has let big-business ruin WotC, trampling through it like a bulldozer.  

I don't mind companies letting creative people go.  I don't mind companies growing.  What I do mind is companies that apply incorrect business standards and principles to an industry they know nothing about, and then turn around and blame the employees for not knowing how to play by rules that they were never responsible for establishing.  I don't think the creative types should suffer for the ignorance of their administrators.  And smaller companies are less likely to find themselves in that situation, because the risks are too great to get into it in the first place.

Yeah, I would contribute to some fund or company or whatever to "save D&D" if I actually felt that there was a heart to it.  But a company that starts out with the sole intention of making money as the priority over creating a product that is worth selling--well, that's what's got us into the economic slump America is in now.  The core of any business has to be either the product they sell or the service they provide.  Making money as the only goal of going into business can't cut it anymore, not in our society, and certainly not in business as a whole, and as these message boards attest certainly not in the RPG industry.  

--Coreyartus


----------



## JCLabelle (Sep 8, 2002)

Here is the cold, hard fact : 

No one is left at Hasbro that knows anything about GAMES.

The top level executives are all corporate DRONES, *I* along with half the posters of this message boards could do a far better job than any of the tools Hasbro share holders are trusting with billions of dollars.

Now, I can see your replys coming from a mile away.  "Managing a multi-billion dollars company is'nt as easy as it sounds" "It's great and all to know about gaming, but you need level-headed executives at the top of even a game company".

Both of those statements are true.  Unfortunately, the top level management at Hasbro does'nt get EITHER of those.  First of all, they CONSISTENTLY go for the _EASY_ route, putting out tired and old versions of decades old toys.  There is not one person among Hasbro's top level management who is willing to take any risk.  And that is KILLING the company.

The only thing the top-level management is interested in is the Company's bottom line.  Sounds good, right?  The management of a top level company should always be looking out for the bottom line, right?  Right.  But they should also be looking towards building strong, INNOVATIVE brands, especially in the case of a games & toys company.  That means investing money to build future strong intellectual properties.  That is something the company's top level execs are absolutely, completely incapable of doing.  Or even comprehending.  All they comprehend is _THIS QUARTER'S EARNINGS_.

Hell, I was supposed to be done by now, but I'm not done hammering those nails in the coffin.

A few years ago, Hasbro got rid of it's electronics game division, and sold the electronics rights to all their brands to Infogrammes ( Hasbro's top level execs would'nt be able to build a solid videogames & electronics games division if their lives depended on it .)  For the next 10 years or so.  TEN YEARS.  The future of toys & games is electronics.  But it made the balance sheet look good.  Short-mid term at least it does.  I doubt the company's leadership expects to be still around in 8 or so years when this deals finishes.

As one of the quoted people said on the front page, "Hasbro is intellectually bankrupt".

Solid game companies, in the long term, make money and grow because they can depend on a strong intellectual capital.  Old & supposedly 'dependable' brand names can help you hide your weaknesses for only so long.


----------



## drakhe (Sep 8, 2002)

bayne said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I can tell you never been in a management position in any company. The "suits" you describe are a fantasy. *




You're right, I have never been in management, but I assure you they exist!

Case in point: What is going on in the firm I work for (an international bank). Five years ago, we as a local branch of a European bank were bought up by this international bank. Originaly our new shareholder promised to leave us alone and let us "play" on our local market. Now five years down the line the shareholder is in trouble, costs have to be cut and the whole organisation (including local branches) have to be reorganised to be more efficient. We notice two major initiatives. For one, they are starting to dump (read outsource) anything they deem "not our core business". Even those departments that have been the core support for the whole of the bank since ages are targeted. Second thing we notice is centralisation of business. Especialy since a bank's business is completely electronic and there is no reason to have local presence (appart from comercial personel for consumer contact) in each and every vilage/town/province/country, the powers that be have decided to (amongst other things) move all IT to ONE giant IT center near to the main seat of the bank and to move certain services (for instance on a European level) to one country.

Now why am I so shure that these suits do exist? I work at IT and as you may have noticed, we're targeted by this reorganisation. All IT activity in my country is to be outsourced. And in several meetings we had over this, it has become very clear that the suits over at main seat HAVE NO CLUE WHATSOEVER what they are doing. They have NO IDEA what our software needs are and HAVE NO CLUE that (at least concerning bank operations) we are bound to our local legal obligations that differ considerably from legal obligations in the country the main seat of the bank is localised. They actualy proved it when one of the representatives of the main seat was invited to one of our meetings to explain to us why they decided the way they did. This person was very friendly but a) gave absolute proof that he didn't understand or even know ANYTHING ABOUT OUR LOCAL SITUATION AND BLIGATIONS and b) when asked questions HIS UNIVERSAL ANSWER WAS : I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS I DON'T KNOW YOUR LOCAL SITUATION OR LAWS!

Need anymore proof....


----------



## Xeriar (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Buttercup said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Thank you for proving my point.  In my world, being a thief is nothing to be proud about. *




There was a reason that software publishers picked up 'piracy' rather than calling it 'IP theft'.

IP Theft is industrial espionage, stealing implies that you deprive someone of something.  You are allowed, legally, to make copies of songs and movies for you family and 'normal circle of friends' (the whole of the Internet is not your friend, by the way 

That the RIAA and MPAA would paint the above as illegal and immoral is an act of deception, not pleading.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 8, 2002)

JCLabelle said:
			
		

> *Here is the cold, hard fact :
> 
> No one is left at Hasbro that knows anything about GAMES.
> 
> The top level executives are all corporate DRONES...  There is not one person among Hasbro's top level management who is willing to take any risk.*




JC, you know this because...?  Sure, it sounds dramatic and makes for a good sound bite, but unless you're personally acquainted with everyone in Hasbro's management I've got to think that you're just making this assertion up. That's a shame, because the hyperbole blunts the message you were trying to make.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Sep 8, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *
> 
> JC, you know this because...? *




Darn it- I had my whole response planned out while washing the car, but you covered it well enough.   

*chuckle*

FD


----------



## Lizard (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Xeriar said:
			
		

> *
> 
> There was a reason that software publishers picked up 'piracy' rather than calling it 'IP theft'.
> 
> ...




Can you please cite the relevant sections of US copyright law?

The Sony case (http://lamar.colostate.edu/~dvest/346/project/silos/BETACASE.HTML), which established the legality of VCRs, granted the right to record television programs for purposes of 'time shifting'. I believe other cases, involving software, have held that there is a right to make backup copies for personal use. In general, making copies of media for your own use has been held to be legal.

I have never heard of any cases cited which establish the right to make copies for your 'circle of friends'. How, precisely, was this term defined in the case? Which case was it? If it was not the result of a court decision, can you please cite the exact law? (Thomas, the online Congressional database, should be of use to you in this.)

I eagerly await your citation of "RIAA vs. Joe And Those Guys He Normally Hangs Out With". Thank you.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman (Sep 8, 2002)

For all those talking about how awful their managers are, I can say that although I've only worked in an office for two months of my life, I can confirm some of friends statements:

<b><u><i>Everything in Dilbert is true.</b></i></u>

Even the talking animals, but they keep them away from lower level grunt types.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Lizard said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Can you please cite the relevant sections of US copyright law?
> *




Keep this thread on topic, please. Branching off onto piracy issues is NOT on topic.

Thanks.


----------



## Nikchick (Sep 8, 2002)

Has anyone here read Toy Wars ?  

Nicole


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 8, 2002)

*Mobius...*

Your confusing the issue yet again...price represents what the aggregate MARKET feels is an efficient outcome. How many of those who are laid off find jobs in other pursuits within a the consumer sector. The data indicates most. Why is this. Because the economies of scale which you dismiss in Walmart and other larger chains increases the value of the dollar and thus increases the total purchasing power of the consumer. What isn't spent on one product is either funneled into another or is saved to fund asset expansion. Either increases labor demand. So the VALUE of the NATIONAL market is increased on all levels. A few may suffer, but the majority benefit. Outside of blatent violations of anti-trust statutes, market concentration is mostly a GOOD thing. You can point to a few personal/rhetorical exceptions to market value, but the only reason they don't express their preference in these terms is because THEY ARE SUCH A SMALL NICHE AS TO BE CROWDED OUT OF THE MARKET. Majority rules..don't you love capitalism? And this is coming from a tried and true Marxist. Those who express exceptions to capitalism usually simply trade in the market economy for the political economy..don't trust the rhetoric.

And what you term as psychological tricks, i.e. brand identity, is something that consumers want and are willing to pay for. Individual brands rise and fall, but it is a continuous factor in the American marketplace. Why? BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO FEEL A PART OF AN EXCLUSIVE OR INCLUSIVE GROUP AND ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT. Both sides profit and it is thus prato efficient, as there is no non-Normative policy that could increase the value to either side.


----------



## Falcmir (Sep 8, 2002)

I think history has shown that there isnt a large enough market for D&D products to make it's ownership more than an afterthought for a huge company like Hasbro.  Conversly a smaller company like TSR didnt have the resources necessary to continue publishing a significant amount of product.

What does this mean for the game and for the gaming industry?

Most likely it means fewer products coming out on a regular basis from Hasbro.  The game doesnt show a potential to explode in popularity, and developing extra sourcebooks for the game will not change that.  Therefore it doesnt make sense to continue to pay people to work on ideas that have a limited return.  They will still make money off of the rule books but the amount they make back on a guidebook that attracts a limited percentage within the gaming community is negligible.

The setting search contest seems like an attempt to develop an idea that may have a wider appeal.  They are looking for the new 'Toy' that will catch on with a larger segment of the population.  I think they're hoping to find something that will really hook on to the imagination of the public at large and by that draw more people into the role playing crowd.

The D&D movie was a flop but I wouldnt be surprised to see them try and develop a new one within a half dozen years.   One likely based on a new setting they've developed and have published a string of novels for, a game world, some kind of other game be it minis or ccg or maybe even a board game.
The chances of their success is questionable but it seems like a reasonable goal.

Somehow I cant see them letting the game fall apart and dont see the layoffs as any prediction of them abandoning the game.  
They have a strategy and even if it's a flawed one they have to realize the value of the product.   In a worse case scenario they stop developing new product and simply put out the rulebooks and continue to make money off of them.  They will continue to make money on it just as they make money on products like Monopoly or GI Joe or Barbie (not that Hasbro makes all these).


----------



## JCLabelle (Sep 8, 2002)

I was somewhat unfair in the first two paragraphs of my post, this is what it should have read like :

"Very, very few peoples are left at Hasbro that knows anything about GAMES.

The top level executives are mostly corporate DRONES... Execs among Hasbro's top level management willing to take any risk are ( at best ) few and far between."

I stand by the rest of my post.  I of course don't expect everyone will share my view of the company.


----------



## Staffan (Sep 8, 2002)

Falcmir said:
			
		

> *I think history has shown that there isnt a large enough market for D&D products to make it's ownership more than an afterthought for a huge company like Hasbro.  Conversly a smaller company like TSR didnt have the resources necessary to continue publishing a significant amount of product.
> *



Well, I think something like TSR or a bit smaller would be the optimum for owning D&D, sizewise that is (we can do without old TSR management). TSR failed mostly due to releasing *too much* stuff, effectively competing with themselves. They released a multitude of campaign settings, which divided the fan base between them which meant that each product had less potential buyers than they could have had.


----------



## jgbrowning (Sep 8, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry*



			
				Piratecat said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Keep this thread on topic, please. Branching off onto piracy issues is NOT on topic.
> 
> Thanks. *




Ahhhh..... but i was so looking forward to that response.  *sniff*  

we'll i guess i'll just listen to the guy ranting about hasbro, (a company that makes games) having no one at their company that knows anything about games.

joe b.


----------



## Falcmir (Sep 8, 2002)

> Well, I think something like TSR or a bit smaller would be the optimum for owning D&D, sizewise that is (we can do without old TSR management). TSR failed mostly due to releasing *too much* stuff, effectively competing with themselves. They released a multitude of campaign settings, which divided the fan base between them which meant that each product had less potential buyers than they could have had.




How does a small company putting out few products differ from a large company putting out a few products?  The large company ensures wider distribution of the few products they do put out since it will go in the same stores as the rest of their product, i.e. I've seen far more D&D books in book stores since WOTC took over than I ever did under TSR.


----------



## Staffan (Sep 8, 2002)

Falcmir said:
			
		

> *
> 
> How does a small company putting out few products differ from a large company putting out a few products?  The large company ensures wider distribution of the few products they do put out since it will go in the same stores as the rest of their product, i.e. I've seen far more D&D books in book stores since WOTC took over than I ever did under TSR. *



I don't mind WOTC owning D&D. I do mind Hasbro doing so. D&D is too small to register on the execs' radar other than as yet another toy to be profit-maximized. A smaller company who knows the RPG business better could take better care of D&D.


----------



## Rayston (Sep 8, 2002)

*Slashdotted*

The Recent news of the WotC layoffs was posted on slashdot. 

http://slashdot.org/articles/02/09/08/1716234.shtml?tid=127


Some Interesting comments there. 


Thanx

Rayston


----------



## Mobius (Sep 8, 2002)

> Your confusing the issue yet again...price represents what the aggregate MARKET feels is an efficient outcome.




Ah, but you are missing my point, too.  What the market 'feels' can be manipulated.  Propaganda works.  Advertising works.  If what the person actually wants can be manipulated, then the rock-solid predictability of the market can be shifted.  This is not a normal market situation any more when the producers can, to a certain extent, manipulate the desire for their products.



> The data indicates most.




But the data also shows that there is a loss in average income and a general move from ownership to being an employee, too.  Perhaps you should look at some research, albeit Canadian in focus:

www.research.ryerson.ca/research/job.html

The study shows a general decline in income for the majority of the population, while a small portion have seen a great increase.   Is landing a job after Wal-Mart decimates the town such a good thing when the job pays so much less than owning your own business?



> Because the economies of scale which you dismiss in Walmart and other larger chains increases the value of the dollar and thus increases the total purchasing power of the consumer.




If you are no longer employed or are now underemployed because of Wal-mart moving in, the increase in the purchasing power of the dollar is offset by the fact that you no longer have any dollars or do not have enough of them to make purchases.



> Either increases labor demand.




Explain this please.  More money for loan does not directly correlate with an increase in the demand for labour - with all the higgery-jiggery in the stock scene, there are plenty of ways to earn interest without having to invest in a venture that actually employs people.  Soros made millions off of currency speculation that didn't employ a single soul, for example.  Couple this with the increase in labour *supply* because there is a measurable net loss in jobs when a big business moves into a town, and I think that you are perhaps overstating your case.



> And what you term as psychological tricks, i.e. brand identity, is something that consumers want and are willing to pay for.




What they want is the feeling of inclusion.  This can get this from their family, their community, their sports team, their friends ... but branding gives them a supposedly easier option where to get into a group of 'committed athletes', all you have to do is buy NIKE.  To be on the forefront of technology, all you have to do is buy MS.  They don't have to actually *be* a committed athlete or be on the forefront of technology, but the product supposedly assures them that they are there.

Branding textbooks (I have literally read dozens) read like government propaganda textbooks from the old Soviet Union.  Why is manipulation of opinion considered acceptable when it is a company doing it and not when it is done by a government?



> Both sides profit




Huh?  I don't understand how paying $120 for a pair of $6 shoes benefits anyone but the producer.  Maybe, in some fantasy world, the shoes make the buyer feel more sporty, but they don't actually make the person more sporty, so they are getting sold a bill of goods that isn't there in truth.  Perhaps you could explain this further.

This debate is more than a bit off track, and my main point was that 'business as usual' is very different under Hasbro rather than when WotC was running things still stands.  Big business looks at the world differently than medium or small business.  Can we agree on that much?


----------



## Undead Pete (Sep 9, 2002)

*BLAH BLAH BLAH*

We all know that corporations suck.


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 9, 2002)

*Ok*

I can't debate with you if you continue to mistake your judgments for value. Regardless of how you feel about brand loyalty, it is something that the MAJORITY VALUES, thus rendering it an objective value. You are utilizing sentimental terms such as 'manipulate' and 'propoganda' to assert to devalue the market, but this is in fact YOUR JUDGEMENT, one that the majority obviously don't share.

How can i say this? Currency speculation is a GOOD THING. If anything, we need more of it. It helps to alleviate future scarcity. And in the case you sighted, it did increase jobs, as it raised the value of said currency and allowed for investment in a number of foreign markets.

And more money DOES correlate with labor demand. Every industry utilizes labor as an input, thus on aggregate, the more economic activity, the more labor neccesary to maintain production, asset maintance, etc. Now i would agree with the notion that labor often can't employ the oppurtunities presented it for a number of reasons, most notably a lack of mobility and general scarcity of human capital. But with a solid institutional basis, both of those problems can be remedied. But to assert that this makes the entire market-oriented system invalid is simply a stretch...


----------



## Enkhidu (Sep 9, 2002)

Anyone else feel like they're back in Economics 101?

This thread has certainly gone far afield...


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 9, 2002)

Enkhidu said:
			
		

> *Anyone else feel like they're back in Economics 101?
> *




Economics 101? Not really, but it does sound like freshman year.


----------



## jasamcarl (Sep 9, 2002)

*ha*

This is pretty remedial isn't it? But for some people even the basics are held suspect.


----------



## MulhorandSage (Sep 9, 2002)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Economics 101? Not really, but it does sound like freshman year. *




Actually, getting into heated economic discussions eventually turn nto something more reminiscent of religious debate.

Scott Bennie


----------



## bayne (Sep 9, 2002)

drakhe said:
			
		

> *
> What is going on in the firm I work for (an international bank). Five years ago, we as a local branch of a European bank were bought up by this international bank. Originaly our new shareholder promised to leave us alone and let us "play" on our local market. Now five years down the line the shareholder is in trouble, costs have to be cut and the whole organisation (including local branches) have to be reorganised to be more efficient.
> *




Things change, thats a fact of life. Nobody can predict the future. Your management staff aren't a bunch of evil suits just because they don't have ESP.  Maybe they should have bought the psionics handbook 




> *
> We notice two major initiatives. For one, they are starting to dump (read outsource) anything they deem "not our core business". Even those departments that have been the core support for the whole of the bank since ages are targeted. Second thing we notice is centralisation of business. Especialy since a bank's business is completely electronic and there is no reason to have local presence (appart from comercial personel for consumer contact) in each and every vilage/town/province/country, the powers that be have decided to (amongst other things) move all IT to ONE giant IT center near to the main seat of the bank and to move certain services (for instance on a European level) to one country.
> *




So, what are you saying - instead of trying to save the company your management should just ignore the problem? Perhaps you want them to fake their books like WorldCom or Enron until all the employees are really screwed?



> *
> Now why am I so shure that these suits do exist? I work at IT and as you may have noticed, we're targeted by this reorganisation. All IT activity in my country is to be outsourced. And in several meetings we had over this, it has become very clear that the suits over at main seat HAVE NO CLUE WHATSOEVER what they are doing. They have NO IDEA what our software needs are and HAVE NO CLUE that (at least concerning bank operations) we are bound to our local legal obligations that differ considerably from legal obligations in the country the main seat of the bank is localised. They actualy proved it when one of the representatives of the main seat was invited to one of our meetings to explain to us why they decided the way they did. This person was very friendly but a) gave absolute proof that he didn't understand or even know ANYTHING ABOUT OUR LOCAL SITUATION AND BLIGATIONS and b) when asked questions HIS UNIVERSAL ANSWER WAS : I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS I DON'T KNOW YOUR LOCAL SITUATION OR LAWS!
> *




Sad to say, this is most likely a failure on the part of your middle management to communicate these reqirements to upper management. 



> *
> Need anymore proof.... *




This does not constitute proof at all. Sure it is possible for management to make the wrong descisions, but that doesn't mean they are making the decision because they are evil suits. What it indicates is an organizational or procederal breakdown. Don't confuse being incompetant with being uncaring. Fortunatly, there are also excellent organizations in the world.


----------



## bayne (Sep 9, 2002)

Mobius said:
			
		

> *Thanks, Ezrael, you made my day.
> 
> 
> 
> What a pregnant statement!  You should elaborate on this one, I think, so that we all know what you know, too.  I, for one, am very interested to hear what you have to say ... and not in a negative tone, either. *





I am not a psychology expert by any stretch of the imagination, so this may not be phrased exactly correct, but I think you will get the idea. It's just that this is a classic case of people trying to explain away problems by blaming the "others". "The suits are not like us, they are a race of evil beancounters".  This is stereotyping, and stereotyping is very rarely accurate. The fact is people are people. Not all "suits" are evil. Are some of them "evil"? Sure, the CFO for WorldCom pretty much proved that one. That doesn't mean every other member of management is a member of the Abyss. I bet many of you know people at the other end of the spectrum who are just as devoid of morals (for example the people on this board who think is OK to steal electronic materials and give it to all their friends, thus stealing money out of the hands of other working people). 

I have been on both sides of downsizing. It is always painfull for both sides.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 9, 2002)

Time to shut this down.  Anyone who wishes to comment on the WotC layoffs in one of the other open threads - you remember, keeping the thread on topic - should feel free to do so.


----------

