# GTS 2009 D&D Seminar - the Rouse discusses D&D



## sunmaster

Hi,

I read this blog post :

http://www.livingdice.com/1639/gts-2009-dungeons-and-dragons-seminar

and thought that it would be interesting for this community.

I want to quote so that you don't have to go there but can just comment here:


> Scott Rouse D&D Sr. Brand Manager put on a one hour seminar regarding 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons. I am liveblogging, so forgive spelling errors.
> 2008 Global Brand Study US and Canada and part of Europe.
> Aided Awareness 89% (brand recognition)
> 80% WOW
> 89% D&D
> 54% have played D&D
> 94% think D&D is the same or better than other games (WOW, etc)
> 56%  of respondents have high interest in buying D&D products in the next six months
> For 2009 will continue to market to existing players and hope to have a halo effect on other new gamers. Three new titles for this year, MM2, PHB2, DMG2. There will be a greater focus on creating new game groups, either through creating new DMs or aid in organizing game groups.
> Focus on marketing to support the “2″ books. Game days, targeted advertising (primarily online), new D&D website, web strategy and community building are all part of the plan. The Penny-Arcade podcast drove 700k to the D&D website. Marketing will focus on bloggers and podcasters. PHB2 sold out in one week. More in stock on 4-30-09. D&D game day took took long to run encounters and paragon level PCs were a bad idea. Monster Manual 2 comes out May 19, 2009. Rust Monster and Frost Giant will be back. Divine Power’s PCs will be available for the next game day. DMG2 contains, traps, hazards and new locations. Robin Laws will have a chapter on storytelling in 4E. They have received feedback that the 4e game is a tactical wargame with limited role-playing.
> DMG2 game day will have players creating encounters and then playing them the same day in the store. More organized play, Delve Night, Game Days and Living ForgottenRealms. Delve Night numbers are fading, WOTC wants more stickiness to make players come back. Plans web-based DM/player game “meet-up” page. “Organized Play” rewards for new and veteran DMs. Training videos for new DMs, such as table management tips.
> “Dungeons and Dragons Insider” has doubled subscribers base since January. Overview of existing D&D Insider features. future applications include “Campaign Tools” for monsters, enounters, maps and adventures for DMs. “Eberron Player’s Guide” comes out 6-16-09.  “Eberron Campaign Guide” coues out 7-21-09. August “D&D Minis Dungeon Lords” with huge minis comes out. “E3rince of Undeath” module comes out 10-20-09. The final battle with Orcus! There were a few questions for retailers, but nothing notable. Will post more later tonight. I will also try to get the entire release schedule for this year and post it.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Good find, thanks a lot.


----------



## Blizzardb

Very interesting, thanks a lot! Here's some some XP


----------



## Piratecat

That's great. Thanks for reposting it!


----------



## Badwe

Exciting stuff, almost wish I could have listened to it myself.  Definitely like the sound of some of those things coming down the pipe.


----------



## Dire Bare

Good Stuff!  Thanks for  posting this.  While WotC made some serious missteps with 4e's launch, it looks to me like they have some solid and excellent plans to grow the game this year.  Specifically, I'm liking what I hear of their plans for the website.

My only remaining 4e unhappiness is that I can't purchase digital copies of the adventures they have put out so far . . . I held off purchasing the physical copies with the eventual intent of buying the PDFs.  Although I'm confident WotC will have some sort of digital distribution in place by late this year or early next (outside of the crunchy bits already on the Compendium).


----------



## Piratecat

I'll slide this into the temp forum for WotC policies.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Piratecat said:


> I'll slide this into the temp forum for WotC policies.




Eww, seems an odd place to put this. This is of more general value and I'm already accustomed to thinking of this forum as the "Bitch about PDF Policy" ghetto.

(Maybe it's just me-- but it's in the forum title after all.)


----------



## Harlekin

*Let's keep positive threads in open*



Wulf Ratbane said:


> Eww, seems an odd place to put this. This is of more general value and I'm already accustomed to thinking of this forum as the "Bitch about PDF Policy" ghetto.
> 
> (Maybe it's just me-- but it's in the forum title after all.)




I agree. Moving it into the ghetto will only associate it with the pdf issue.


----------



## Piratecat

Heh. 

I agree, it is more general interest. I'll slide it back.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

sunmaster said:


> Hi,
> 
> I read this blog post :
> 
> http://www.livingdice.com/1639/gts-2009-dungeons-and-dragons-seminar
> 
> and thought that it would be interesting for this community.
> 
> I want to quote so that you don't have to go there but can just comment here:





I will correct, expand, or further some of the notes taken in the live blog as I presented a ton of info in a short amount of time.

Overall our strategy for 2009 will be to continue to market to the existing D&D fans. Lapsed players, current players of other editions, and fans of the brand who participate in other ways like novels and video games. Our hope is that as D&D becomes a multi-generational brand with players now becoming moms & dads, the next generation starts being recruited with in existing playing families. we also will get some halo effect acquistion through our efforts focused on core fans. In 2010 we'll start to focus more on pure acquisition on non-players.

We are continuing to invest in expanding our Organized Play efforts including re-tool Delve night, 3 game days this year, and a new DM rewards program.

Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on bloggers, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media. Print will be minimal with some trade adversting and a few core magazines like KQ and Level Up.

We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet.

To clear up something on the PHB2 game day. We received feedback that the Paragon level play was a little too much for a game day event. This is not a concern that Paragon play has issues but in a limited time event with players (possibly newer players) using pre-gens of new classes this type of event maybe better using mid-tier heroic PCs.

Also, the MM2 game day will feature a pre-gen Paladin with preview content from Divine Power.

I'll add more later. I am going to watch Lost with my wife


----------



## Piratecat

Scott_Rouse said:


> To clear up something on the PHB2 game day. We received feedback that the Paragon level play was a little too much for a game day event. This is not a concern that Paragon play has issues but in a limited time event with players (possibly newer players) using pre-gens of new classes this type of event maybe better using mid-tier heroic PCs.



I just ran a lvl 12 playtest for a freelance project, and yeah - there was a big learning curve even amongst the experienced characters. It's a system that at higher levels seems to reward play over time, instead of a one-shot.

Thanks for expanding on these. Really interesting. You've managed to answer some of the strategy questions I wasn't able to fully nail down two weeks ago in that Q&A.


----------



## Keefe the Thief

I´ll second the thanks - very nice stuff, looking forward to DMG2. Its so refreshing to talk about the game once in a while and not get the usual anger and flames.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Scott_Rouse said:


> In 2010 we'll start to focus more on pure acquisition on non-players.



Can you give us any information on what this will entail? This sounds fascinating.




Scott_Rouse said:


> We really want to counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excellent chapter on storytelling in the DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Hommlet.



Great. I'm really looking forward to this. Robin Laws should sneak in an "Over the Edge" reference too (shhhh!)


----------



## Saracenus

Scott,

It has been mentioned that Sigil would be the mapped out city in DMG2. Can you let us know what product Village of Homlet will show up in? Or is that not on the schedule yet?

Thanks,



Scott_Rouse said:


> <SNIPY, SNIPY>
> We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet.
> <SNIPY, SNIPY>


----------



## Jack99

> The Penny-Arcade podcast drove 700k to the D&D website




If this means that 700k people came to wizards' website via a link on Penny Arcade, this sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Or is it just me?


----------



## Tuft

Scott_Rouse said:


> We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet.




I don't think even more "oh, that fluffy stuff only the DM reads" chapters will change that perception. 

I think what the game needs is cool non-combat stuff that draws the eyes of _players_, not DMs. When you build your characters, there should be abilities and capabilites that makes you go "Oh, I want to buy/use/try that!"; more skills/powers/rituals/magic items purely aimed at the non-wargame part of the game. Or rules for that sake, like an roleplay-focused advantage/disadvantage system or something. 

The article on Familiars in Dragon makes a good example. They had cool non-combat stuff they could do, and they had wonderful little roleplayable quirks listed.



The 4E rules set is the first rule set I encountered that I did not stop while leafing through and say "ooooh! I want to do that!" in regards to non-combat stuff... 

(I did not do that on combat stuff either, but that is because I've burned myself out on MMOs, and want table-top RPGs to provide what you _cannot_ get in a computer game.)


----------



## Kelon

Perhaps WotC should release  an adventure which focuses on interaction and mysteries and not mostly on tactical fights.
Only a fluff chapter in the DMG II will change nothing.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Scott_Rouse said:


> Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on bloggers, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media. Print will be minimal with some trade adversting and a few core magazines like KQ and Level Up.



So, how does Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles figure into this? (You watch that show, right?)

Aside from that, I am sure the writers of Kobold Quarterly and Level Up like the title of "core magazine". 

On an unrelated note - I wonder if there are any plans to find a new distributor in Germany? I am accustomed to using English books, but not everyone is, and certainly not newbies... 



> We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet.



Don't forget to add more such stuff in your adventures and your player-targeted stuff (PHB, <source> Power)


----------



## xechnao

Some questions:

1)
"2008 Global Brand Study US and Canada and part of Europe."
 "Aided Awareness 89% (brand recognition)"

-What does "global" stand here for? Also I would like to ask *what kind of people this survey reached*. Random, casual people? WOW subscribers? People who frequent certain web sites?    

2)
"80% WOW
 "89% D&D

-What was the question of this answers? I would guess if respondents know about or recognize what D&D or WoW stand for but I aint sure. Clarification would be nice.


----------



## xechnao

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> So, how does Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles figure into this? (You watch that show, right?)




Were there any references in the show?


----------



## Trolls

Nice find!

Looks like this confirms the release date swap for the EPG and the ECG, too.


----------



## ferratus

The one thing I'd like to know is if there is a 4e single-player module based video game in the works in the mold of Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights.

There are far too many classes I want to play, and far too little time in the next 10 years to play them on the tabletop.  Something I could do on my own time for an hour a night would be excellent.


----------



## xechnao

ferratus said:


> The one thing I'd like to know is if there is a 4e single-player module based video game in the works in the mold of Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights.
> 
> There are far too many classes I want to play, and far too little time in the next 10 years to play them on the tabletop.  Something I could do on my own time for an hour a night would be excellent.




The problem I see with video games and 4e is that AI could not be used to make a fun experience in the way Baldur's Gate did. 3e was a game based on resources and exploration, 4e is more chess like. Could they now create a solo video game that managed to provide a good experience with the 4e toolset? I think they would have to add other elements of resources to engage the player. Perhaps a game like _jagged alliance 2_ with big tactical maps where one combat could take place would be more suitable. But that would difficultly make a ground for some interesting story or plot development. It would make for a strategy game like jagged alliance, rather than a classic crpg game.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

xechnao said:


> Were there any references in the show?




One episode was called Dungeons & Dragons, in the latest episodes featured 



Spoiler



John Henry painting miniatures and later even playing a combat against various monster, including a Mind Flayer. He has shown the ability to roll whatever dice result he wants, making the Vorpal Sword he's using particularly overpowered.


----------



## Cadfan

Jack99 said:


> If this means that 700k people came to wizards' website via a link on Penny Arcade, this sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Or is it just me?



Its a lot of people objectively speaking, but Penny Arcade has been known to destroy websites by posting links to cool things, resulting in huge numbers of people accessing the site simultaneously and overwhelming it.  So the number doesn't surprise me.


----------



## avin

"new D&D website"

Yes, please. And merge RPGA database also.

"Robin Laws will have a chapter on storytelling in 4E. They have received feedback that the 4e game is a tactical wargame with limited role-playing"

As a 4E DM I salute you. While is a nice edition we're lacking a bit more of RP  and incentive. I mean no offense here, but I have seen lots of 4E enthusiasts saying it doesn't hinder RP but, for new players, it does, as combat is very cool and there's no XP for roleplaying... 

"future applications include “Campaign Tools” for monsters, enounters, maps and adventures for DMs"

Encounter Builder + Compendium + Easy Print.

"current players of other editions"

Compendium + Character Builder for older editions = tons of returning players.


----------



## JeffB

Scott_Rouse said:


> We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system.




I've never understood this thinking either. But I've never run alot of combat in D&D whether it was the LBBs I started with or 4E. I think another thing that would help Scott is really pushing out the utility powers and rituals for the spellcasters- in particular utility powers that can be used creatively in combat if you have a clever player-not blasts and rays, and such.



> I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways including a 4e version of Village of Homlet.




 excellent. Homlett is always a win. Will this be in in the DMG2? or is this a separate product?  

I would also suggest that the RP element not only needs to be "pushed" in the DMG2, but also WOTC published adventure material. I've avoided the WOTC adventures because of the "long string of combat encounters" style- I've exclusively spent my money with Goodman, as they are combining great story lines/plots, fun encounter areas and classic D&D feel (check out Isle of the Sea Drake, e.g)

Sounds like all good news Scott- Thanks!


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Scott_Rouse said:


> Overall our strategy for 2009 will be to continue to market to the existing D&D fans. Lapsed players, current players of other editions, and fans of the brand who participate in other ways like novels and video games.




I think you wanted a colon there. You're saying that "existing D&D fans" = lapsed players, players of other editions, and fans of the brand. 



> We also will get some halo effect acquistion through our efforts focused on core fans.




Who are the core fans? Does this mean current 4e players?

Am I understanding correctly that lapsed/prior edition fans aren't currently considered core?



> Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on bloggers, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media. Print will be minimal with some trade adversting and a few core magazines like KQ and Level Up.




Sounds good to me! Go where the geeks are. 



> We really want top counter the perception that D&D is a tactical, combat focused war game. We want to show off the roleplaying potential with the system. I have been told Robin has written an excelennt chapter on storytelling inthe DMG 2 and we hope to demonstrate the RP potential of the system in other ways.




Hmm. I would not have guessed that among brand fans, the perception that it was a tactical combat game was the problem. D&D has _always _been a tactical combat game. I think 4e certainly highlighted/enhanced that existing "core brand experience."

Was there marketing research specifically to lapsed/prior edition players to find out why they did not adopt 4e? I didn't see anything here at ENworld. Is there a bigger, more accessible pool of "brand fans" who are not 4e adopters?

I'd like to know what's holding them back, and my guess is that the predominant reason is that 4e "breaks with the traditions of prior editions."

"Lots of cool, evocative tactical combat" is the one tradition 4e delivered in spades. 

In my opinion, it's not that the _play _feels different, it's that the _world _feels different. 



Kelon said:


> A fluff chapter in the DMG II will change nothing.




With all due respect, and much props to Robin Laws-- especially when Robin Laws is writing it. Robin could convince folks to play chess as an RPG.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

TarionzCousin said:


> Can you give us any information on what this will entail? This sounds fascinating.
> 
> 
> Great. I'm really looking forward to this. Robin Laws should sneak in an "Over the Edge" reference too (shhhh!)




This tends to be broader reaching media, likely aimed at younger video game players. The messaging is typically different based on the demographic. We have not solidified any plans on this as of yet. Our 2010 marketing planning won't start until mid 2009.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Saracenus said:


> Scott,
> 
> It has been mentioned that Sigil would be the mapped out city in DMG2. Can you let us know what product Village of Homlet will show up in? Or is that not on the schedule yet?
> 
> Thanks,




Nothing announced yet. TBA soon


----------



## haaz

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on bloggers, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media. Print will be minimal with some trade adversting and a few core magazines like KQ and Level Up.




Any word on a "new" fansite policy ?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Tuft said:


> I don't think even more "oh, that fluffy stuff only the DM reads" chapters will change that perception.
> 
> I think what the game needs is cool non-combat stuff that draws the eyes of _players_, not DMs. When you build your characters, there should be abilities and capabilites that makes you go "Oh, I want to buy/use/try that!"; more skills/powers/rituals/magic items purely aimed at the non-wargame part of the game. Or rules for that sake, like an roleplay-focused advantage/disadvantage system or something.
> 
> The article on Familiars in Dragon makes a good example. They had cool non-combat stuff they could do, and they had wonderful little roleplayable quirks listed.
> 
> 
> 
> The 4E rules set is the first rule set I encountered that I did not stop while leafing through and say "ooooh! I want to do that!" in regards to non-combat stuff...
> 
> (I did not do that on combat stuff either, but that is because I've burned myself out on MMOs, and want table-top RPGs to provide what you _cannot_ get in a computer game.)




Good advice here. One chapter in a book won't change that perception. I would love to see some more RP type modules like the original Ravenloft.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> So, how does Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles figure into this? (You watch that show, right?)




I don't watch the show, except for those episodes. Sara Girard on my team coordinated that product placement. It was great!



> Aside from that, I am sure the writers of Kobold Quarterly and Level Up like the title of "core magazine".



 We you core to refer to "non-mass market" as in core hobby.


> On an unrelated note - I wonder if there are any plans to find a new distributor in Germany? I am accustomed to using English books, but not everyone is, and certainly not newbies...




yes we are in active negotiations with a new German publishing partner




> Don't forget to add more such stuff in your adventures and your player-targeted stuff (PHB, <source> Power)




OK


----------



## Hawke

Scott_Rouse said:


> This tends to be broader reaching media, likely aimed at younger video game players.




From the get-go I've felt that 4E has the easiest conversion to a videogame. Manipulation of a set of basic states and very clear movement information seems like it would be much easier to setup than 3.5 was for NWN. I'm surprised that a year later we haven't seen any game companies announce a 4E style game. I wonder if there's something in the works or if wotc specifically decided to hold off and focus on their core product for a while?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

xechnao said:


> Some questions:
> 
> 1)
> "2008 Global Brand Study US and Canada and part of Europe."
> "Aided Awareness 89% (brand recognition)"
> 
> -What does "global" stand here for? Also I would like to ask *what kind of people this survey reached*. Random, casual people? WOW subscribers? People who frequent certain web sites?




It was a nationally representative study that surveyed USA, Canada, UK, Australia, Spain, Italy, Germany, & France

Without looking at the survey again I don't recall the exact filtering methodology.  I recall there was some filtering by demographic (mostly age) and I believe they had to play video games.



> 2)
> "80% WOW
> "89% D&D
> 
> -What was the question of this answers? I would guess if respondents know about or recognize what D&D or WoW stand for but I aint sure. Clarification would be nice.




This was an aided awareness question. Do you recognize one of these Roleplaying games with a list provided.

89% recalled Dungeons & Dragons
80% recalled World of Warcraft

To be expected on a game with 35 years of equity but still nice to see since Wow has such a big presence in the game category


----------



## Imaro

@Scott:  

First let me commend you on recognizing that some people have an issue as far as 4e goes and it's very tactical combat centric nature.  I think some people are confusing the issue, I don't think people necessarily don't want combat to be tactical... but want a robust system that handles things outside of combat in an interesting way as well.  Many are equating it with an either/or thing... when it doesn't have to be.

Quick question, if you have time ... will there be, outside of DDI anything to address the various issues many (even core fans) are having with skill challenges?  I understand Mike Mearls is addressing it through DDI.. but that's only reaching a small subset of those who bought 4e.  I really think, if done right, skill challenges could be one of the major ways to address the whole "wargame" complaint about D&D 4e.  For inspiration I would suggest looking at Exalted as well as the social rules in Requiem for Rome.  

Create powers that can influence skill challenges in a narrative way (and make their cost separate from combat powers, maybe based on skill ranks or something.)...as an example something like a power name "Luck o' the Irish" that allows you to happen to "find" an item ina scene that gives the PC a bonus on his next skill roll... Or a power called "With Style Chere...With Style." (Heavily inspired by Gambit of the X-Men ) Where if your skill check is below a certain number, and others are watching, you get to roll again and keep the higher of the two.  Hey I wouldn't mind coming up with something like this for a Dragon article... though I'm not sure where the current guidelines for submitting actually are.  Anyway just a couple of suggestions.


----------



## davethegame

Scott_Rouse said:


> Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on *bloggers*, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media.




I fully approve of this!


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Wulf Ratbane said:


> I think you wanted a colon there. You're saying that "existing D&D fans" = lapsed players, players of other editions, and fans of the brand.



Yes, typed in haste. D&D Fans: lapsed players (played but stopped typically due to a file change like starting a career), current players of older editions (e.g. OD&D *cough* Dialgo *cough*), novels readers (FR, Dragonlance etc), and people who have interacted in other ways like video games. Basically people who we don't need to explain what D&D is.




> Who are the core fans? Does this mean current 4e players?



People who play D&D or read D&D novels




> Am I understanding correctly that lapsed/prior edition fans aren't currently considered core?



No, I would say a core fan is someone who is actively engaged with the brand in some way. Reading books, playing games, etc.




> Sounds good to me! Go where the geeks are.



Yep




> Hmm. I would not have guessed that among brand fans, the perception that it was a tactical combat game was the problem. D&D has _always _been a tactical combat game. I think 4e certainly highlighted/enhanced that existing "core brand experience."



Combat is a key element of D&D for certain. After all, it is "Kick in the door, kill the monster, take it's stuff" but RP is also part of the game. Personally, I don't buy the rules for roleplaying argument (don't pounce on this and start an edition war) but perception is reality and if people believe that they we need to manage to alter that perception.  



> Was there marketing research specifically to lapsed/prior edition players to find out why they did not adopt 4e? I didn't see anything here at ENworld. Is there a bigger, more accessible pool of "brand fans" who are not 4e adopters?



Yes this was studied and cotinues to be studied



> I'd like to know what's holding them back, and my guess is that the predominant reason is that 4e "breaks with the traditions of prior editions."



I would like to know this too. I think it comes down to many reasons like personal preference on a system, some people don't like or feel the need for change. 3.5 was a good game system that people are happy to keep playing, etc. There is no silver bullet answer that will suddenly get people to drop hatthey are doing and start playing 4e so wee need to appraoch it from many angles. 



> "Lots of cool, evocative tactical combat" is the one tradition 4e delivered in spades.
> 
> In my opinion, it's not that the _play _feels different, it's that the _world _feels different.



Thanks for making my point above. Someone else will tell me a different reason





> With all due respect, and much props to Robin Laws-- especially when Robin Laws is writing it. Robin could convince folks to play chess as an RPG.



Then DMG2 should rock your socks off!


----------



## GnomeWorks

Scott_Rouse said:


> After all, it is "Kick in the door, kill the monster, take it's stuff"...




This attitude is why I don't care for the new edition.

Some folks play this way, and that's fine - it _should_ be a supported approach to the game.

But if I want to play that way, I'll go play WoW.


----------



## Piratecat

GnomeWorks said:


> This attitude is why I don't care for the new edition.



With respect, I'd strongly argue that this was also the attitude with OD&D, 1e, 3e and 3.5e. (2e tended towards more story-based railroads when it came to the modules, IMO.) It's hardly new.


----------



## JoeGKushner

Piratecat said:


> With respect, I'd strongly argue that this was also the attitude with OD&D, 1e, 3e and 3.5e. (2e tended towards more story-based railroads when it came to the modules, IMO.) It's hardly new.




And that would be a winning arguement. 4e did not create the... dare I say it? Dare I use the old chestnut? "Kill it and take it's stuff." motto.


----------



## Imaro

Piratecat said:


> With respect, I'd strongly argue that this was also the attitude with OD&D, 1e, 3e and 3.5e. (2e tended towards more story-based railroads when it came to the modules, IMO.) It's hardly new.







JoeGKushner said:


> And that would be a winning arguement. 4e did not create the... dare I say it? Dare I use the old chestnut? "Kill it and take it's stuff." motto.





Yes, but what I think both of you are missing is that... "It's always been like that." becomes less and less of an argument with any validity as people gain easier access to other rpg's.  I mean honestly I remember when D&D was the only rpg I knew about... but that time has long since passed and I tend to compare D&D, at least when it comes to my money, with a much wider range of games now.  

In other words doing the same thing over and over again, because we did it last time will probably, slowly but eventually, loose WotC a significant portion of their customers (especially as I have the last edition where you gave me the exact same gameplay experience as before.) as they discover other games that meet their needs better or just accomodate a wider variety of desires.  One of the reasons, amongst many, I enjoy Reign more than D&D is esoteric disciplines.  Not only does Reign give me special combat maneuvers... but it gives me ancient secrets (special maneuvers and knowledge) with skills as well.  D&D 4e could have easily done this with the 4e power structure... but they didn't and thus Reign offers me tactical combat and an interesting system for skills, while 4e doesn't... all IMO of course.

In the end the game should evolve, not just in it's presentation and media (DDI) but also in what it offers in gameplay. I think a prime example of this is when you look at SWSE vs. D&D 3.5, the addition of talents evolved the game into a direction where character concepts outside of combat had interesting choices and advantages.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

A word of caution from me, if people are going to turn this into another edition war thread I will not participate.

I am more than happy to answer questions but i don't want to debate the merits of one system over another.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Scott_Rouse said:


> Our marketing efforts will focus mostly on core hobby media and less on mass type media. This will include a focus on *bloggers*, podcasts, core RPG sites, and more "viral" web based media. Print will be minimal with some trade adversting and a few core magazines like KQ and Level Up.




I would like to note that MichaelSomething's blog is willing and able to preview any and all material you're willing to send!  A power, magic item, or even the first ten words of a book or just the number of pages it has!


----------



## alleynbard

I saw Village of Hommlet, 4e, and my brain exploded.  I read the rest of the thread but it all seems hazy and indistinct. 


Actually, I am very excited about the Robin Laws essay on storytelling. While I have never needed a game to tell me how to roleplay and I never really put much stock in the "tactical board game" argument", I am happy that Wizards is making efforts to bridge that gap.  Kudos!

Besides, anything written by Robin Laws is pure, DMing gold.


----------



## ferratus

I'm really glad that the electronic initiatives will continue to be a part of the 4e strategy.  The character builder is probably the easiest way to get someone into the hobby who has not played 4e before.  Reading the rulebooks is often too much of a barrier to people wanting to try it out, but going through the character builder is a good way to allow a new player to build a character, step by step, with all the latest options.  

It also keeps me very interested in the latest developments of D&D.  I've never been one to buy the 3e splatbooks, because I could never justify spending 20-30 dollars for one prestige class or one set of rules I liked.  I am perfectly happy though to pay a subscription and have access to all the rules I'm interested in _at the moment_.  When you factor in that it has new adventures and fluff articles included, I'm one happy customer.


----------



## Nikosandros

Imaro said:


> @Scott:
> 
> First let me commend you on recognizing that some people have an issue as far as 4e goes and it's very tactical combat centric nature.  I think some people are confusing the issue, I don't think people necessarily don't want combat to be tactical... but want a robust system that handles things outside of combat in an interesting way as well.  Many are equating it with an either/or thing... when it doesn't have to be.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Create powers that can influence skill challenges in a narrative way [...]




I agree. The classes, paragon paths and epic destinies all have nice fluff, but for the out of combat stuff often I have the feeling that there is little or no mechanical support for that fluff.

Just to make two examples with paragon paths, if I am a pathfinder or a master spy, I would expect some kind of mechanical support that shows in game how awesome I am at leading others through the desert of doom or at infiltrating the cabal that conspires against the king...


----------



## The Ghost

Imaro said:


> I mean honestly I remember when D&D was the only rpg I knew about... but that time has long since passed and I tend to compare D&D, at least when it comes to my money, with a much wider range of games now.




Agreed. Once upon a time D&D was all I knew. Now, it is competing against its previous incarnations, against other pen-and-paper RPGs, and against computer and console-based RPGs. What is it about this new edition that should "wow!" me? Why should I spend my money on it?

Among the people in my gaming group, we do perceive this edition to be a very good miniatures game and a fairly average RPG. If this rules set where placed in a product similar to Descent I would be very interested in buying. However, as an RPG it does not really interest me.

Edit: Just read Scott's post. I do not mean this to be critical of the new edition. Just saying how I would buy into the brand.


----------



## PeelSeel2

Scott,

I am not blogging yet.  Send me a copy of the New Village of Homlet and I will start one up .

T1-4 was a great campaign and we had MANY hours of fun with it.

Scott A.


----------



## Quickleaf

Robin Laws? Wow, I'm even more excited about the DMG2 than I was before. 



The Ghost said:


> Among the people in my gaming group, we do perceive this edition to be a very good miniatures game and a fairly average RPG.



Several folks in my group (the more story-oriented folks) also have this perception. We're just switching to 4e now, but they raise some really good points. Here are their perceptions:

* There's little flavor text for monsters, prestige classes (paragon paths), etc. This makes it harder to find inspiration when creating a character or depicting a monster. 

* The game doesn't facilitate playing without miniatures (it's hard to do with all the forced movement powers). _Perhaps a small section in DMG2 could address running short combats without breaking out miniatures?_

* Feats are almost exclusively combat-focused - for example, there are no social feats. _When I wrote Caliphate Nights this was one of the trends I was trying to break, by deliberately making the most powerful feats non-combat based, so players would be taking feats like True Faith and Virtuous to play to the genre._

* Published adventures focus on tactical wargaming aspects, not role-playing. Even if we don't use published adventures, it reveals a mindset of the design team. _I always thought it was funny that physical spaces were the only ones that got mapped in D&D. It would be interesting to find in Dungeon an adventure map of relationships, events, and reactions._


----------



## Piratecat

Scott_Rouse said:


> A word of caution from me, if people are going to turn this into another edition war thread I will not participate.



I think I have to take the responsibility for starting a sidetrack. Sorry folks. Back on track, please.


----------



## Hereticus

Scott_Rouse said:


> A word of caution from me, if people are going to turn this into another edition war thread I will not participate.
> 
> I am more than happy to answer questions but I don't want to debate the merits of one system over another.




Scott,
I'm sure you remember Coca Cola's issue when they introduced fourth edition Coke back in 1985.

Some people did not like it, so Coke had the genius idea of selling both New Coke and Coke Classic, and sold more because of it.

I wonder if WotC would consider supporting third and fourth editions as two separate games?

They really are different enough to be two completely different systems that appeals to two different groups (with some overlap).

Thank you,

Hereticus


----------



## Remathilis

[sblock=I haven't removed your post, but it's in a sblock. Please see my caution about sidetracking the thread. ~ PCat]







Imaro said:


> Yes, but what I think both of you are missing is that... "It's always been like that." becomes less and less of an argument with any validity as people gain easier access to other rpg's.  I mean honestly I remember when D&D was the only rpg I knew about... but that time has long since passed and I tend to compare D&D, at least when it comes to my money, with a much wider range of games now.




Heh, tell that to the people still complaining about removal of the Vancian casting system.

D&D has always had a strong tendency to "combat first, everything else second" Sure, plenty of us played D&D with less reliance on dungeons and more on other types of adventures (mysteries, social encounters) but the rules have always been flimsy on it. Clever DMs either didn't bother with rules for RP, or they created them on the spot.

Pop quiz: How many pages in the AD&D1e PHB are devoted to a non-combat skill system? How many are devoted to obscure pole-arms? Case. In. Point.



Imaro said:


> In other words doing the same thing over and over again, because we did it last time will probably, slowly but eventually, loose WotC a significant portion of their customers (especially as I have the last edition where you gave me the exact same gameplay experience as before.) as they discover other games that meet their needs better or just accommodate a wider variety of desires.  One of the reasons, amongst many, I enjoy Reign more than D&D is esoteric disciplines.  Not only does Reign give me special combat maneuvers... but it gives me ancient secrets (special maneuvers and knowledge) with skills as well.  D&D 4e could have easily done this with the 4e power structure... but they didn't and thus Reign offers me tactical combat and an interesting system for skills, while 4e doesn't... all IMO of course.




See, I don't buy that. 3e promised a "return to the dungeon" feel. Necromancer games and Goodman's DCCs (two of the top sellers in 3PP) sold themselves on that 1e dungeon crawl feel. There are retro-clones all over the place promising that feel of late 70's game play. I don't foresee D&D's primary playstyle (dungeons) fading anytime soon.



Imaro said:


> In the end the game should evolve, not just in it's presentation and media (DDI) but also in what it offers in gameplay. I think a prime example of this is when you look at SWSE vs. D&D 3.5, the addition of talents evolved the game into a direction where character concepts outside of combat had interesting choices and advantages.




Are you talking about Saga edition? Where your non-combat related feats consist of skill focus, linguist, and skill training? Its nearly impossible to build a Saga PC that can't kick-ass in combat! (Then again, this is Star Wars were senators are crack-shots and the Imperial Chancellor is a Sith Lord, so...)

I just don't see D&D's emphasis on combat being a primary focus going away in any edition. Its too central to D&D's identity.[/sblock]


----------



## GnomeWorks

Scott_Rouse said:


> A word of caution from me, if people are going to turn this into another edition war thread I will not participate.




It's not an edition war. It's an attempt to engage what you are saying.



			
				Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> There is no silver bullet answer that will suddenly get people to drop hatthey are doing and start playing 4e so wee need to appraoch it from many angles.




I don't play 4e because I perceive it as only supporting a "kick in the door, kill things and take their stuff" approach to the game. From your perspective, whether or not 4e supports styles other than that at this moment is irrelevant - _my perception is that it does not_, and thus I will find something else on which to spend my money.


----------



## Piratecat

Do not sidetrack the thread into edition discussion, please.


----------



## tuxgeo

Jack99 said:


> The Penny-Arcade podcast drove 700k to the D&D website
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this means that 700k people came to wizards' website via a link on Penny Arcade, this sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Or is it just me?
Click to expand...


Do the numbers of people that came to the website from PvP and Will Wheaton's blog compare, or are they relatively insignificant? 
(Photos might help the podcasts, as well; the only photo I found was one taken at PAX 2008 by Kiko, linked from Will's blog.)


----------



## Imaro

Remathilis said:


> [sblock=I haven't removed your post, but it's in a sblock. Please see my caution about sidetracking the thread. ~ PCat]
> 
> Heh, tell that to the people still complaining about removal of the Vancian casting system.
> 
> D&D has always had a strong tendency to "combat first, everything else second" Sure, plenty of us played D&D with less reliance on dungeons and more on other types of adventures (mysteries, social encounters) but the rules have always been flimsy on it. Clever DMs either didn't bother with rules for RP, or they created them on the spot.
> 
> Pop quiz: How many pages in the AD&D1e PHB are devoted to a non-combat skill system? How many are devoted to obscure pole-arms? Case. In. Point.
> 
> 
> 
> See, I don't buy that. 3e promised a "return to the dungeon" feel. Necromancer games and Goodman's DCCs (two of the top sellers in 3PP) sold themselves on that 1e dungeon crawl feel. There are retro-clones all over the place promising that feel of late 70's game play. I don't foresee D&D's primary playstyle (dungeons) fading anytime soon.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you talking about Saga edition? Where your non-combat related feats consist of skill focus, linguist, and skill training? Its nearly impossible to build a Saga PC that can't kick-ass in combat! (Then again, this is Star Wars were senators are crack-shots and the Imperial Chancellor is a Sith Lord, so...)
> 
> I just don't see D&D's emphasis on combat being a primary focus going away in any edition. Its too central to D&D's identity.[/sblock]




Remathilis, I have addressed your post in a seperate thread, here...

http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...d-seminar-playstyle-evolution-discussion.html


----------



## filthgrinder

tuxgeo said:


> Do the numbers of people that came to the website from PvP and Will Wheaton's blog compare, or are they relatively insignificant?
> (Photos might help the podcasts, as well; the only photo I found was one taken at PAX 2008 by Kiko, linked from Will's blog.)




They may have lumped them all together, since it technically was the Penny-Arcade podcast, with special guests Scott from PvP and Wil. I believe the first podcast was spawned when WotC wanted to advertise on the PA site. PA has a policy that they wont advertise a game without playing it first, so the podcast was born.

Also, PA is the 1000 pound gorilla in this case. PvP and Wil have awesome sites, but PA is the goliath.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Scott_Rouse said:


> Perception is reality and if people believe that they we need to manage to alter that perception.




Absolutely true. 

How much of this responsibility, moving forward, falls to Marketing, and how much to R&D? It seems to me you're saying that everything the game needs (from the R&D side) is there already, and folks' _perception _is wrong?

Or do you anticipate that there will have to be some design/development changes to alter the perception?

I need 4e rules that preserve the old school feel. (Blame Clark. I simply don't know a better way to put it.)

4e has enticements, but it also has obstacles. None of those obstacles are non-negotiable but, because you're competing against your prior editions, the enticements need to be stronger to force a switch.


----------



## Nightson

Scott, have you guys ever considered revising KotS to include more roleplaying focus/advice?  I know quite a lot of people end up starting with that adventure and it shapes a lot of people's perceptions about the game.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Scott_Rouse said:


> I don't watch the show, except for those episodes. Sara Girard on my team coordinated that product placement. It was great!



So it was no accident. 



> yes we are in active negotiations with a new German publishing partner



Glad to hear that, and I think other German players will agree.


----------



## JohnnyQuest

I'm looking forward to hearing about how Delve Night will be re-tooled.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Absolutely true.
> 
> How much of this responsibility, moving forward, falls to Marketing, and how much to R&D? It seems to me you're saying that everything the game needs (from the R&D side) is there already, and folks' _perception _is wrong?
> 
> Or do you anticipate that there will have to be some design/development changes to alter the perception?
> 
> I need 4e rules that preserve the old school feel. (Blame Clark. I simply don't know a better way to put it.)
> 
> 4e has enticements, but it also has obstacles. None of those obstacles are non-negotiable but, because you're competing against your prior editions, the enticements need to be stronger to force a switch.





I think it will be a little of both. 

From the R&D/product perspective we need to show people what else is out there. Adventures with more roleplaying or the fun flavor type stuff with familiars are good examples of this.

On the marketing side we can come out and tell this in articles, podcasts (like Penny Arcade "Theatre of the mind") etc.

One area I wish we had done more on with the launch of 4e was conversion. The conversion from 2e to 3e was largely a failure, but it was attempted and it got people to sample the system at a minimum. Even though the the conversion of character etc was wonky it got people to convert none the less.  Because we knew it was wonky the last time we didn't attempt it with 3.5 to 4e.  By not attempting any sort of 3.5 to 4e conversion we put up an artificial barrier to certain people. 

Even if the mechanical conversion will not work due to some of the major changes there is so much that can be carried over.  Now that we have a lot  more character options I would like to see us do more articles like the assassin piece that give ideas and guidelines on how to add more variety and flavor to your characters, even going as far as to take a 3.x class and try and replicate it in 4e. I would also like to see articles on converting old adventures and using all of the great content from 3.x (or older editions) that can be carried into 4e. Conversion articles to show people that the collection on their shelves still has great value even if they are not playing in an older edition. I know guys like Chris Perkins still rely on their 3.5 books on a daily basis for 4e design and development.


----------



## MerricB

G'day, Scott!

I just wanted to say how much I appreciate your posts in this thread. They've been fascinating to read.

Cheers!


----------



## Scott_Rouse

tuxgeo said:


> Do the numbers of people that came to the website from PvP and Will Wheaton's blog compare, or are they relatively insignificant?
> (Photos might help the podcasts, as well; the only photo I found was one taken at PAX 2008 by Kiko, linked from Will's blog.)




I am not sure but I suspect the Penny Arcade numbers are greater. 

We still love the celeb mentions. When Wil or someone else of his stature mentions us, it drives a pretty good amount of traffic and gets good buzz going.

Yeah, next time we'll get more pics.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

The thing I am wondering about is the continuation of relying on existing players in the marketing side. I remember last year you stated that your marketing plan was to focus on existing players at first then go to phase two which would be going after new players. The current plan seems to be not only continuing to focus on existing players but to pull back on wider market options. At what point do you feel 4th edition needs to at before you focus on recruiting new players again?


----------



## Baron Opal

GnomeWorks said:


> I don't play 4e because I perceive it as only supporting a "kick in the door, kill things and take their stuff" approach to the game. From your perspective, whether or not 4e supports styles other than that at this moment is irrelevant - my perception is that it does not, and thus I will find something else on which to spend my money.




What needs to be added to the system to fill the lack that you have found?

Not changed, mind you. Added. Assume for the moment that the basic rules engine is carved in stone.


----------



## Spatula

xechnao said:


> The problem I see with video games and 4e is that AI could not be used to make a fun experience in the way Baldur's Gate did. 3e was a game based on resources and exploration, 4e is more chess like. Could they now create a solo video game that managed to provide a good experience with the 4e toolset? I think they would have to add other elements of resources to engage the player. Perhaps a game like _jagged alliance 2_ with big tactical maps where one combat could take place would be more suitable. But that would difficultly make a ground for some interesting story or plot development. It would make for a strategy game like jagged alliance, rather than a classic crpg game.



I guess the gold box games aren't "classic" CRPGs then...


----------



## w_earle_wheeler

I'm probably not going to be buying any more 4e books, but I'd be a sucker for a good D&D t-shirt, especially one that had the art from the Character Sheet folder on it. Maybe even a D&D logo hat.

Especially a "wizard" bathrobe. Then every morning I could wake up and put on my robe and wizard hat.


----------



## Arawn76

Scott just to add my thanks for your posts in this thread .

I cannot tell you how excited I got at the mention of Hommlett in particular .  As an aside if that's still in the planning stage I heartily encourage a full conversion of T1-4 .


----------



## Mark

Scott_Rouse said:


> One area I wish we had done more on with the launch of 4e was conversion. The conversion from 2e to 3e was largely a failure, but it was attempted and it got people to sample the system at a minimum. Even though the the conversion of character etc was wonky it got people to convert none the less.  Because we knew it was wonky the last time we didn't attempt it with 3.5 to 4e.  By not attempting any sort of 3.5 to 4e conversion we put up an artificial barrier to certain people.





Honestly, Scott, I do not think that you are having problems getting people who played 3.xE to sample 4E.


----------



## Derulbaskul

Scott,

Firstly, I would echo the thanks expressed by other posters for the time you have taken for posting here.

*What is your strategy with adventures? More particularly, for adventure paths?*

1. Dungeon: I (and many, I think) would argue that Scales of War is quite disjointed (it really needs a "keeper of canon") and so doesn't do a good job as either an adventure path, or in the context of this thread, an introduction about how to build a campaign in 4E. For the next one could I suggest that someone be appointed to really shepherd the whole process and to use it as both an adventure path and a teaching aid for new DMs.

2. Published Adventures: Is there any plan to do a new "hard copy" adventure path? Will you make it more "newbie-friendly" to help introduce the game to the new DMs and players you plan to attract? 

3. Forgotten Realms/Eberron: I understand that your strategy involves only having the three books for each (plus LFR at this point in time), but what about ensuring that the next adventure path published in _Dragon_ or in hard copy includes conversion notes even if it is just a series of website articles?
It would also be great if a "guru" for each world could have some input into the overall adventure path before it is designed to make sure the conversion is an easier process. After all, if you're going to keep the IP you may as well use them!

4. More Chris Perkins: Seriously, this guy can write adventures but his writing gigs are few and far between. I know his new role is important but, without being able to call on the Paizo crew to do the heavy lifting anymore, you need someone with his talents to "lunch up" the adventure writing.

5. More Rich Baker: Like Chris, this guy can write adventures well (and novels, too). He has a particular style that translates well to adventure paths or series in particular. I do hope we will see more adventures with him as author.


----------



## MacMathan

xechnao said:


> The problem I see with video games and 4e is that AI could not be used to make a fun experience in the way Baldur's Gate did. 3e was a game based on resources and exploration, 4e is more chess like. *SNIP*[/QUOTE
> 
> OT but Baldur's Gate was most definitely a 2nd edition game.


----------



## MacMathan

Imaro said:


> @Scott:
> 
> First let me commend you on recognizing that some people have an issue as far as 4e goes and it's very tactical combat centric nature.  I think some people are confusing the issue, I don't think people necessarily don't want combat to be tactical... but want a robust system that handles things outside of combat in an interesting way as well.  Many are equating it with an either/or thing... when it doesn't have to be.
> *SNIP*




Self-removed didn't catch that there was a fork for system oriented discussion, sorry.


----------



## Keefe the Thief

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> So it was no accident.
> 
> 
> Glad to hear that, and I think other German players will agree.




I really wonder who´s going to be the new licensing partner. Ulisses seems to be the new juggernauth on the market - but the own TDE and have licensed Pathfinder, so i highly doubt that they would do 4e. Amigo? *shudders* Do they even still exist? Hmmm... Time will tell. 

Scott, i know you have enough stuff to do, but please, please, for all that is holy, have someone check the translation of the Corebooks after they´re done - don´t let your new licensee use the translation lists from Feder & Schwert, just because thats easier and cheaper. I´ve reviewed enough 3.x D&D stuff for X-zine to know that the translations have been a big obstacle for German D&D players in the past. If you want to get people into the game in Germany, force your licensee to do a quality translation.


----------



## Henrix

Scott_Rouse said:


> Adventures with more roleplaying or the fun flavor type stuff with familiars are good examples of this.




I fully support this! 

I think the point where 4e failed to show the roleplaying bits is mainly in the published adventures and examples of play - the focus on the 'delve' things is an extreme example.


----------



## xechnao

Spatula said:


> I guess the gold box games aren't "classic" CRPGs then...



Gold box? We are talking about Baldur's Gate here. It is not only about a video game that was one of the best video games of its time, it is also universally a very good game. Also its time was more significant relatively to success in the broad market: in the very end of 90s more people were directly engaging with computers and video games than in the early 90s, late 80s. The strategic brand awareness for D&D is vastly important for its power in its own market. It is not random that the survey Wotc has made(the one Scott presented in the seminar) deals with this performance. 



MacMathan said:


> OT but Baldur's Gate was most definitely a 2nd edition game.



Yes, I know. I have the complete series. But it's the same due to the magic-resource system being based on the same model.


----------



## hong

xechnao said:


> Gold box? We are talking about Baldur's Gate here. It is not only about a video game that was one of the best video games of its time, it is also universally a very good game. Also its time was more significant relatively to success in the broad market: in the very end of 90s more people were directly engaging with computers and video games than in the early 90s, late 80s. The strategic brand awareness for D&D is vastly important for its power in its own market. It is not random that the survey Wotc has made(the one Scott presented in the seminar) deals with this performance.
> 
> 
> Yes, I know. I have the complete series. But it's the same due to the magic-resource system being based on the same model.



There are indeed problems with adapting 4E to a computer game. However, they have nothing to do with what you've been talking about. Hope this helps!


----------



## xechnao

hong said:


> There are indeed problems with adapting 4E to a computer game. However, they have nothing to do with what you've been talking about. Hope this helps!




That's been so informative. It helps very much!


----------



## hong

xechnao said:


> that's been so informative. It helps very much!



NP. GTBoA!


----------



## hong

For the edification of xechnow:

Immediate interrupts and immediate reactions are the issue. At the least, you would need to program the AI to react to the user's actions out of its turn. Ideally, you also want an interface to allow the user to react to the AI's actions, if you don't want the AI handling all immediate actions itself.

Talk of 4E not supporting exploration or dialogue or resource management or whatever else it is that was so good about Baldurs Gate is silly. 4E supports this to the exact same extent that any version of D&D has supported it.


----------



## WhatGravitas

Scott_Rouse said:


> Good advice here. One chapter in a book won't change that perception. I would love to see some more RP type modules like the original Ravenloft.



So... more good adventures are going to be planned? More RP-heavy adventures? That would change the perception a lot, I assume (esp. as KotS was pretty "dungeon-crawly" for an introductory adventure and sure tinted the perception).


Scott_Rouse said:


> yes we are in active negotiations with a new German publishing partner



Very cool! Happy to hear that!

Cheers, LT.


----------



## xechnao

hong said:


> NP. GTBoA!



Your comment above: "has nothing to do with what you are talking about" is just a dismissive quote for the sake of making a dismissive point. Why do you need to do such a thing is beyond me.


----------



## avin

Scott, if you are still around and are allowed to talk about that: the art style of fourth edition was incluenced by World of Warcraft (for the Horde!) or maybe aimed to attract a younger audience who will represent D&D future?


----------



## hong

xechnao said:


> Your comment above: "has nothing to do with what you are talking about" is just a dismissive quote for the sake of making a dismissive point. Why do you need to do such a thing is beyond me.




To point out that your objections are baseless, of course.


----------



## xechnao

hong said:


> For the edification of xechnow:
> 
> Immediate interrupts and immediate reactions are the issue. At the least, you would need to program the AI to react to the user's actions out of its turn. Ideally, you also want an interface to allow the user to react to the AI's actions, if you don't want the AI handling all immediate actions itself.
> 
> Talk of 4E not supporting exploration or dialogue or resource management or whatever else it is that was so good about Baldurs Gate is silly. 4E supports this to the exact same extent that any version of D&D has supported it.




Thanks for the edification hong.

Well I disagree. AoO is an example of what you are talking about and it has been implemented already in games. Also "readying" actions is something very similar already implemented in various games. Blooded conditions would seem to fit in the same problematic you are talking about and whole AI dynamics are build around this sort of thing.

I insist on the exploration problematic due to the limited focus on resource managment and greater focus on tactics. Jagged alliance has a story too. It is that plot development though is easier to do with a model of limited "explorative" resources than tactical play. Perhaps they could do a sandbox kind of game though but then that would be WoW raiding style game and I doubt they could compete with this to make any sort of impression.


----------



## Piratecat

Scott_Rouse said:


> Adventures with more roleplaying or the fun flavor type stuff with familiars are good examples of this.



Agreed on both counts. Logan Bonner deserves a raise for the familiar roleplaying hooks. 

My personal hesitation with many currently published modules is that I prefer a lot of roleplaying challenges, and those seem few and far between. When my Scales of War adventure is getting complimented for being role-playing rich, and it feels combat heavy to me, I know I have a disconnect. I'd love to see more social challenges in what you guys publish.


----------



## hong

[sblock=I've sblocked your post instead of removing it, but please see my admonition below. Don't sidetrack the thread.  ~ Piratecat] 







xechnao said:


> Thanks for the edification hong.
> 
> Well I disagree. AoO is an example of what you are talking about and it has been implemented already in games. Also "readying" actions is something very similar already implemented in various games. Blooded conditions would seem to fit in the same problematic you are talking about and whole AI dynamics are build around this sort of thing.




Ah, so you're saying that immediate actions are not in fact a barrier to a 4E game. That's good to hear! Unfortunately, this would appear to be more of an indication that you have misunderestimated the complexity of immediate actions as they interrelate with powers, rather than a correct analysis thereof.



> I insist on the exploration problematic due to the limited focus on resource managment and greater focus on tactics. Jagged alliance has a story too.




But, but, you get ppl complaining about how everyone having daily powers leads to the 15-minute day and stuff. You can't be saying that they're wrong and 4E characters can keep going like Energizer bunnies, can you?



> It is that plot development though is easier to do with a model of limited "explorative" resources than tactical play.




Nonsense. Cf Mass Effect, which doesn't even track ammunition. Or even Fallout 3, which is 99% exploration-oriented, but lets you warp to your home base for R&R.[/sblock]


----------



## Piratecat

Guys, if you want to talk about video games, fork the thread. Interesting topic, but this isn't the place.


----------



## xechnao

hong I've forked the reply to our discussion to another thread
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...9-d-d-seminar-d-d-4th-edition-video-game.html


----------



## TwoSix

A question and point:

Question:  Are there any plans for advertising on some the larger MMO-related websites, particularly WoW related sites?  (WoW forums, WoW Insider, WoWHead, etc.)  Marketing D&D as WoW + friends over - thousands of dollars in laptops might cause occasional apoplexy, but I can't see a better place to market medieval fantasy to teenagers.

Point:  There are rules already in place that I think do a good job of putting "fluff" into mechanics: Epic Destinies.  Prince of Hell, Archlich, Mystic Sovereign, Dark Wanderer; all of them have fluff that makes you go "ooh", and does a good job of putting that into mechanics.  Heck, there's an ED that lets you make a demiplane!  

The problem with that fluff is that it's remote; I'm sure epic is the least played tier.  Putting social/non-combat oriented fluff into Paragon Paths or multi-class feats of similar would be a lot of fun, I think.  I'd take a Paragon Path like "Academy Headmaster" or "King's Vizier" or "Patriarch", with mostly non-combat benefits.  I'm sure a lot of players would too, because Path benefits feel like a bonus, rather than an integral part of a lot of builds.


----------



## JoeGKushner

Dungeon.

No, not the magazine, the board game.

Make it so that it's tile based and uses figures from the DDM line.

The tiles would allow some different configurations.

With FFG making Talisman and having Descent, it's a place where there is a proven market.

If it's made to the point where it's cheaper than either of those due to reusing existing components, and is a fun game, then it'll be a hit.


----------



## Ariosto

I have greatly enjoyed Robin Laws designs, and can think of no one better to write a "story telling" essay. However ...

I think it's problematic to conflate the concepts so that "story telling" replaces the more traditional "role playing" concept in D&D. References to the ground-breaking Ravenloft module send shudders down some spines, and NOT for the reasons a Hammer Dracula movie might. Certainly the D&D brand identity has expanded to encompass the approach of the Dragonlance module series and so on, but I can't see a contraction to only -- or even primarily -- that as a good idea.

I won't attempt to offer here an explanation Laws is better equipped to give, but there is already a dissonance in the 4E rules design. I suspect that some difficulties with the skill challenge formalism are related to that. 

Suggestions that classic dungeon adventures are adequately described as "killing things and taking their stuff" or as "not role-playing" seem to me to miss critical elements of success. There is similar confusion in the notion that WotC's games are inherently more "tactically rich" than old D&D, a confusion that I think has contributed to some less than exciting scenarios.

There is room to accommodate different approaches, but it's a good start to understand what their characteristics actually are. Many criticisms of 4E could be taken as challenges to realize more fully the potential of the basic "game engine". One thought I have is that a more clearly modular approach to game systems could facilitate that -- along with opportunities to present supplementary products appealing to those who want to fine-tune the game to their tastes.

Looking ahead to the initiative to attract new players, I think one might take another look at what could constitute a "Basic Set" with appeal similar to the classic TSR products. The exercise could help identify the modularization to which I referred above, the core structures already at the heart of the more elaborate and systematically integrated design. There is a beauty in simplicity, as well as in the baroque.


----------



## Baz King

Piratecat said:


> My personal hesitation with many currently published modules is that I prefer a lot of roleplaying challenges, and those seem few and far between. When my Scales of War adventure is getting complimented for being role-playing rich, and it feels combat heavy to me, I know I have a disconnect. I'd love to see more social challenges in what you guys publish.




I'd love to hear a little bit more about that disconnect. I'm reviewing the whole of Scales of War over at my 'blog , so rather than sidetrack this thread, please feel free to drop by and comment.

Thanks, carry on!


----------



## Mephistopheles

Scott_Rouse said:


> One area I wish we had done more on with the launch of 4e was conversion. The conversion from 2e to 3e was largely a failure, but it was attempted and it got people to sample the system at a minimum. Even though the the conversion of character etc was wonky it got people to convert none the less.  Because we knew it was wonky the last time we didn't attempt it with 3.5 to 4e.  By not attempting any sort of 3.5 to 4e conversion we put up an artificial barrier to certain people.




I think that's a good point. By not attempting the conversion it has the potential to send a message that says "this edition is so different from what has come before that attempting conversion is pointless" - upon typing that it seems so familiar that I think one of the previews may have said something like it, actually - which may instill a perception that it's no longer the same game. Even if the conversion is clunky and doesn't really work it gets people looking at the game and thinking about representing their characters in it rather than just feeling that they shouldn't bother to look at it.

Also, as an aside, I'd like to join those who are thanking you for your participation in this thread, Scott. It's refreshing to see some frank and personal and informative communication coming from WotC after some of the events of recent weeks. So...thanks!


----------



## Hereticus

Mephistopheles said:


> By not attempting the conversion it has the potential to send a message that says "this edition is so different from what has come before that attempting conversion is pointless" - upon typing that it seems so familiar that I think one of the previews may have said something like it, actually - which may instill a perception that it's no longer the same game.




The only thing that did not transfer well from 2.X to 3.X was multi-class levels. Everything else was simple.

I am curious to hear from Scott if both game systems (3.X and 4.0) could still be supported at the same time as different games.


----------



## Holy Smokes

Heyas Scott,

Dungeon needs some higher octane fuel than the stuff you're feeding it now; consider more 4E conversions of classic adventures, and not just 1st edition mods. Refactor them a bit for all the things that work great in 4E (dynamic terrain, skill challenges, etc.), but also use that as way to demonstrate both better roleplaying chops, and fidelity to traditional play style modes. _Ravenloft_ is a great example candidate for this treatment; I'd like to see a really polished 4E refactor of _Sunken Citadel_, or better yet, _Sinister Secret Of Saltmarsh_. This is ideal DDI content (either free or sub), and would create opportunities to make a statement about the direction D&D is going.


----------



## dm4hire

I'd like to say thanks also Scott and nice to see that WotC is listening to all sides and wanting to repair the disconnect that has happened during the change over to 4e.  I agree that adding in some of the elements that were cut back, such as skills that had more emphasis in role-playing, i.e. cooking, crafting, etc will be a good starting point.


----------



## Festivus

Jack99 said:


> If this means that 700k people came to wizards' website via a link on Penny Arcade, this sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Or is it just me?




Anecdotal, but I have personally spoken with at least a dozen people who came to our gameday meetups or delve night event because they were listening to the podcast and wanted to give the game a try in person.  These are typically easy to spot, brand new cube of chessex dice, no miniature, and a copy of PHB1 with no dents or dings on the corners yet.

That is out of a sampling of about 75 unique individuals over the past month or two, and that was only those who told me about it... I didn't fish for that information so there could be more.

I was one of the complainers about the paragon characters at the gameday events, much better looking stuff for the MM2 event (but there were questions about why not more classes from outside the first book)


----------



## wedgeski

Festivus said:


> Anecdotal, but I have personally spoken with at least a dozen people who came to our gameday meetups or delve night event because they were listening to the podcast and wanted to give the game a try in person.  These are typically easy to spot, brand new cube of chessex dice, no miniature, and a copy of PHB1 with no dents or dings on the corners yet.



That's really cool.

Thanks for your posts in this thread Scott.


----------



## Mark

Festivus said:


> That is out of a sampling of about 75 unique individuals over the past month or two, and that was only those who told me about it... I didn't fish for that information so there could be more.





They must have gaming in common, anyway.


----------



## Mournblade94

Imaro said:


> In the end the game should evolve, not just in it's presentation and media (DDI) but also in what it offers in gameplay. I think a prime example of this is when you look at SWSE vs. D&D 3.5, the addition of talents evolved the game into a direction where character concepts outside of combat had interesting choices and advantages.




This is the evolution I was hoping for with 4e. I love SWSE. IT is a good improvement, and I love talent trees.

Many of the gamers I am friends with left D&D at 2nd edition for HERO system. They did not come back to 4e because well, HERO already has the power structure built in, and they feel HERO does it better than 4e. I can't comment as I am more familiar with 4e than HERO at this point.



Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes, typed in haste. D&D Fans: lapsed players (played but stopped typically due to a file change like starting a career), current players of older editions (e.g. OD&D *cough* Dialgo *cough*), novels readers (FR, Dragonlance etc), and people who have interacted in other ways like video games. Basically people who we don't need to explain what D&D is.
> 
> I would like to know this too. I think it comes down to many reasons like personal preference on a system, some people don't like or feel the need for change. 3.5 was a good game system that people are happy to keep playing, etc. There is no silver bullet answer that will suddenly get people to drop hatthey are doing and start playing 4e so wee need to appraoch it from many angles.




Many older gamers (like myself) do not like the gameplay of the powerstructure. Many of us feel very little difference between playing a wizard or a rogue or a paladin. It is almost like every character was reduced to a class with its own specialized 'spell list'.

It feels as if the change to 4e threw out the baby with the bathwater.

It could however simply be a difference between people that like classical fantasy and people that like the contemporary fantasy model of allowing for everything and anything. I preferred the classical fantasy as being the "core" but always allowing the options for the other tastes.


----------



## Mournblade94

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Absolutely true.
> 
> 4e has enticements, but it also has obstacles. None of those obstacles are non-negotiable but, because you're competing against your prior editions, the enticements need to be stronger to force a switch.




I had to quote this because I strongly second this.


----------



## BryonD

Mournblade94 said:


> I had to quote this because I strongly second this.



I also agree.

Can you clarify, in a general sense, how you plan to go after prior edition hold-outs?

Do you plan in any way to bring the game to us?  Or do you plan to convince us that we should switch to the game pretty much as it is now?

No edition war here, but for my own personal enjoyment, 3E provides a significantly more rewarding gaming experience.  Are you going to try to market to me?  I don't mean that as confrontational or to imply you owe me anything.  But do you mean people like me when you say you will target older edition players?  If no, that is cool.  I'll go on having fun just as I am now.  If yes, then I'll pay attention.  I'll be open minded and see what you offer.  It is going to take a lot.  But I'd love to see you pull it off.  I'd be thrilled. 

But I'm not clear that you even intend to try what I'm asking.  Do you?


----------



## alleynbard

Holy Smokes said:


> Heyas Scott,
> 
> Dungeon needs some higher octane fuel than the stuff you're feeding it now; consider more 4E conversions of classic adventures, and not just 1st edition mods. Refactor them a bit for all the things that work great in 4E (dynamic terrain, skill challenges, etc.), but also use that as way to demonstrate both better roleplaying chops, and fidelity to traditional play style modes. _Ravenloft_ is a great example candidate for this treatment; I'd like to see a really polished 4E refactor of _Sunken Citadel_, or better yet, _Sinister Secret Of Saltmarsh_. This is ideal DDI content (either free or sub), and would create opportunities to make a statement about the direction D&D is going.




Hear, hear!

While I have enjoyed Dungeon so far, I really think some conversions would take it to the next level.  There are worthy adventures from every previous edition that could really use a 4e update.  I can imagine some of these might see actual print.  But Dungeon is a very cost effective way of doing these conversions and it would definitely go a long way to showing the ability of the new ruleset.  

Of course, it might also lead to an outcry that makes the opening of the Ark of the Covenant seem like a ride on Disney's Haunted Mansion.  So, there is a risk. But I think it is one worth taking.


----------



## Festivus

Scott, can you elaborate on what "retool delve night" means?

I have been running the delves for a few months at the FLGS but it's not a huge success yet and would be curious what to look forward to in terms of support from WoTC.


----------



## alleynbard

Festivus said:


> Scott, can you elaborate on what "retool delve night" means?
> 
> I have been running the delves for a few months at the FLGS but it's not a huge success yet and would be curious what to look forward to in terms of support from WoTC.




I am going to just step out here and look ignorant, but what are Delve Nights?

It sounds like something I might be interested in doing for my local store and if Wizards is looking to re-tool it for more support, I would like to know what it is and if I can get on board.


----------



## Festivus

alleynbard said:


> I am going to just step out here and look ignorant, but what are Delve Nights?
> 
> It sounds like something I might be interested in doing for my local store and if Wizards is looking to re-tool it for more support, I would like to know what it is and if I can get on board.




For the present, once per month you order the delve night kit for a retail location.  WoTC mails out two copies of the delve, which consists of four cardstock double sided full color encounters, which are tied together with a very simple plot of some sort.  If you have seen the new Delve book, it's in the same format as those, only each delve is on a single 8.5x11 sheet back to back rather than opposing pages.  They are not bound.  They also include a single pregen character appropriate for the delve.  Each encounter takes roughly an hour to complete.

The current month delve is level 5, next months is level 18 I think.  So month to month they are radically different and there is nothing tying them together.

I'd love to see 5 pregens instead of 1.. for a full and complete party.  A progression from level 1 to 30, much like the book, so that players could bring thier characters each month and level them up... faster progression than a regular game, but allow for some consistency with the characters.  This gets more important at paragon and epic tiers... next month's delve is going to be rough.

I'd also like to see poster maps but those are likely too expensive to do.  They do use fairly current dungeon tiles (with the exception of this month which uses two sets of the really hard to find Ruins of the Wild... no more of that stuff guys, please!)


----------



## alleynbard

Festivus said:


> For the present, once per month you order the delve night kit for a retail location.  WoTC mails out two copies of the delve, which consists of four cardstock double sided full color encounters, which are tied together with a very simple plot of some sort.  If you have seen the new Delve book, it's in the same format as those, only each delve is on a single 8.5x11 sheet back to back rather than opposing pages.  They are not bound.  They also include a single pregen character appropriate for the delve.  Each encounter takes roughly an hour to complete.
> 
> The current month delve is level 5, next months is level 18 I think.  So month to month they are radically different and there is nothing tying them together.
> 
> I'd love to see 5 pregens instead of 1.. for a full and complete party.  A progression from level 1 to 30, much like the book, so that players could bring thier characters each month and level them up... faster progression than a regular game, but allow for some consistency with the characters.  This gets more important at paragon and epic tiers... next month's delve is going to be rough.
> 
> I'd also like to see poster maps but those are likely too expensive to do.  They do use fairly current dungeon tiles (with the exception of this month which uses two sets of the really hard to find Ruins of the Wild... no more of that stuff guys, please!)




Thanks.  I will talk to my store owner about that. I was also thinking about pursuing Living Forgotten Realms in the store, but there is no reason both couldn't happen. More D&D is always a good thing.


----------



## Hadrian the Builder

Scott thanks for posting and expanding on the original commentary.

You mentioned the celebrity buzz that gets generated by engaging Penny Arcade and Wil Weaton. Could you tell us if there are any plans to engage other celebrities as part of the marketing campaign?

Also, has there been any serious discussionof hosting a webcomic or guest webcomics on the WotC website to bring in new traffic?

Thanks


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Festivus said:


> Scott, can you elaborate on what "retool delve night" means?
> 
> I have been running the delves for a few months at the FLGS but it's not a huge success yet and would be curious what to look forward to in terms of support from WoTC.




I don't want to give out specifics right now as we are embarking on a small store test of new kits/program and I don't want to lead the jury and/or say something that doesn't happen in the final re-tooling. 

I can say that broadly speaking we want to create a program that is conducive to public play has a certain level of repeat play value (stickiness) that keeps people coming back to play on a regular basis.

Thanks for supporting the program up to this point.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Hadrian the Builder said:


> Scott thanks for posting and expanding on the original commentary.
> 
> You mentioned the celebrity buzz that gets generated by engaging Penny Arcade and Wil Weaton. Could you tell us if there are any plans to engage other celebrities as part of the marketing campaign?
> 
> Also, has there been any serious discussionof hosting a webcomic or guest webcomics on the WotC website to bring in new traffic?
> 
> Thanks




Yes we have a list of celebrities that we regularly send product too. We laso use a product placement agency that works to get D&D into TV shows and movies.

Do you mean like OoTS? If so, then yes we have had conversations about web comics and web cartoons for the site. Currently we are working on more web cartoons with Adam@ Bitey Castle but I don't think we have any plans for a comic strip at this time


----------



## Greg K

Mournblade94 said:


> Many of the gamers I am friends with left D&D at 2nd edition for HERO system. They did not come back to 4e because well, HERO already has the power structure built in, and they feel HERO does it better than 4e. I can't comment as I am more familiar with 4e than HERO at this point.




One of the systems I tried for fantasy when I left 2e and , before returning with 3e, was Hero.  Upon seeing 4e, one of my thoughts was that I would rather use Hero (and, now,  Mutants and Masterminds with the release of Warriors and Warlocks).  With Hero or M&M I don't need to buy tons of supplements as both games give me the system to build what I want. Both also, imo, do a better job handling familiars, animal companions etc with 4e feeling more like early Hero System for such things.




> Many older gamers (like myself) do not like the gameplay of the powerstructure. Many of us feel very little difference between playing a wizard or a rogue or a paladin. It is almost like every character was reduced to a class with its own specialized 'spell list'.







> It feels as if the change to 4e threw out the baby with the bathwater.



This is my opinion as well. There are some 4e things that I think would have been good changes  if ithe designers had remained closer to the 3e.


----------



## Corinth

The results of the brand recognition survey bear out what I suspected for some time, which is that WOW is to MMORPGs what D&D is to TRPGs, and that these two properties have no internal competition- but instead are in competition with each other because nothing else can challenge them.


----------



## Herschel

The Ghost said:


> mong the people in my gaming group, we do perceive this edition to be a very good miniatures game and a fairly average RPG. If this rules set where placed in a product similar to Descent I would be very interested in buying. However, as an RPG it does not really interest me.




I think it's more trying to get information for different learning styles than an actual set of rules. 

One of the main things that brought me back to the current edition of D&D is that the RPG portion is more free form and back in the hands of the DM to do with and adjudicate as wanted/needed. I'm looking forward to the new chapter in DMG2. 

I really like the way there are very few listed "skills" for non-combat situations but I know my son, for example, who has never been a DM wants/needs some things written out for him as a guide. I felt fairly natural just "jumping in", but I'm very outgoing and have a lot of experience being highly visible and interacting with people. Public speaking has never bothered me. I'm more of a "show me and let me jump in and learn while doing". I'm probably not in the majority though. 

Others I know like to learn by reading all the material and having scenarios presented as examples before they actually run a game. They also may not feel confident being in front of a group without most everything lined up. 

Different strokes for different folks. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think there's any need for more rules around role playing, just more guides and hints as to how to do it.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Scott_Rouse said:


> Currently we are working on more web cartoons with Adam@ Bitey Castle but I don't think we have any plans for a comic strip at this time




That would be great - his work was my favourite of all the 'pre-4e' material


----------



## RefinedBean

You know what'd be awesome?  Have the guy from Dead Fantasy and Dead Fantasy 2 do a wicked-awesome animation of a 4E party kicking butt.

Thinkin' outside the box, one lame idea at a time.

But seriously, get on that.


----------



## JoeGKushner

How's the 'D&D' lifestyle thing going?

For example, could I order a 4x shirt with the cover image of Blackmoor 1 (I think it was DA1) in honor of Dave's passing? 

Coffee cups with different iconics on them?

Key Rings?

Things that you can get with 'swag' points and a minimum purchase from Reaper for example?

(Might be there but I'm pretty unaware of it.)


----------



## Hereticus

I would like to thank Scott for appearing here on this thread, he has been very clear and forthcoming.



BryonD said:


> Can you clarify, in a general sense, how you plan to go after prior edition hold-outs?
> 
> Do you plan in any way to bring the game to us?  Or do you plan to convince us that we should switch to the game pretty much as it is now?
> 
> No edition war here, but for my own personal enjoyment, 3E provides a significantly more rewarding gaming experience.  Are you going to try to market to me?  I don't mean that as confrontational or to imply you owe me anything.  But do you mean people like me when you say you will target older edition players?  If no, that is cool.  I'll go on having fun just as I am now.  If yes, then I'll pay attention.  I'll be open minded and see what you offer.  It is going to take a lot.  But I'd love to see you pull it off.  I'd be thrilled.
> 
> But I'm not clear that you even intend to try what I'm asking.  Do you?




I agree with you, and there has been only silence when fans of earlier editions ask for something. That means for all practical purposes it is a dead issue.

I will be hosting Delve Nights at the local RPG store on May 7th, and from what I heard upthread that it will be run with fifth level characters. However I am concerned that the next one will be 18th level, that may be over my head to run.


----------



## Ariosto

The Hero System mentions catch my eye, because 3E seemed to me to have a similar "vibe", to appeal to many of the same interests among gamers. I have not seen Mutants & Masterminds at my FLGS, but have seen a good bit of buzz about it online.


----------



## Nightson

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes we have a list of celebrities that we regularly send product too. We laso use a product placement agency that works to get D&D into TV shows and movies.
> 
> Do you mean like OoTS? If so, then yes we have had conversations about web comics and web cartoons for the site. Currently we are working on more web cartoons with Adam@ Bitey Castle but I don't think we have any plans for a comic strip at this time




Blizzard has a fan submitted comic thing for World of Warcraft.  I don't know whether enough people visit the Wizards site to make it work, but you could have prizes like a free copy of that months book and such.


----------



## Furluge

Scott,

I'm in a gaming group that's had a successful RPGA gaming group going with a decent number of home games, so the split that's occurred is something I've had the, unfortunate, experience of first hand.

I think the largest problem you're having is with Pathfinder. Pathfinder seems to have become the, "Disgruntled with 4e? Play this!" product. Which is kind of sad, because most of our people who don't play 4e with us, even just for RPGA, don't really give it much of  a chance. Most played it for one or two sessions when the game first came out and never came back and went to play Pathfinder.

Of the players that weren't interested in playing 4e one refuses to play because he takes personal affront to the fact that 4e was being developed and feels lied to that it wasn't announced until it was done. Four are are old school players who don't want to try the new system. Their common complaints are, "Spell casters aren't spell casters anymore.", "Everyone is identical now.", and "This game is pen and paper WoW." The last arguement seems to be focused around the fact that players have powers, that monsters and players have roles, and fighters can mark. The last player in the group refuses to play 4e because he can't power game like he used to. We don't miss him not playing. 

They're all playing Pathfinder now. 

In additon, one or two are less happy with D&D 4e because it got rid of lots of non-combat abilities and crafting. For example, my DM hates that fact that because spells like _Wall of Iron_ are missing he can't calculate how much iron his crazy abandoned bored wizard NPC can will into being so it can be smelted down and turned into weapons to drive an entire magical economy. He also wonders more mundane things too like how the economy would work for forging magic weapons, ritual scrolls, etc. if the relevant rituals don't have any cost savings in them, etc. Others don't like the fact that there aren't mechanics for other obscure mundane things. (Note: If I remind them that we barely ever used those things in 3.5 for fear of "gimping" ourselves or suggest a skill challenge this doesn't seem to help.)

Hope this gives you a nice snippit of what's going on out there Scott.


----------



## Mallus

Ariosto said:


> I have not seen Mutants & Masterminds at my FLGS, but have seen a good bit of buzz about it online.



Because it's awesome.


----------



## wedgeski

Nightson said:


> Blizzard has a fan submitted comic thing for World of Warcraft.  I don't know whether enough people visit the Wizards site to make it work, but you could have prizes like a free copy of that months book and such.



It's cool, but as an aside, the trouble with their competitions, I find, is that their user-base is so massive that there are inevitably professional artists in there, and the quality of the winners is absurd, on a par with what Blizzard produce themselves. And Blizzard are renowned for having some of the best artistic design in the business!

IMO synnergy is where Wizards should be looking. They've stumbled upon a huge winner by interfacing with the Penny Arcade guys... they need to make the most of that they can, and find similar avenues to investigate. I've read PA and Wil Wheaton's blog for years, to suddenly see those excellent geeks at the heart of the D&D machine puts a big smile on my face. Both sites have massive gamer cred which I'm sure will put money in Wizards pockets over the next few months.

So, Scott, don't over-do it, don't over-schedule it, keep people hungry for more, and give whomever executed the deal with PA and WW a raise immediately!


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Hereticus said:


> BryonD said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you clarify, in a general sense, how you plan to go after prior edition hold-outs?
> 
> Do you plan in any way to bring the game to us? Or do you plan to convince us that we should switch to the game pretty much as it is now?
> 
> No edition war here, but for my own personal enjoyment, 3E provides a significantly more rewarding gaming experience. Are you going to try to market to me? I don't mean that as confrontational or to imply you owe me anything. But do you mean people like me when you say you will target older edition players? If no, that is cool. I'll go on having fun just as I am now. If yes, then I'll pay attention. I'll be open minded and see what you offer. It is going to take a lot. But I'd love to see you pull it off. I'd be thrilled.
> 
> But I'm not clear that you even intend to try what I'm asking. Do you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to thank Scott for appearing here on this thread, he has been very clear and forthcoming.
> 
> I agree with you, and there has been only silence when fans of earlier editions ask for something. That means for all practical purposes it is a dead issue.
> 
> I will be hosting Delve Nights at the local RPG store on May 7th, and from what I heard upthread that it will be run with fifth level characters. However I am concerned that the next one will be 18th level, that may be over my head to run.
Click to expand...



The thing was though that the GTS seminar said that they were going to focus on existing players, and Scott said in this thread that they would have been benefited by at least attempting conversion documents. 

I think it is a perfectly valid question as to whether this marketing to existing players means that they are going to come out with new products that interest 3.x/Pathfinder players or whether that means continuing to try and convince us that 4e is better than what we are currently playing as it stands. The only thing I am fairly certain about is that almost all D&D players know 4e exists now so letting us know it exists is probably not what is meant by Scott.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Brown Jenkin said:


> The thing was though that the GTS seminar said that they were going to focus on existing players, and Scott said in this thread that they would have been benefited by at least attempting conversion documents.




Not quite.  *Existing fan*: this group includes existing players (of any edition currently in a game), video game players ( NWN2, BG2, DDO etc), novels readers (RA Salvatore, Weis & Hickman, Ed Greenwood etc), and lapsed players (this group alone is millions of players in the game's 35 year history).

Essentially use the newness of 4e as an entry point back into the game to potential or current customers who don't need to be told what D&D is (unlike new players who may have heard of D&D but know little to nothing about it).



> I think it is a perfectly valid question as to whether this marketing to existing players means that they are going to come out with new products that interest 3.x/Pathfinder players or whether that means continuing to try and convince us that 4e is better than what we are currently playing as it stands. The only thing I am fairly certain about is that almost all D&D players know 4e exists now so letting us know it exists is probably not what is meant by Scott.



It is a little of both. We will continue to market the existing 4e products and the system as a whole. Every month as we add new stuff this evolves but at it base there are still some pretty common themes that won't change much (ease of DMing, party roles, etc). We won't be doing this at the expense of another system instead we will be showing more of how this is a D&D experience and not talk about what is different.   

We will also be introducing new stuff that either fans or we feel is missing (familiars, classes, worlds, adventure style, D&Di tools etc) and cool stuff that is completely new including brand new classes, races, adventures etc.

And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.


----------



## Greg K

Furluge said:


> I think the largest problem you're having is with Pathfinder. Pathfinder seems to have become the, "Disgruntled with 4e? Play this!" product.




I'm going to disagree.  Pathfinder is just one avenue for those that dislike 4e.  However, not everyone that dislikes 4e are going to Pathfinder.  There are many people, based upon the alpha and beta, are finding Pathfinder changes to be as unsatisfying as 4e and are choosing to stick with or return to 3e (assuming they don't leave d20, DND, or gaming altogether). 

If anything, the biggest challenge is the OGL of which Pathfinder is just one part.  The products under the OGL (including Unearthed Arcana) allow for a wide customization of 3e and d20 in general.  

Through the OGL, one  can find options to give fighter types variety in combat, new spell systems, and changing the rules for magic item creation and not require xp.  I sure that there are probably options for doing away with level drain, xp for casting certain spells, and save or die . There is even the upcoming Trailblazer from Bad Axe which will have options designed to help the DM fix various issues that some DMs and groups have with 3e including prep time.






> Which is kind of sad, because most of our people who don't play 4e with us, even just for RPGA, don't really give it much of  a chance. Most played it for one or two sessions when the game first came out and never came back and went to play Pathfinder.




I'd say one or two sessions is giving it a chance. That is a good enough time to get a feel for the game.  They just are not enjoying the game for whatever reason.

For those not trying it, perhaps they have had experience with various 4e mechanics through Tome of Battle, Star Wars, or other games and know from experience that such mechanics are dealbreakers.  

I personally dislike 
a) per encounter mechanics
b) skill systems that give automatic increases per level rather than use skill points.

These two factors alone are going to be issues with my enjoyment of the game (yes, for myself, the mechanics are just as important as the people I  am playing with). 

Now, add in the following
a) rules meant to support dungeon crawl as opposed to other playstyles in general (I am looking at "Milestones" and Mearl's comments from another thread on why the currrent implementation rather than an earlier one exists); 
b) how daily items work; 
c) the short duration or numerous round onset of certain affects due to the save mechanics; 
d) illusions doing hit points;  
e) the mechanics of the ranger's animal companion which as written, imo, feels like a power rather than the existance of another creature (which was, imo, a problem with early editions of the Hero System, but something that later editons of Hero fixed and Mutants and Masterminds managed to avoid); 

and several other design decisions and implementations and the game is not something I want to play despite the existance of some implementations and changes  that I prefer to 3e.

The point of the above is that various people want different things of rpgs.  For some people, 4e delivers those things while for others it delivers an experience that they don't like. For others, it will fall in between and players will base their decisions to play or not play based on the degree to which they can overlook the areas for which it falls short.


----------



## Treebore

Scott_Rouse said:


> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.





Thats a shame. I realize WOTC doesn't want to fragment their consumer base, but the reality is its already fragmented, has always been fragmented, and there is some pretty good evidence its growing, along all editions. So I would prefer WOTC tap into that, rather than continue to ignore it.


----------



## Treebore

Greg K said:


> I'm going to disagree.  Pathfinder is just one avenue for those that dislike 4e.




Could we quit saying "dislike". I don't know how many of us actually "dislike" 4E. I think there are a fair number like me, who thinks its a good game, just not good enough to be one of my premiere games.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Scott_Rouse said:


> We will also be introducing new stuff that either fans or we feel is missing (familiars, classes, worlds, adventure style, D&Di tools etc) and cool stuff that is completely new including brand new classes, races, adventures etc.
> 
> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.




OK, some people are asking for dual support, but that wasn't really my implied question. The earlier part about familiars, classes, worlds, adventure style, D&Di tools etc was really the question. Things like Familiars, Gnomes, and Half-Orcs are good starts to bringing 4e closer to what some earlier edition people expect. Adventure Style is another though I still think that needs some work as well as play style. 

I think there is a demand for less combat intensive modules and more robust rules support for non-combat roles. This doesn't mean scrap the existing rules, but add more (even optional) rules to them so that more people have more choices. 

I personally still play 3.x because I am still not sold on the belief that 4e is more than a glorified miniatures game. This is not meant as an insult, but just a statement that reflects my belief in how I see the 4e ruleset and what type of play style I see it as designed for. Feel free to add that as just another data point in how some people view 4e and where marketing might be directed.

Edit: P.S. I have noticed and appreciate the recent lack of 3.x was broken and here is how/why 4e fixes it comments from WotC.


----------



## Greg K

Treebore said:


> Could we quit saying "dislike". I don't know how many of us actually "dislike" 4E. I think there are a fair number like me, who thinks its a good game, just not good enough to be one of my premiere games.




No, I will not quit saying dislike, because many people do dislike it (I actually like certain elements compared to 3e, but dislike (not hate) the game as a whole). However,  I'd be willing to amend what I wrote to read "dislike or [x]"  What  would you like x to be "like it, but not enough to switch from their current edition"?


----------



## BryonD

Scott_Rouse said:


> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.



For me, I didn't think you implied that.  

To me the question was, will the 4E of the future be different than the 4E of the present in ways intended to attract people who simply find 3E (or something else) a preferable alternative.  I think it is a fair question in context of your earlier post.  But even then I did not see it as a realistic potential.  If you said yes, then I'd eagerly await what magic you have coming.  But 4E is fundamentally different in approach and the kind of changes I was asking about do not seem feasible.  My read on your answer here is a confirmation of that.

And that is cool.  Good luck.  Thanks


----------



## BryonD

Greg K said:


> No, I will not quit saying dislike, because many people do dislike it (I actually like certain elements compared to 3e, but dislike (not hate) the game as a whole). However,  I'd be willing to amend what I wrote to read "dislike or [x]"  What  would you like x to be "like it, but not enough to switch from their current edition"?



Heh,  I'm pretty sure I'm on the "haters" list.  
But I'll certainly clarify that I could enjoy an evening playing 4E with friends.  But this is in the same group Descent or Guitar Hero or DDM.

However, if the objective was to have a good time playing an RPG, 4E is way down the list of preferences.  I don't have time for all the others I prefer.


----------



## C_M2008

I was wondering if perhaps there were plans to bring D&D into the mainstream?

Something similar to Blizzard's WoW campaign where they get celebrity endorsements.

Internet ads are obviously ineffective (everyone ignores them we all know it) but how about ads in mainstream magazines? 

Perhaps a play a session with Celebrity X (who of course should actually play D&D and be a real well know by non-gamers celebrity) for a day at GenCon or similar. It seems like a good way to bring the game to the masses, especially given our celebrity obssessed culture nowadays. It would probably cost a fair penny, but I imagine the hype and potential new customers might be worth it.

I realize my suggestions are expensive, but it seems like there is a much larger potential market waiting to be tapped. Movie & TV product placements are a great start, but are only largely noticed by fans anyway unless they are on screen for a while, get an in character mention or are glaringly obvious.

Anyway it'll be interesting to see what you have in store.


----------



## avin

Even p0rn actresses play Wow, that could be said from D&D? I don't think so... Wow is far more popular than D&D these days.


----------



## Corinth

avin said:


> Even p0rn actresses play Wow, that could be said from D&D? I don't think so... Wow is far more popular than D&D these days.



Take the stereotypical D&D gameplay experience, and then translate into a medium that has a far superior network effect as well as far superior personal convenience, and you have World of Warcraft.  Blizzard beat WOTC at its own game.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

C_M2008 said:


> I was wondering if perhaps there were plans to bring D&D into the mainstream?





You mean mainstream sales at WalMart or that 89% of people asked recognize the name?



> Something similar to Blizzard's WoW campaign where they get celebrity endorsements.



We wont pay for this but plenty of celebrities like Vin Diesel and Felicia Day come out from time to time to profess their love for D&D 


> Internet ads are obviously ineffective (everyone ignores them we all know it) but how about ads in mainstream magazines?



Actually, this is not really true. Every day magazines become less and less viable as a advertising medium (Starlog I am looking at you) while our use of internet ads have CTRs (click through rates) well above accepted industry standards for effective. 



> Perhaps a play a session with Celebrity X (who of course should actually play D&D and be a real well know by non-gamers celebrity) for a day at GenCon or similar. It seems like a good way to bring the game to the masses, especially given our celebrity obssessed culture nowadays. It would probably cost a fair penny, but I imagine the hype and potential new customers might be worth it.



Like this?



> I realize my suggestions are expensive, but it seems like there is a much larger potential market waiting to be tapped. Movie & TV product placements are a great start, but are only largely noticed by fans anyway unless they are on screen for a while, get an in character mention or are glaringly obvious.
> 
> Anyway it'll be interesting to see what you have in store.



You should watch this, or this for mainstream placement.


----------



## C_M2008

Scott_Rouse said:


> You mean mainstream sales at WalMart or that 89% of people asked recognize the name?




More like a mainstream activity to do like poker. The recognition was good (89% is huge) but a follow up question among the 89% about how they perceived the brand would be interesting.



Scott_Rouse said:


> We wont pay for this but plenty of celebrities like Vin Diesel and Felicia Day come out from time to time to profess their love for D&D




This is very true. I think a paid campaign would help but I understand there are reasons you won't/can't do them .



Scott_Rouse said:


> Actually, this is not really true. Every day magazines become less and less viable as a advertising medium (Starlog I am looking at you) while our use of internet ads have CTRs (click through rates) well above accepted industry standards for effective.




I was thinking more along the lines of Time, Scientific American, Sports Illustrated, Cosmo, etc. I've never heard of Starlog. The death of small print media is fairly inevitable but there are lots of magazines that still have a huge subscriber base--I do imagine a full page ad in such a magazine would be pricey though--especially in a good section. I suppose I question internet ads because I view them as an annoyance, why else would many sites charge you to have ad free access. I would be curious to know how well CTRs translate to sales though-but that may be difficult to measure.



Scott_Rouse said:


> Like this?



No offense to Wil Wheaton, but he isn't exactly well known outside of geek circles. Someone like Vin Diesel and Felicia Day as you mentioned would be more along the lines I'm thinking of. Again I can see that this would have cost/availablity ramifications just a thought.




Scott_Rouse said:


> You should watch this, or this for mainstream placement.




These were very well done. More like this (and maybe something in a big movie) would be superb IMO.

I don't mean to hassle and I hope It's not taken that way, I'm just really curious as to the strategy/timing for moving beyond the core demographic (which seems to have stalled in place for many years, but that may just be me) and any plans to move beyond being a niche activity (video games were such once) to something more common place. I suspect some technological intergration may be required however(a D&D app for say an Iphone or blackberry would be supercool---although the facebook thing grew old quick so I'm not sure how that would/could be done) before there's any chance of that.

Anyway Just a guy who's curious about the future of his favourite hobby.
Thanks for all your replies in this thread Scott, very interesting reading thus far.


----------



## Mark

Scott_Rouse said:


> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.





It is a shame for many fans of 3.XE that WotC does not feel they can also move forward and support that edition but at least with this absolute statement you will have put many future questions to bed.  Thank you for being so forthright.


----------



## BryonD

Mark said:


> It is a shame for many fans of 3.XE that WotC does not feel they can also move forward and support that edition but at least with this absolute statement you will have put many future questions to bed.  Thank you for being so forthright.



It really doesn't make much sense to try to support an older edition alongside a prior one.

However, it IS a shame that they feel a need to promote a game that assumes its players need "ease of DMing" is incompatible with supporting an advanced version of the same game for players don't need that and find the downsides of that trade-off to be much greater cost than the value added.


----------



## Storminator

Scott_Rouse said:


> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.




Whew! 

PS


----------



## Windjammer

*4E and the DIY mentality*

Ariosto hit the nail above. 4E isn't marketing one of its most considerable strengths: *ease of customizability*. Like the "design your own trap" article that came out in Dragon magazine after the core books were released - that's the sort of stuff you want to be *in *the core books. Goes for everything else too. Monster design, encounter design, you name it (and I mean designing these beyond just crunching the numbers); "creating your own plane(s)", to name another great section that wasn't carried over into a 4E core product (MoTP). To find advice on that stuff I'm currently forced to bypass 4E core product (books and DDI). If I want to get advice on how to use 4E as a toolkit and wrap my head around 4E's design tenets (a prerequisite to customize a game effectively) I read Mike Mearls' blog. And that's for free. And he responds to people. 

So I think you're doing your brand a disservice by solely supporting Plug'n'Play. Certainly, "PlugnPlay" works exceedingly well with 4E (Delve Format), but it misses out the DIY crowd that's just as thrilled with 4E but remains hesitant to buy follow-up product.


----------



## Treebore

Greg K said:


> No, I will not quit saying dislike, because many people do dislike it (I actually like certain elements compared to 3e, but dislike (not hate) the game as a whole). However,  I'd be willing to amend what I wrote to read "dislike or [x]"  What  would you like x to be "like it, but not enough to switch from their current edition"?




Maybe we should just be sure not to say "dislike" in a general way. We should be sure to speak just for ourselves. So just be clear and say, "I do not like 4E." and I will say how "4E isn't my favorite game." That way we can perpetrate clearer perceptions.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

C_M2008 said:


> More like a mainstream activity to do like poker. The recognition was good (89% is huge) but a follow up question among the 89% about how they perceived the brand would be interesting.




I understand. When I first joined Wizards we had the Magic Pro Tour on ESPN 2. This was before poker but in a time when things like billiards and darts were on TV. If recall MTG PT ratings were in about a 1-2% share (read bad) and was crushed by pretty much everything else on the network including billiards, fishing, darts, strongman etc.


<snip>




> I was thinking more along the lines of Time, Scientific American, Sports Illustrated, Cosmo, etc. I've never heard of Starlog. The death of small print media is fairly inevitable but there are lots of magazines that still have a huge subscriber base--I do imagine a full page ad in such a magazine would be pricey though--especially in a good section. I suppose I question internet ads because I view them as an annoyance, why else would many sites charge you to have ad free access. I would be curious to know how well CTRs translate to sales though-but that may be difficult to measure.




The big mass media mags that you mention are way out of reach for a brand like D&D and would be a complete waste of our marketing dollars. you spend a ton of money to reach a very broad demographic of which the majority will never buy the game. 

A better bet would be to go for a couple tiers down of targeted gamer and lifestyle magazines like X-Box, PC Gamer, Playstation, (possibly Wired but even that is spendy). The demographic and pyschohgraphics  are going to be much closer to the potential target audience and cost way less. 

You are right it is difficult to track sales to print and online advertising unless there is a measurable call to action like a special offer.




> No offense to Wil Wheaton, but he isn't exactly well known outside of geek circles. Someone like Vin Diesel and Felicia Day as you mentioned would be more along the lines I'm thinking of. Again I can see that this would have cost/availablity ramifications just a thought.




Fair enough but we love us some Wil Wheaton. 




> These were very well done. More like this (and maybe something in a big movie) would be superb IMO.




We are right there with you. We would love to have a big, well done movie for our brand. 



> I don't mean to hassle and I hope It's not taken that way, I'm just really curious as to the strategy/timing for moving beyond the core demographic (which seems to have stalled in place for many years, but that may just be me) and any plans to move beyond being a niche activity (video games were such once) to something more common place. I suspect some technological intergration may be required however(a D&D app for say an Iphone or blackberry would be supercool---although the facebook thing grew old quick so I'm not sure how that would/could be done) before there's any chance of that.




No hassle at all. This will be more of a slow build versus a overnight switch but we are working in the direction you are asking about. I agree with you on the technological integration. 



> Anyway Just a guy who's curious about the future of his favourite hobby.
> Thanks for all your replies in this thread Scott, very interesting reading thus far.




My pleasure


----------



## Hereticus

Scott_Rouse said:


> And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.




Pathfinder owes you credit for one more sale based on that comment.



Mark said:


> It is a shame for many fans of 3.XE that WotC does not feel they can also move forward and support that edition but at least with this absolute statement you will have put many future questions to bed.  Thank you for being so forthright.




The deal breaker for me with 4.0 is the lack of any sort of magic system that resembles anything at all like the earlier editions. With the best part of the game completely removed, it is now something completely different.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

C_M2008 said:


> No offense to Wil Wheaton, but he isn't exactly well known outside of geek circles. Someone like Vin Diesel and Felicia Day as you mentioned would be more along the lines I'm thinking of. Again I can see that this would have cost/availablity ramifications just a thought.




No offense to Felicia Day, but I would put her in the same category as Wil Wheaton. She may be a good actor, but so far she has not really broken out except in geek circles. 

The other person I would put with Vin Deisel in the known to mainstream category is Stephen Corbert.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Scott,

Along the lines of bringing 4e closer to the type of game that 3.x players seem to prefer, any chance of a new _Unearthed Arcana_ in which you could provide some optional rules and subsystems that older players might apreciate without impinging on core?


----------



## Hadrian the Builder

Scott, you are on fire! I am really enjoying these great responses from you.
 I'm going to push my luck and ask you about the halo effect you mentioned in your first post. When you develop a marketing campaign, how do you expand that halo effect?
    I'm thinking of the idea that I've sucked my wife into the hobby, my friend got his girlfriend playing, and I'll probably play with my kids when they are old enough to play.(I did see you mention some of this before.) Are there things that WotC can do that encourages this? Is this effect measurable so that you can assess it?

    Also, I think I recall some generous donation of gaming materials to US service members by WotC. That got me thinking. Do you have any information that might indicate that targeting service members for marketing is worthwhile or measurable?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Folks, I know it's really hard to avoid and you are being *very cool *about keeping it civil but I really don't want this to turn into an edition vs edition discussion. 

Thanks


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Hadrian the Builder said:


> Scott, you are on fire! I am really enjoying these great responses from you.
> I'm going to push my luck and ask you about the halo effect you mentioned in your first post. When you develop a marketing campaign, how do you expand that halo effect?
> I'm thinking of the idea that I've sucked my wife into the hobby, my friend got his girlfriend playing, and I'll probably play with my kids when they are old enough to play.(I did see you mention some of this before.) Are there things that WotC can do that encourages this? Is this effect measurable so that you can assess it?




The halo effect happens organically like you describe. Friends and family are the number one way that people learn about and learn to play D&D. The internet is second and retailers are third. So word of mouth is very important to get more people to pick it up.

Products themselves can be a goo way to get the next generation. We have our Mirrorstone line of books that all are based on the worlds and monsters of D&D. Practical Guide to Dragons is an example of this. These books are now including a small D&D logo onthe back to indicate they are part of the brand.

Finally is PR, Advertising, Events, and Merchandising. We get a halo effect from existing player focused marketing when a non player sees a story in a local paper about a game day, sees a game product or the game itself being played at a store, goes to PAX and sees the booth, sees an advertisement on a video game site, sees a comic about it on Penny Arcade or the game featured in an episode of Futurama.



> Also, I think I recall some generous donation of gaming materials to US service members by WotC. That got me thinking. Do you have any information that might indicate that targeting service members for marketing is worthwhile or measurable?




It is hard to market dirrectly to the military but we do support the troops in many ways including product donations, author siginings at bases, conventions like Ziggurat Con, and we sell products through AAFES.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Wait a minute, I have a question.  

What exactly do people mean by "supporting" an edition?

What actions are required in order to "support" an edition?


----------



## ashockney

Scott, 

Thank you for your responses and interaction.  Very cool.

Quick editorial on 4e:
4e rocks it out in tactical combats, elegant villian construction rules, elite/solo/minions=awesome, class balance is incredible, new race and class options are compelling, treasure packaging is brilliant, skill challenge concept is compelling, foundational rules simplifications work (damage types, skills, defenses)

Thank you for all these things.  Job well done.

4e Obstacles:
Character balance is currently character blandness.  Break your generic character building system to allow for individual characters to be unique and compelling.
The heroic tier modules are not strong.  The story elements, rp, skill challenges, do not do the game justice.  The encounters are good, and maps are strong, but it is challenging to engage players when introducing the game to them. 
Your DM's versimilitude is off.  How does a recurring villian fit into a campaign?  What are villians motivations (beyond their three powers), and how does this affect the game?  What advantage do the villians have over the PC's, and how can they convice the PC's to react/behave?  Magic items got so nerfed, it's been tough to reconcile why they're relevant.
There are several foundations that don't compartmentalize well and are annoyingly cumbersome: Marking, DoT's, Save Effects - please elaborate on these or help DM's to understand how they can tweak or remove them if we desired.  
Online support and resources remain uncompelling.

I appreciate your sentiments and comments about where things are headed.  I'm a huge fan of the brand, and hope that all your best plans are successful.  

For more detailed analysis, check out our podcast (Amorphous Blobcast):
Amorphous Blob Games (Home)
Also, please check out the great thread from LostSoul about his experiences running the heroic tier modules, especially Keep on the Shadowfell.  Excellent stuff in there that helps to provide concrete examples to all of the above.

Questions:
What are your most profitable and fastest growing divisions under the D&D brand?
If you could provide advice from where you sit to those that might take advantage of the GSL, what strategy do you think could be successful for a third party publisher if executed properly?
What is something that your most dedicated brand fans, including most of the members of this community, could do to support, grow, and nurture the brand, right now?
Given the enormous gap between your revenue streams and those of competitor (or arguably substitute) products such as Blizzard's World of Warcraft MMORPG, what strategic ground do you feel you hold and/or do you desire to take, in order to be able to effectively compete in the long run?

Good luck in all that you do, and good gaming!


----------



## Scott_Rouse

ashockney said:


> snip






> For more detailed analysis, check out our podcast (Amorphous Blobcast):
> Amorphous Blob Games (Home)
> Also, please check out the great thread from LostSoul about his experiences running the heroic tier modules, especially Keep on the Shadowfell.  Excellent stuff in there that helps to provide concrete examples to all of the above.



I'll check it out

Questions:


> What are your most profitable and fastest growing divisions under the D&D brand?



Can't say, publicly traded and all.



> If you could provide advice from where you sit to those that might take advantage of the GSL, what strategy do you think could be successful for a third party publisher if executed properly?



Be creative and look for the white space. Use the templates: there is a ton of room to add new powers, monsters, magic items, flavor, etc. If people want roleplay heavy adventures, make them. 



> What is something that your most dedicated brand fans, including most of the members of this community, could do to support, grow, and nurture the brand, right now?



Teach a kid to play 
Buy a book in a game store
If you are not a DM become one and start a new game group
Subscribe to D&Di
Buy a book from a GSL publishers
Give me some XP 




> Given the enormous gap between your revenue streams and those of competitor (or arguably substitute) products such as Blizzard's World of Warcraft MMORPG, what strategic ground do you feel you hold and/or do you desire to take, in order to be able to effectively compete in the long run?



Imagination - you tell the story, determine the rules, define the boundaries (or lack there of)



> Good luck in all that you do, and good gaming!



Thanks!


----------



## Lanefan

Scott_Rouse said:


> If you are not a DM become one and start a new game group



This. 

It is *the* most significant thing a person can do to grow the game and the hobby in general, regardless what specific system(s) or editions you end up playing.

Without DMs, there is no game.

Lan-"DMing since 1984"-efan


----------



## RefinedBean

Scott_Rouse said:


> Fair enough but we love us some Wil Wheaton.




I imagine it's because he helps create customers out of the specific demographics you're looking for, rather than pull in tangential targets.

Begs the question of what areas of geek-dom/nerd-dom you guys should target most, and how much overlap there is.  Is it worth advertising at Trekkie conventions (if that's even possible)?  Would something like that see decent results?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

RefinedBean said:


> I imagine it's because he helps create customers out of the specific demographics you're looking for, rather than pull in tangential targets.
> 
> Begs the question of what areas of geek-dom/nerd-dom you guys should target most, and how much overlap there is.  Is it worth advertising at Trekkie conventions (if that's even possible)?  Would something like that see decent results?





I don't think geek necessarily translates into D&D play. Geek-dom is so broad now that you need to start to look for the pyschograpic similarities of the audience to see if connections can be made with D&D. Furries are super geeky (IMO a pretty weird) but may not be into D&D but LARPers, historical war reenactors, and the rennaisance fair crowds may be more enclined to like D&D due to their appreciation of fanatasy and /or war gaming.

If I were to target areas of geekdom outside of hobby gaming I would choose:

Video game (eg PAX)
Comic book 
Action Figure
Anime/manga
LARP/SCA
Roller Derby
Garage Bands and Local Metal Scenes
Urban Vinyl
Low Brow Art


----------



## The Ghost

First, and I think this bears repeating, what is good for Wizards and 4e is ultimately good for *every* edition of D&D.



Herschel said:


> _snip_
> 
> Different strokes for different folks. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think there's any need for more rules around role playing, just more guides and hints as to how to do it.




I purchased the 4th edition core rulebooks set last June. I read through the books, printed out a character sheet... and then sat there for over an hour with a pencil unable to make a character. Not because I lacked ideas but because I could not decipher the character sheet and how to apply the rules and numbers. (I say this as a person with degrees in Finance and Economics and one who has owned and operated three successful businesses.) I went back a few days later and purchased H1 just to learn how to make a character. Even then I had trouble replicating what was done.

It is not additional rules I am looking for but a product that would have given me basic rules, pre-gens, minis, and tiles all in one package. One that would have allowed multiple game sessions. One that would have sparked my imagination through multiple play sessions. One that was easy and quick to learn. Basically, an expanded version of H1. Something more like Hero Quest or Descent. As it turned out, I just became frustrated and put the books on my shelf and I have not touched them since. 

When I say it makes a great board game or minis game - I really mean it! I would love to see more products embrace that notion. Delve Night seems like a good step in that direction. I would love to see a convient way to emulate that at home - and with people who may not have ever gamed before. While I may not want to play long drawn-out campaigns with 4e that does not mean that I do not want a way to utilize the system.


----------



## RefinedBean

Scott_Rouse said:


> If I were to target areas of geekdom outside of hobby gaming I would choose:
> 
> Video game (eg PAX)
> Comic book
> Action Figure
> Anime/manga
> LARP/SCA
> Roller Derby
> Garage Bands and Local Metal Scenes
> Rock-a-billy




I could get behind Roller Derby.

And SOME famous comic artist/author has a good thing to say about D&D, surely!

What you need is a systematic method for outing every celebrity who plays D&D.


----------



## cdrcjsn

Scott_Rouse said:


> If I were to target areas of geekdom outside of hobby gaming I would choose:
> 
> Video game (eg PAX)
> Comic book
> Action Figure
> Anime/manga
> LARP/SCA
> Roller Derby
> Garage Bands and Local Metal Scenes
> Urban Vinyl
> Low Brow Art




Might I make a suggestion?  Have someone in your office scour the internet for fantasy/RPG webcomics.  There are hundreds out there, convenienty organized into various lists.

Individually, they might not have more than a couple thousand readers or so (some in the tens of thousands), but taken together, they have a readership much larger than Penny Arcade.  Do something with this list.  Anything.  Advertise through them.  Hold a contest and encourage them to participate.  Anything.

There is a ready made audience out there that is receptive to fantasy stories that is sitting there untapped.  

I've seen advertisement on this forum and elsewhere for D&D.  I've never, ever seen D&D advertised in any of these sites, and I visit a lot of them.

I know you said that blogs and online forums are a focused target according to the initial post on this thread.  Just don't forget to hit the webcomics scene which is similar but are often forgotten.  You've had a good start with Penny Arcade.  Don't stop there.  They might be the most visible because of PAX and Child's Play, but they are certainly not the only one that has a huge readership and a couple of webcomics actually have more readers (going just by Alexa figures).

Cedric Atizado
PS  You might want to have your advertising guys look at Project Wonderful.  Cheaper ad rates than Google Adsense and most ad services and targets pretty much most of the list you mentioned above.


----------



## Henrix

Scott_Rouse said:


> If people want roleplay heavy adventures, make them.




That's something I've been wondering as well - why are there so few roleplay heavy adventures from third party publishers? In pdf it should be easy to sell.


----------



## rounser

> Ariosto hit the nail above. 4E isn't marketing one of its most considerable strengths: ease of customizability. Like the "design your own trap" article that came out in Dragon magazine after the core books were released - that's the sort of stuff you want to be in the core books.



I recall a TSR designer saying that the 2E DMG was made with this plan of intentional incompleteness so you'd keep buying in mind (saving material that should have been in the DMG for the splatbooks).  I think people notice when they see important chunks of the game they're used to conspicuously absent (although I never noticed with 2E, despite the fact that I agree that it's not a very useful book).


----------



## Emryys

Lanefan said:


> It is *the* most significant thing a person can do to grow the game and the hobby in general, regardless what specific system(s) or editions you end up playing... Without DMs, there is no game.




QFT... since '80, 1E to 4E 



The Ghost said:


> It is not additional rules I am looking for but a product that would have given me basic rules, pre-gens, minis, and tiles all in one package. One that would have allowed multiple game sessions. One that would have sparked my imagination through multiple play sessions. One that was easy and quick to learn....




Maybe you need the *4E Starter Set*

I'd also download the *Character Builder Demo* for additional characters... greatly expands the replay value 



cdrcjsn said:


> Might I make a suggestion?  Have someone in your office scour the internet for fantasy/RPG webcomics.  There are hundreds out there, convenienty organized into various lists.




Somewhere to start... *www.thewebcomiclist.com*


----------



## jbear

Scott,

How long until the character builder and DNDi in general will be available in other languages, if at all? I'm especially interested in Spanish.

Someone suggested looking at what LostSoul did with KotS, I second that notion. Having advice on how to DM in that style would be a true gem. My brain nearly exploded with ideas when he described how he allowed his soon-to-be-sacrificed-to-Orcus-PC's escape during a skill challenge using their attack powers and resolving them with skill checks. Also, how he handled the split party (the worst thing my players could do to me) in rounds, with two simultaneous events going on is brilliant. That should go down in print as SOLID DM ADVICE.

I realise that the 'say yes' guideline in the DMG advocates this type of ruling. Some guidelines on how to do it with the game system as it stands would be cool.

One of people's complaints (though not mine or my players') is the 'sameness' of classes. I think you're already on the ball on this one with some of the concepts you seem to be developing, like Racial Lineage. Between all the new classes, a multi-class, hybrids and the Bard and a racial lineage to boot, character build options are pretty darn wide. 

Keeping in mind, and I think even the most embittered detractor of 4e must understand that the engine has been built (The engine is not going to be rebuilt, tuned at best maybe.), and whatever follows must slot into the engine, maybe there is room to slot in an optional subsystem for classes along the same lines as the Lineage feats. 

Within the Class there could be an Expertise Line of feats that would define one ranger from another, and also (as only rangers could take up one of their expertise lines) define rangers from theives. Once that line was taken up, you could't take another line. The feats could largely influence out-of-combat situations, heading down the line of 'promote RP characteristic of my class'.

Anyway, just a thought.

The idea of converting earlier modules seems like an interesting one. Especially if it were along the lines of 'Clear Guidelines to convert your early edition modules to 4e'.

I liked the mention of Ravenloft. My 4e campaign is using homebrew adaptation of the Heroes of Horror Taint system, and the world is slowly descending into a realm of horror itself. I'm sure I would find lots of inspirational material in a Ravenloft setting.

Are you allowed to tell us if a new power source is underway and being developed? If so, are you allowed to accidently type the first or second letter of that power source and then stop and say you've been sworn to secrecy? Something like this: 'Yes, part of the team has begun the initial devolopment of a new power source we have decided to call Ki.... ahhhh, actually I'm sworn to secrecy, so I can't tell you' ;p

Ok last question. At the moment a character's power source doesn't have any real influence over the game, it seems merely descriptive. Will this change as the game continues to expand and grow? If so, in what way will they characters power source be relevant?

Thank you for your time.


----------



## Festivus

The Ghost said:


> It is not additional rules I am looking for but a product that would have given me basic rules, pre-gens, minis, and tiles all in one package. One that would have allowed multiple game sessions. One that would have sparked my imagination through multiple play sessions. One that was easy and quick to learn. Basically, an expanded version of H1. Something more like Hero Quest or Descent. As it turned out, I just became frustrated and put the books on my shelf and I have not touched them since.
> 
> When I say it makes a great board game or minis game - I really mean it! I would love to see more products embrace that notion. Delve Night seems like a good step in that direction. I would love to see a convient way to emulate that at home - and with people who may not have ever gamed before. While I may not want to play long drawn-out campaigns with 4e that does not mean that I do not want a way to utilize the system.




A few thoughts:
First, the D&D RPG Starter Set, which is almost exactly what you describe might have been worth looking into.  Perhaps it wasn't out at the time... I really wished that came out at the same time as everything else.  [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dragons-Roleplaying-Starter-Introductory/dp/0786948205/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240409440&sr=8-2]Amazon.com: Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Starter Set (D&D Introductory Game): Wizards RPG Team: Books[/ame]

Second, you can order delve night for home play a month after it comes out for retail play without having to use WPN.  You don't get DM points for it, but you can certainly order them.

Third, check out the Living Forgotten Realms.  You get short adventures for a variety of levels that can be played in about 4 hours.  Best of all, they are FREE!

Oh fourth, one of the best books I have seen for people like me who often run out of time... the "Dungeon Delve" book.  I have used 5 levels worth of them already.  I'd love to see a "Dungeon Delve 2".


----------



## Mournblade94

Scott_Rouse said:


> If I were to target areas of geekdom outside of hobby gaming I would choose:
> 
> LARP/SCA
> Roller Derby
> Garage Bands and Local Metal Scenes
> Urban Vinyl
> Low Brow Art




Many of the gamers I play with got their start in LARP.  Most of the people in SCA have already played D&D for years.  It is because of the old wargamers that were involved in Runequest and TSR that Pensic intentionally interfered with the old GENCON.

I always make sure to invite the newer players to our tabletop games.


----------



## mhensley

One marketing idea I give a big thumbs up to is the D&D game on Facebook.  Very neat and I'm sure it's seen by a large number of people there.  I've also started seeing D&D flash ads on Digg which are pretty nice.


----------



## Festivus

I'd love to see Sheldon and company on Big Bang Theory have a episode that revolved around a D&D game, perhaps in the spirit of "The Gamers" where they flip between real world and the fantasy world.  Sadly, I am no script writer and probably have no shot at ever seeing this happen.


----------



## Holy Smokes

Scott_Rouse said:


> ..Garage Bands and Local Metal Scenes...



Speaking of which, *somebody* really needs to grab a license from Double Fine Productions for _Brütal Legend_. This game cries out for the 4E D&D treatment; Tim Shafer's metal mythology setting is incredible with awesome-sauce poured on top.

The sub-cultural overlaps are too synchronous to ignore. D&D IS METAL, and _Brütal Legend_ has just the setting to prove it.


----------



## D'karr

Festivus said:


> I'd love to see Sheldon and company on Big Bang Theory have a episode that revolved around a D&D game, perhaps in the spirit of "The Gamers" where they flip between real world and the fantasy world.  Sadly, I am no script writer and probably have no shot at ever seeing this happen.




That is absolutely one of the funniest shows.  If Sheldon was DMing, that would be hilarious.  But they really need to include Kripke in the game.  His Elmer Fudd speech is ridiculously funny.


----------



## alleynbard

Hexmage-EN said:


> This is a big internal conflict with me.
> 
> Good points about magic




I was the same way at first.  I really struggled with this. I am not going to lie, it took a fundamental shift in the way I thought about these classes before it clicked.  

The one way to preserve caster flexibility is through rituals.  I know it is not a perfect fix, but it is a pretty good one. While anyone can become a ritual caster the spell casting classes get it for free.  Wizards even gain bonus rituals starting at 5th level.

It took me a while to convince my players that they should be using their rituals.  But now we get at least one Tenser's Floating Disk every session.  I can't wait to see Amanuesis (which is essentially the old Scribe spell) in action.  

I am encouraging the use of rituals by giving out a few rituals for free, mostly through enemy ritual books.  I stray slightly outside the wealth guidelines to make it happen, but that is a trade-off I am willing to make.  I do make sure I read each ritual carefully before I place it in a treasure hoard.

Some of this tactic is to just get the players used to the idea of rituals.  Once that is achieved I think they will see, and I will see, that wizards (and other spellcasters) can still be remarkably flexible classes without being overpowering.  Kind of the "first hit is free" tactic that I hope will encourage ritual purchasing in the future.

Sorry for being a bit off-topic. Don't mind me Scott, please continue with your fantastic thread.


----------



## The Ghost

Emryys said:


> Maybe you need the *4E Starter Set*
> 
> I'd also download the *Character Builder Demo* for additional characters... greatly expands the replay value






Festivus said:


> A few thoughts:
> First, the D&D RPG Starter Set, which is almost exactly what you describe might have been worth looking into.  Perhaps it wasn't out at the time... I really wished that came out at the same time as everything else.  Amazon.com: Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Starter Set (D&D Introductory Game): Wizards RPG Team: Books
> 
> Second, you can order delve night for home play a month after it comes out for retail play without having to use WPN.  You don't get DM points for it, but you can certainly order them.
> 
> Third, check out the Living Forgotten Realms.  You get short adventures for a variety of levels that can be played in about 4 hours.  Best of all, they are FREE!
> 
> Oh fourth, one of the best books I have seen for people like me who often run out of time... the "Dungeon Delve" book.  I have used 5 levels worth of them already.  I'd love to see a "Dungeon Delve 2".




Thanks. If only the 4e starter set had come out in June 2008 and not October 2008...? 

The Dungeon Delve book sounds pretty interesting. Are there any plans by Wizards to re-release older tile sets? I have a bought a few but have had a hard time tracking down some of the other sets. That is, without resorting to the internet. 

What is WPN?


----------



## dm4hire

The Ghost said:


> Thanks. If only the 4e starter set came out in June and not October...?




Starter set is out for 4e.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne

Scott_Rouse said:


> We are right there with you. We would love to have a big, well done movie for our brand.




This is a little off-topic for this thread, but is WoTC/Hasbro doing anything special in this regards?  As a former film-school kid, this topic always interests me - and the thing that always strikes me is that WoTC should be approaching this from the same sort of angle that Marvel Comics used, trying to attract the right kind of talent so that the films made are quality.  I also beat the drum of making a D&D movie that isn't a "D&D Movie" but rather a "Driz'zt Movie" (just to use one obvious example) in the same way that Marvel doesn't make "Comic Book Movies" but "Spiderman" or "Iron Man" movies.


----------



## Greg K

Kid Charlemagne,
I completely agree with your post. Have an XP



Kid Charlemagne said:


> This is a little off-topic for this thread, but is WoTC/Hasbro doing anything special in this regards?  As a former film-school kid, this topic always interests me - and the thing that always strikes me is that WoTC should be approaching this from the same sort of angle that Marvel Comics used, trying to attract the right kind of talent so that the films made are quality.  I also beat the drum of making a D&D movie that isn't a "D&D Movie" but rather a "Driz'zt Movie" (just to use one obvious example) in the same way that Marvel doesn't make "Comic Book Movies" but "Spiderman" or "Iron Man" movies.


----------



## ShinHakkaider

Kid Charlemagne said:


> This is a little off-topic for this thread, but is WoTC/Hasbro doing anything special in this regards?  As a former film-school kid, this topic always interests me - and the thing that always strikes me is that WoTC should be approaching this from the same sort of angle that Marvel Comics used, trying to attract the right kind of talent so that the films made are quality.  I also beat the drum of making a D&D movie that isn't a "D&D Movie" but rather a "Driz'zt Movie" (just to use one obvious example) in the same way that Marvel doesn't make "Comic Book Movies" but "Spiderman" or "Iron Man" movies.




The Marvel characters however have a lot more traction with audiences than D&D characters do. You ask the average person if they've heard of Spider-Man, Iron Man, The Hulk or Captain america and they'll say yes and can ID them if shown a picture. 

Driz'zt? Not so much. 

My thought is this, if they're going to do a D&D movie, it should'nt rely soley on the D&D brand. That's more likely to keep people away than anything. They should just try to make a good fantasy film or even better build brand awareness by doing a TV series (animated or otherwise). Seriously, a D&D series done as well as an AVATAR the Last Airbender show would be great. 

I use Avatar as an example because it was pretty much an orignal story, that built up it's own following overtime based on solid storytelling and strong characterization. 

On almost the flip side is that Justice League / Justice league Unlimited Series. Both had for the most part highly recognizable characters but also had amazingly strong characterizations and plotting / story telling as well. Particularly during the Cadmus story arc during the 1st season of Unlimited.
Amazing stuff that didn't just rely on the brand, but on giving it's viewers something more of value. In this case good story telling with great payoffs.


----------



## Festivus

The Ghost said:


> Thanks. If only the 4e starter set had come out in June 2008 and not October 2008...?
> 
> The Dungeon Delve book sounds pretty interesting. Are there any plans by Wizards to re-release older tile sets? I have a bought a few but have had a hard time tracking down some of the other sets. That is, without resorting to the internet.
> 
> What is WPN?




WPN = Wizards Play Network, it's the retail organized play system for Magic: the Gathering and D&D, where youc an order things like the Worldwide Gameday events and the monthly delves.  http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/wpn/main

I was saying you can order the delves after they are available for WPN play as a download using the RPGA system.  RPGA is the organized play system for home (and retail) D&D games:

New Comer's Information Page

A bit out of date I think, but I believe that WoTC is trying to straighten out the whole DCI/WPN/RPGA tangle into a single entity... but I am no expert on what they are doing so I'll let the Rouse address that or get Chris Tulach (or similar) to post.

Lastly, I saw Amazon.com got restock on DU1 recently so I ordered a second set.  But they are sold out again.  I too hope they reprint some of the older sets, as I missed out on Ruins of the Wild and don't want to pay $40 for a set.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

ShinHakkaider said:


> My thought is this, if they're going to do a D&D movie, it should'nt rely soley on the D&D brand. That's more likely to keep people away than anything. They should just try to make a good fantasy film or even better build brand awareness by doing a TV series (animated or otherwise). Seriously, a D&D series done as well as an AVATAR the Last Airbender show would be great.



I would kill for a HBO production of a series/mini-series set in Eberron or Sigil. You could have very cool urban sets, interesting cast of characters, multi-layered plots, mature content. It be great.

HBO has had lots of success with _True Blood_ and _Song of Ice and Fire_ is going to be coming out on HBO. So I can dream, I can dream!


----------



## Greg K

ShinHakkaider,
The impression I got, and I could be wrong, was that he was advocating the same position that you are- they need to approach it not as a DND movie, but as making a good fantasy movie with a solid story, characterization and talent capable of pulling it off.  The Drizz't movie, as he wrote was just one possiblity as to how approach it.

Though as I wrote at the beginning, I could be entirely wrong and have misinterpreted his post.



ShinHakkaider said:


> My thought is this, if they're going to do a D&D movie, it should'nt rely soley on the D&D brand. That's more likely to keep people away than anything. They should just try to make a good fantasy film or even better build brand awareness by doing a TV series (animated or otherwise). Seriously, a D&D series done as well as an AVATAR the Last Airbender show would be great.
> 
> I use Avatar as an example because it was pretty much an orignal story, that built up it's own following overtime based on solid storytelling and strong characterization.
> 
> On almost the flip side is that Justice League / Justice league Unlimited Series. Both had for the most part highly recognizable characters but also had amazingly strong characterizations and plotting / story telling as well. Particularly during the Cadmus story arc during the 1st season of Unlimited.
> Amazing stuff that didn't just rely on the brand, but on giving it's viewers something more of value. In this case good story telling with great payoffs.


----------



## ShinHakkaider

Greg K said:


> ShinHakkaider,
> The impression I got, and I could be wrong, was that he was advocating the same position that you are- they need to approach it not as a DND movie, but as making a good fantasy movie with a solid story, characterization and talent capable of pulling it off.  The Drizz't movie, as he wrote was just one possiblity as to how approach it.
> 
> Though as I wrote at the beginning, I could be entirely wrong and have misinterpreted his post.




Yeah, I kinda got that as well when I went back and read both posts again.  My mistake. 

Still there's a certain amount of fanboy expectation from using a specific character that is so universally loved / hated by the fandom at large. That expectation that shouldn't weigh into whether its a good feature or not. It should just be a GOOD feature that stands on it's own. So on that point we're in total agreement.


----------



## Nebulous

I doubt a real D&D adaptation of a famous D&D line would actually happen, but it seems to me like it would be a shoe-in idea for a hit trilogy. For what it's worth though, Dragonlance Chronicles would make a truly epic HBO mini-series...


----------



## BryonD

ShinHakkaider said:


> Driz'zt? Not so much.



I don't think this is a problem at all.  It may even be a good thing.
Non-D&D folks may hear about a new D&D movie and stop listening before you get to the ampersand.  However, the same people, or at least some of them, may be interested in some cool new fantasy action flick about this "Drizz-whassit-dude".  Then, assuming it is done well enough, they see it, like it, find out it is D&D and a few percent check out the game.  

Drizzt becomes a more known entity and D&D gains come along for the ride.

I think Kid Charlemagne had a good point there.


----------



## Plane Sailing

I've deleted about a dozen posts which were verging towards edition wars or even overly edition comparison-like in this thread. Some of them could have become quite interesting conversations, but *not in this thread*. After the earlier warnings, further posts that stray off track are also likely to disappear.

Please keep it on topic, thanks.


----------



## Stormtalon

Nebulous said:


> I doubt a real D&D adaptation of a famous D&D line would actually happen, but it seems to me like it would be a shoe-in idea for a hit trilogy. For what it's worth though, Dragonlance Chronicles would make a truly epic HBO mini-series...




Too bad the horrific Dragonlance Animated ....thing.... probably killed all chance of THAT happening....


----------



## Stormtalon

Now that I think of it, I do have a question for Scott on the topic of a hypothetical D&D movie:

Are plans being made for better quality control of the next D&D-related/branded/themed movie?  'Cause, well, frankly the last two live action ones were less than good; I watched the 2nd one on TV last year with two friends of mine and a direct quote from one of them was, "OMG, that barbarian FAILS AT LIFE!"

Pleeeease set up some sort of editiorial/quality control in the next movie licensing deal you guys set up, okay?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Stormtalon said:


> Now that I think of it, I do have a question for Scott on the topic of a hypothetical D&D movie:
> 
> Are plans being made for better quality control of the next D&D-related/branded/themed movie?  'Cause, well, frankly the last two live action ones were less than good; I watched the 2nd one on TV last year with two friends of mine and a direct quote from one of them was, "OMG, that barbarian FAILS AT LIFE!"
> 
> Pleeeease set up some sort of editiorial/quality control in the next movie licensing deal you guys set up, okay?





Yes. We now have a strong precedent within Hasbro of what a well done movie can do for a brand (Transformers) and I believe the bar has been set for future entertainment endeavors. After the success of Transformers, Hasbro now has a specific entertainment executive and a group to manage the TV and movie opportunities.


----------



## Henrix

For a movie, wouldn't about any script written by one of Wizards ordinary authors be a lot better than what the other movies had?


----------



## Mouseferatu

Henrix said:


> For a movie, wouldn't about any script written by one of Wizards ordinary authors be a lot better than what the other movies had?




Yeah, Scott. Wouldn't a script, or at least a story treatment, written by one of your freelance novelists *cough, ahem, cough* be worth considering?


----------



## Stormtalon

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes. We now have a strong precedent within Hasbro of what a well done movie can do for a brand (Transformers) and I believe the bar has been set for future entertainment endeavors. After the success of Transformers, Hasbro now has a specific entertainment executive and a group to manage the TV and movie opportunities.




Best news I've heard all day!

And, never thought I'd say this, but thank god for Michael Bay....


----------



## Hadrian the Builder

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes. We now have a strong precedent within Hasbro of what a well done movie can do for a brand (Transformers) and I believe the bar has been set for future entertainment endeavors. After the success of Transformers, Hasbro now has a specific entertainment executive and a group to manage the TV and movie opportunities.





So...ummm...can we start speculating on the next D&D movie? Starring Felicia Day, Wil Weaton, Vin Diesel...

I'm kind of amazed that a company like Hasbro just figured this out...espcially so late after the Star Wars phenomenon (and the related success of Kenner) 

What's the feasibility of Hasbro working with the Sci-Fi channel to produce some sword & sorcery films?


----------



## Festivus

Stormtalon said:


> Too bad the horrific Dragonlance Animated ....thing.... probably killed all chance of THAT happening....




Lord of the Rings managed to overcome a treatment by Rankin & Bass, so anything is possible.

If a D&D movie were to be made, I'd want to see something epic.  Give me Age of Worms on the big screen, I'd pay money to see a group of heroes save the world from the worm god.


----------



## Stormtalon

Ahhh, let's leave SciFi out of the D&D movie discussion; frankly, the 2nd D&D movie was already like a made-for-SciFi flick.  I'd rather see them get away from that sorta thing, IYKWIMAITYD.

Now, if we're talking about a TV _series_ that'd be a whole 'nother thing, as they've done pretty well on the series side of things: BSG, for example.


----------



## Treebore

Mouseferatu said:


> Yeah, Scott. Wouldn't a script, or at least a story treatment, written by one of your freelance novelists *cough, ahem, cough* be worth considering?




Excellent suggestion!


----------



## UngainlyTitan

Mouseferatu said:


> Yeah, Scott. Wouldn't a script, or at least a story treatment, written by one of your freelance novelists *cough, ahem, cough* be worth considering?



Yup, I second this, especially given the quality of Black Crusade


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Stormtalon said:


> Ahhh, let's leave SciFi out of the D&D movie discussion; frankly, the 2nd D&D movie was already like a made-for-SciFi flick.  I'd rather see them get away from that sorta thing, IYKWIMAITYD.
> 
> Now, if we're talking about a TV _series_ that'd be a whole 'nother thing, as they've done pretty well on the series side of things: BSG, for example.




If you want to recreate the feeling of a D&D game, you will usually have something pretty action-heavy. Such a show would be costly. BSG managed pretty well by  having a lot of non-SFX stuff going on (you know, the part some people decry as soap operaish), but they could pull off the big stuff for the important things.

I think a movie is a good way to go. 

Of course, the story of an inspector and his friends in Sharn might be awesome. Pulp Noir Fantasy. The problem might be the cost of CGI in an ongoing series in an exotic locale as Sharn...

Maybe one shouldn't even really think of D&D tropes specifically. It might be enough to have just the equivalent of Stargate or BSG for fantasy settings.

Stargate is actually pretty close - medieval city of the day was a standard trope. Just have the character wield swords and fireballs instead of rifles and grenades. 



For writers, I'd recommend jonrog1, Mouseferatu and Piratecat. Hypersmurf can be stunt coordinator or something. 
Edit: Oh, and Rel could do the casting.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Of course, the story of an inspector and his friends in Sharn might be awesome. Pulp Noir Fantasy. The problem might be the cost of CGI in an ongoing series in an exotic locale as Sharn...



One reason why I would like to see Sigil for a urban fantasy one. You could set it in the Hive, and film in lots of industrial areas that have been redressed to look like Sigil. The costs be more for magic, cosmetics for different races and probably would use some manner of digital matte-painting for the background.

Another reason too I would like to see it on HBO as a mini-series cause well if HBO thinks it will do well it could get big production. Imagine the above with a production value of _Rome, Band of Brother_s, etc. Also being on HBO they could make good, mature stories that would showcase the range of D&D.


----------



## Siran Dunmorgan

Fallen Seraph said:


> Another reason too I would like to see it on HBO as a mini-series cause well if HBO thinks it will do well it could get big production. Imagine the above with a production value of _Rome, Band of Brother_s, etc. Also being on HBO they could make good, mature stories that would showcase the range of D&D.




Sadly—for the Dungeons & Dragons brand, not in general—HBO already has a major fantasy series in the works, and is unlikely to undertake another one for the next few years:


HBO turns 'Fire' into fantasy series - Entertainment News, TV News, Media - Variety
—Siran Dunmorgan


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Stormtalon said:


> Ahhh, let's leave SciFi out of the D&D movie discussion; frankly, the 2nd D&D movie was already like a made-for-SciFi flick.  I'd rather see them get away from that sorta thing, IYKWIMAITYD.
> 
> Now, if we're talking about a TV _series_ that'd be a whole 'nother thing, as they've done pretty well on the series side of things: BSG, for example.




Lets leave Sci-Fi out for a series as well. For every BSG there is a Flash Gordon. 

If HBO already has fantasy, then consider Showtime. Showtime gave us Stargate afterall.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Yeah I know about _Song of Fire and Ice_, but one can dream, one can dream


----------



## Corinth

I concur with the idea that WOTC needs to follow Marvel's lead in transitioning properties from its home media business (for D&D, that's the TRPG medium) to another media arena; that Hasbro already has something like this operational is a good sign for the business, and I would think that it would be good for the D&D brand (as well as the subordinate brands that are its vassals, such as the Realms) to work through such internal agencies.  This is, from the perspective of the long-term health of D&D, not a bad thing.

Where I disagree is in specifics.  Any movie made must be either a summer blockbuster or Oscar bait, primarily due to the monetary costs involved in making such a movie at all, and making a commercially-successful major blockbuster requires attractive talent that has the skill to pull it off before as well as behind the camera.  That isn't cheap; this will force decisions on _what_ to translate to film as well as _how_ that gets done, because the pressure will be to focus on spectacle--something that film, as a medium, excells at doing--at the expense of the often-intangible characterization and narrative execution required to make a Dumb Blockbuster into a long-running classic film (with guaranteed revenue over generations) with high repeat-viewing potential.

A television series, on the other hand, lends itself far better to those two intangibles due to the relaxed pressure for spectacle.  Serial television demands strong degrees of both characterization and narrative execution for commercial success, especially if the serial is a genre fiction work; the recently-concluded SFC version of _Battlestar Galatica_, for all its faults, is a very good example of Doing It Right (just as _Babylon 5_ was in the 1990s, for all of its faults).

The corpus of D&D-brand fiction needs to be divided along subgenre lines when figuring out what property to translate into which other medium.  Where the fantasy merges with investigation, _noir_, some form of intrigue as a driving plot or subplot of the story then shunt it towards TV; where the story is focused on exploration, action scenes, high adventure, or other forms of spectacle that are far better done in a visual medium then shunt towards film.  (Paragraphs of description become establishing shots, action routines, etc. that take seconds or minutes to unfold on screen instead of taking long minutes or worse in prose, especially as you get into Fat Fantasy territory and thus run into filler.)

The Icewind Dale novels would make very good films.  They are strongly visual, possess easy plots to follow, and work best at the fast pace that a blockbuster has to have to be truly excellent.  The prequels, on the other hand, would make for an excellent TV series; lots of melodrama, intrigue, double-dealing and other features of successful TV soap operas and costume dramas are present therein.  Find the right actor to play the focal character in both sets, with the work ethic necessary (and health coverage to go with it; he'll need it), and you can make Salvatore's iconic drow outcast hero into a big mainstream cultural icon within five years (and thereby shape an entire generation for life to your banner).


----------



## JeffB

Eberron is not my fave D&D setting, but I like it and I think it would prolly have the most mass appeal for a movie setting. 

In fact some sort of  Indiana Jones-ish Xendrik type thing would be very cool.

I think the thing that is CRUCIAL- is no..I repeat NO.. oppressed band of normal type would-be heroes need to find and use a magic item to destroy a "Dark lord" and bring peace to the lands....PLEASE!!! PLEASE! None of that.

That is all

roger

over


----------



## Mephistopheles

Kid Charlemagne said:


> This is a little off-topic for this thread, but is WoTC/Hasbro doing anything special in this regards?  As a former film-school kid, this topic always interests me - and the thing that always strikes me is that WoTC should be approaching this from the same sort of angle that Marvel Comics used, trying to attract the right kind of talent so that the films made are quality.  I also beat the drum of making a D&D movie that isn't a "D&D Movie" but rather a "Driz'zt Movie" (just to use one obvious example) in the same way that Marvel doesn't make "Comic Book Movies" but "Spiderman" or "Iron Man" movies.




I think that's a great idea.

On a bit of a tangent I'd have loved it if this old gem could have somehow turned into a series...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5V-fF-2URE]YouTube - Drizzt mithril drow fantasy[/ame]


----------



## merelycompetent

Scott:

I like what I'm reading here, and agree wholeheartedly with much of what you've posted. I would like to ask a few questions about some of your preceding comments:

You had mentioned that the lack of a conversion method for 3.5E to 4E put up an artificial barrier for gamers who wanted to switch, and a desire on your (WotC's) part to draw in older edition gamers. I, and many of the gamers I associate with, fall into this category. There are many things about 4E that I like and admire - enough to back-port into my existing high-level campaign.

1) Will there be such a conversion process/method from WotC in the forseeable future? What I'm interested in is a single location (web) or document (articles?) dedicated to lessening the pain (and it is very painful) to perform such a conversion.

2) You also mention doing conversion pieces/articles for classes, adventures, and books. Will there be any focus on the mechanics problems/incompatibilities? I can see several pitfalls from reading the 4E core rulebooks. I am very sure there are others that I would miss, with the results leaving a painful bruise upon my face (at least psychologically). Being prepared means more fun in the campaign and less DM (and player) pain.

3) Is WotC actively researching this matter, and if so, is there some way that we can help?

I'd also like to thank you for posting the information that you have. It's helped relieve some of the frustration, and provided much fodder for enthusiasm


----------



## Furluge

Greg K said:


> I'm going to disagree.  Pathfinder is just one avenue for those that dislike 4e.  However, not everyone that dislikes 4e are going to Pathfinder.
> 
> ...
> 
> I'd say one or two sessions is giving it a chance. That is a good enough time to get a feel for the game.  They just are not enjoying the game for whatever reason.
> 
> <Really off-topic diatribe of why Greg K hates 4e>




In response to your post, I said Pathfinder is the biggest problem. Not the sole reason, the biggest one. It's the one I hear about the most. We're not losing 4e players to Mutants and Masterminds games, even though M&M is concentrated awesome and also OGL.

I disagree with what you say about one or two gaming sessions being an accurate portrayal. In one or two gaming sessions you haven't even gained a single level. Classes haven't started to show their many-colored distinctions. Like past editions and many other RPGs at beginning levels characters still have a lot in common and less to distinguish themselves from other classes than they do at higher levels. What edition of D&D is two games at 1st level a representative of the entire experience? If I did that with any of the previous editions I'd think that Wizards are useless because you just cast magic missile three times and take a nap, Paladins are lame fighters, Fighters are fighters, and Barbarians are supah-fighters, Clerics are healy fighters, And rogues are lametastic fighters, and druids are wolves.

As for the rest of your post. This thread is not about edition wars. I was posting anecdotal evidence (Admittedly the worst kind of evidence.) about what I see causing splits in gaming groups. Not posting my manifesto of 4e. I do disagree with a majority of your points though, and I think a number of them show a lot of evidence of not really trying the game system, but you've apparently made up your mind to hate it.  Hope you enjoy whatever else you're playing then.


----------



## Greg K

Furluge said:


> In response to your post, I said Pathfinder is the biggest problem. Not the sole reason, the biggest one. It's the one I hear about the most. We're not losing 4e players to Mutants and Masterminds games, even though M&M is concentrated awesome and also OGL..




Pathfinder might be what you are hearing the most. However, I hear people going not only to Pathfinder, but I hear just as many people going to True20, Warriors and Warlocks (the new M&M fantasy expansion), and retro games.



> I disagree with what you say about one or two gaming sessions being an accurate portrayl. In one or two gaming sessions you haven't even gained a single level. Classes haven't started to show more their many-colored distinctions. What edition of D&D is two games at 1st level a representative of the entire experience?




If you have played many different rpgs, you know what elements you like and what you don't like in rpgs- especially, when certain dislikes crop up in many games.



> As for the rest of your post. This thread is not about edition wars. I was posting anecdotal evidence (Admittedly the worst kind of evidence.) about what I see causing splits in gaming groups. Not posting my manifesto of 4e. I do disagree with a majority of your points though, and I think a number of them show a lot of evidence of not really trying the game system, but you've apparently made up your mind to hate it.  Hope you enjoy whatever else you're playing then.




I have played nearly 100 rpgs if not more. I know what works for ME in an rpg and what does not. A lot people on these boards will tell you that if you play enough rpgs, you know what works and doesn't work for you. And, my post was not meant as an edition war. As I wrote, there are elements that I like in 4e over 3e, but there are just many more that me not want to play and what I gave was a list of some of those reasons..


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Lot's of talk and ideas on the idea of a totally awesomtasticool movie so here's the deal.

Stories: we've got 'em. Awesome stories. NY Times Bestseller stories that I know would make awesome movies. 

What we don't have yet is: a screenplay, producer, studio, director, cast, or budget. 

A couple years back a few of us went to LA and pitched D&D to some amazing producers (I won't name drop but if I did you might say wow!). The meetings went well and we had some interest but then the writers strike hit and the leads went cold. So it is back to square 1. Hasbro has a partnership with Universal and they are working on some projects. D&D is not one of them but who knows what the future could hold. Fantasy has proven potential but it also has a lot to live up to with the success of LoTR (and conversely some baggage with movies like Dragon Wars). D&D has this baggage but as someone pointed out, bad movies from the past don't rule out future potential for success (just look at comic book movies from the 80s vs now). It is all about the getting the right writers, director, cast, and budget.


----------



## Wereserpent

Hey Scott.

4E is not really my kind of game, I mean I would play it, but it is not my number one game of choice.

But, I wanted to let you know that I think it is great you are here on the forums responding to everyones questions.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

Scott_Rouse said:


> It is all about the getting the right writers, director, cast, and budget.



Let's hope we one day do 

Oh, and Scott I now got a question actually. Do you know when the next big, Mailbag will be? I am sure with the release of PHB2, Arcane Power the new info we are getting for MM2 and PHB3 that there will be questions galore.

Thanks for being so responsive and taking your time out to do this


----------



## amysrevenge

Scott_Rouse said:


> D&D has this baggage but as someone pointed out, bad movies from the past don't rule out future potential for success.




They made another Hulk movie.  They can make another D&D movie.

Frankly, I still think the best thing for showcasing the hobby is showing cool people *playing* D&D in otherwise unrelated movies or TV shows, not showing actual gameworld characters having adventures.  

The problem is doing it without "let's laugh at the nerds wearing costumes and talking in funny accents" being the only reason it's there, and yet to still have it entertaining in some way.  The wrong kind of publicity (and yes, I do believe there is bad publicity) could only further marginalize the hobby from the mainstream.  We need to have prominent examples of normal people playing D&D in a typical sort of way.  Not super-nerds in elf ears talking in faux-medieval 'thees' and 'thous' and taking the game too seriously.

The above is the reason I actually thing having the nerd herd on Big Bang Theory have a D&D-themed episode could actually be a bad thing for the hobby.  Sure, they could theoretically do a respectful job, but it would be soooo tempting for the show to do the things I mentioned above - they could fill their entire episode with cheap laughs at our expense, reinforcing stereotypes we would probably prefer to let disappear.  Heck, they'd be fools to pass up such an opportunity to use these gags - they almost write themselves.


----------



## Droogie

D&D would work well as a TV series. There are truly endless story possibilities, and it would require a long-running series to tell even a fraction of them. Of course, it would be hard to do all the races, creatures and exotic locations on a TV budget....maybe a CGI animated show (ala Clone Wars) would be an option?


----------



## hong

Hmm... Dungeons and Dragons... as a cartoon....


----------



## Dionysos

hong said:


> Hmm... Dungeons and Dragons... as a cartoon....




I have thought for some time that a new cartoon series is the best first step toward getting D&D back into mass media. I think that the horrific failure of the two movies has made the brand poison in Hollywood, such that getting that dream staff of writers, actors, director, etc is going to be impossible. For now.

Unlike in the 80s, when the original cartoon aired, cartoons are appreciated and followed by large numbers of adults as well as children. A rockin D&D cartoon aimed at teens and young adults on Cartoon Network would be brilliant. It would also neatly sidestep the problem of a live action TV series not having the budget to do the SFX in a non-cheesy way.

Once the brand got some recognition in another medium, you could go back and start worrying about making a new (good) movie. For right now, I think the big names in the film industry wouldn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole, seeing how poorly the brand has fared in recent memory.

But after a successful cartoon, potentially with merchandise, action figures, etc...some doors might open.

Easier said than done, I know. But it would be awesome, and its fun to dream.


----------



## JoeGKushner

One of the things in terms of story potential that the game lacks is support for published campaigns. This fire and forget thing puts a lot of work on... yes, the GM. Unless you're just slotting the adventurers into the game with some help from Dungoen, if you're running the forgotten Realms, the lack of print support means you're essentially home brewing on a skeleton. Stories have to take place somewhere. Coming up with NPCs, locations, background elements, unique magic items, and other things that give the campaign flavor require a lot of work. It's one of the reasons why I so enjoyed previoud incarnations of the Realms in that I could still pull out FR4, the Magister, even when running 3e. Now? Magic items are so different that even that's out.


----------



## xechnao

Siran Dunmorgan said:


> Sadly—for the Dungeons & Dragons brand, not in general—HBO already has a major fantasy series in the works, and is unlikely to undertake another one for the next few years:
> 
> 
> HBO turns 'Fire' into fantasy series - Entertainment News, TV News, Media - Variety
> —Siran Dunmorgan




Go Green Ronin!


----------



## Plane Sailing

Mephistopheles said:


> I think that's a great idea.
> 
> On a bit of a tangent I'd have loved it if this old gem could have somehow turned into a series...




Cool cartoon, I've never seen that before!


----------



## César Ayala

Coming back a bit to another part of the thread, more RP in the adventures and books, I think that Demon Queen's Enclave it's awesome.
Lots of RP moments, and the skill challenges are very cool. The best part is that you can do things with attack rolls or skill rolls .
I mean, there are encounters that can be done talking or fighting. And there's no downside to any of them. Sometimes the players feel that if they don't kill the bad guys the "lose" some loot. It's like "okey, we avoided that dude, but man, look how shiny is that mace... sniff". But in Demon Queen's that doesn't happen (much). And that's cool, you choose a path to play in your game and you shouldn't be "punished" for it for no special reason.

Perhaps now that the first module series is coming to an end, the next one could be centered in the Feywild. This one is clearly 100% Shadowfell (and that's perfect), but if the next adventures are going to be so Shadowfellian (that's not even a word! ) people will end being tired of it.

And the Feywild has an awesome chance of TONS of RP situations. Reading the Manual of the Planes you find things like the Court of Stars, the Summer Fey, Green Fey, Winter Fey, etc. that could provide a really good background for a serie of adventures.

For example, it could start in the material plane, with a town where the people doesn't have dreams. Yeah, they sleep, but they don't dream. The PCs discover there's some kind of evil cult that steals that "dream energy". Later they discover that creatures of the Plane of Dreams (another good idea of the Manual of the Planes) are attacking the Feywild. And the players have to fight against those nightmares, they have to go to the court of stars (the city that stays 6 months here and 6 months there it's also a perfect place for some adventures), make pacts with feys, fight in battles and in the end a demon prince, the Prince of Nightmares is the mastermind behind all of it. That's only an idea, but the Feywild has more RP options than the Shadowfell (I think). And that way the artists can use some other colors  I'm sure they are a bit bored of all that grey, sick green, brown and black of the Shadowfell.


----------



## ChaosShard

Hi Scott,

I scanned the thread over and didn't notice any responces to the question I have. My apologies if I missed them.

The online game table was one of the major features that my group was (and still is) looking forward to for 4th edition. Aside from my local friends who I still game with weekly, there are relatives and friends who retired from WoW that would _love_ to play with us, but are too far away (one would have to travel from Kansas to New York, for instance.)

Is development on the game table (hopefully with built-in rules adjudication) continuing, and if not, have the folks in charge of that project considered licensing the type of software that (ex.) Fantasy Grounds produces, and tying the use of the full ruleset to a DDI subscription? Although I'm loathe to speak for others, I know my group is fine with a 2D map, so long as we can all play together.

If it was felt that a 3D viewer was needed, what about working with the folks who developed the CoH/CoV character app to tailor it for D&D?

Thanks for you time!


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Dionysos said:


> For right now, I think the big names in the film industry wouldn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole, seeing how poorly the brand has fared in recent memory.




Nah, you just need to find people desperate for work. I hear Lindsey Lohan is still looking for a job.


----------



## Stoat

kheris said:


> Hi Scott,
> 
> I scanned the thread over and didn't notice any responces to the question I have. My apologies if I missed them.
> 
> The online game table was one of the major features that my group was (and still is) looking forward to for 4th edition. Aside from my local friends who I still game with weekly, there are relatives and friends who retired from WoW that would _love_ to play with us, but are too far away (one would have to travel from Kansas to New York, for instance.)
> 
> Is development on the game table (hopefully with built-in rules adjudication) continuing, and if not, have the folks in charge of that project considered licensing the type of software that (ex.) Fantasy Grounds produces, and tying the use of the full ruleset to a DDI subscription? Although I'm loathe to speak for others, I know my group is fine with a 2D map, so long as we can all play together.
> 
> If it was felt that a 3D viewer was needed, what about working with the folks who developed the CoH/CoV character app to tailor it for D&D?
> 
> Thanks for you time!




Let me second this question and the sentiment behind it.  I play in a weekly online game.  I am/was very interested in WotC's VTT, and I'd actually prefer a 2D map to a 3D map.

I don't expect Scott to give us launch dates or a lot of detail, but I think its fair to ask:  

Does WotC still plan to release a VTT?  

Is such a VTT under development now?


----------



## UngainlyTitan

Thirded on the VTT. I have a home party but there is another bunch of us (my old college group) that would play on VTT about once per month is WoTC provided one with all the mod cons.


----------



## Festivus

The VTT would have to beat the functionality I have currently with Maptool.  This would mean things like tight integration with whatever mapping application WoTC produces, as well as the CB for importing / exporting characters and the ability to import monsters from the various tools.  Having that functionality would make it worth my while to switch, otherwise if it's just a bunch of manual entry again I'll probably stick with what I have already.

I'd like to hear where WoTC is at with regard to that as well.... so fourthed.


----------



## Hussar

Fifthed on the VTT.  I wanna hear about this too please.

I've been playing online for about six years now.  There is a very solid group of gamers who play over VTT.  A fairly healthy community between OpenRPG and Maptool.  

I've used both, although I'm pretty new with Maptool.  I would second the idea that 2d is very much good enough for a VTT.  The idea is not to create a video game, but a virtual space to play in.  IMO, it doesn't need to have a 3d environment for that - we don't do that in real life with a battlemap (barring some very, VERY creative people and a lot of time) and I don't think we need it for a VTT either.

One thing I would say is that the VTT should decide what it is.  Is it a virtual tabletop or is it a mapping program.  The major problem I have with Maptool is that it tries to do both and loses a lot of functionality in the process.  From the DM's perspective, unless I wanted to actually build my maps from the ground up in Maptool, most of that functionality is a waste.  Since there are literally hundreds of great map images out there, and with Dungeon being online already, simply porting in the map onto the VTT is a must.  

I'd much prefer a VTT that focused on game play, rather than on trying to be a mapping tool.  

Anyway, sorry about the soapbox.  

Is anything happening with the VTT?


----------



## Stoat

Festivus said:


> The VTT would have to beat the functionality I have currently with Maptool.  This would mean things like tight integration with whatever mapping application WoTC produces, as well as the CB for importing / exporting characters and the ability to import monsters from the various tools.  Having that functionality would make it worth my while to switch, otherwise if it's just a bunch of manual entry again I'll probably stick with what I have already.
> 
> I'd like to hear where WoTC is at with regard to that as well.... so fourthed.




I don't want to sidetrack the discussion to far, but this is a good point to keep in mind.  I've used three different VTT's: Klooge, Fantasy Grounds and now d20 Pro.  Each one has required a fair amount of data entry on my part.

Any VTT WotC did should be able to import monsters/characters/traps/whatever from the Compendium, the Character Builder, the Monster Builder, or any other tool WotC comes up with.


----------



## TerraDave

I don't know who this "scott" is. 

But, *The* Rouse, always good to read you.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

For people asking about the VTT:

There was a survey recently, and the VTT was not on the top list of stuff requested. Adventure/Campaign & Monster Management seemed to be more favored.

I was a bit surprised about it, though I basically had a similar feeling (and voted accordingly) - as much as I love the idea of a VTT, I personally do not need it. GameTable did work fine for my online group, and usually I am playing at a real table. 

So, the gametable doesn't look like it will be the next product in the pipeline. 

I wonder how surprised WotC was by this survey result...


----------



## ChaosShard

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> For people asking about the VTT:
> 
> There was a survey recently, and the VTT was not on the top list of stuff requested. Adventure/Campaign & Monster Management seemed to be more favored.
> 
> I was a bit surprised about it, though I basically had a similar feeling (and voted accordingly) - as much as I love the idea of a VTT, I personally do not need it. GameTable did work fine for my online group, and usually I am playing at a real table.
> 
> So, the gametable doesn't look like it will be the next product in the pipeline.
> 
> I wonder how surprised WotC was by this survey result...




Oh, no worries. I'm aware of the survey, but I still hope that The Rouse may be willing and able to spend a moment on the topic. (My hope that it's coming along is so I don't have to spend all that time entering data for a FG2 mod file )

Even a reply I don't want to hear (i.e. "We've shelved it indefinitely" or somesuch) would let me know what plans to lay down for online play.


----------



## hailstop

Holy Smokes said:


> Heyas Scott,
> 
> Dungeon needs some higher octane fuel than the stuff you're feeding it now; consider more 4E conversions of classic adventures, and not just 1st edition mods. Refactor them a bit for all the things that work great in 4E (dynamic terrain, skill challenges, etc.), but also use that as way to demonstrate both better roleplaying chops, and fidelity to traditional play style modes. _Ravenloft_ is a great example candidate for this treatment; I'd like to see a really polished 4E refactor of _Sunken Citadel_, or better yet, _Sinister Secret Of Saltmarsh_. This is ideal DDI content (either free or sub), and would create opportunities to make a statement about the direction D&D is going.




This.  I guess one question is whether or not Dungeon would be interested in getting submission proposals for some of these.  I've been kinda jonesing for a 4e version of Castle Amber myself.


----------



## samursus

Sixed...or whatever.  Also very interested on any info about the VTT.  This was one of the main reasons I got excited about 4e.  My group has also moved away, but all would be happy to play together again, if the tools were simple and powerful enough.


----------



## samursus

hailstop said:


> I've been kinda jonesing for a 4e version of Castle Amber myself.




This sounds cool!!!


----------



## fnwc

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes. We now have a strong precedent within Hasbro of what a well done movie can do for a brand (Transformers) and I believe the bar has been set for future entertainment endeavors. After the success of Transformers, Hasbro now has a specific entertainment executive and a group to manage the TV and movie opportunities.



Good thing, too. D&D movies have been, by and large, terrible to the point of parody.

It would really make my day to go see a great D&D movie -- where LotR would be _my_ gold standard.


----------



## fnwc

hailstop said:


> This.  I guess one question is whether or not Dungeon would be interested in getting submission proposals for some of these.  I've been kinda jonesing for a 4e version of Castle Amber myself.



I wouldn't mind seeing a 4E ToEE box adventure. 

Or maybe a 4E remake of some classics like A1-A4: Against the Slave Lords.


----------



## Beginning of the End

> 2008 Global Brand Study US and Canada and part of Europe.
> Aided Awareness 89% (brand recognition)
> 80% WOW
> 89% D&D
> 54% have played D&D
> 94% think D&D is the same or better than other games (WOW, etc)




This would appear to demand explication. 1 in 2 people (150,000,000 in the United States alone) have not played D&D. Exactly what is the scope of this study?



Jack99 said:


> If this means that 700k people came to wizards' website via a link on Penny Arcade, this sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Or is it just me?




Wasn't the podcast hosted on WotC's website?

It's still a nice number, but it's people specifically clicking through to WotC's website to grab Penny Arcade content linked from the Penny Arcade site. The real question is how many of those people clicked through to another page.



Furluge said:


> I disagree with what you say about one or two gaming sessions being an accurate portrayal. In one or two gaming sessions you haven't even gained a single level.




Two session would constitute a 10 to 16 hour commitment of time. I may not have experienced "everything the game has to offer", but if I spend 16 hours with your game and you haven't given me a reason to continue playing... well, your game has a problem (at least as far as I'm concerned).

To go on to say, as you do, that you need to play enough to experience everything the game has to offer (all three tiers of play? more than that?) is absurd.

To put this in perspective: 16 hours constitutes 20 episodes of an hour-long TV show. For many shows, that's a full season. So basically this conversation boils down to:

"I gave that show a chance, it just didn't grab me."
"You need to give it a chance! If you watch enough of it, you'll like it eventually!"
"I watched an entire season of it."
"No, no. You have to watch at least 15 seasons of the show before giving up on it!"

That's simply not a reasonable expectation. It certainly fails to match up with any reasonable definition of "giving it a chance".



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> One episode was called Dungeons & Dragons, in the latest episodes featured
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> John Henry painting miniatures and later even playing a combat against various monster, including a Mind Flayer. He has shown the ability to roll whatever dice result he wants, making the Vorpal Sword he's using particularly overpowered.




That doesn't surprise me. Somebody on the creative team is clearly a gamer. They've been referring to AI tanks as "ogres". (Which isn't a D&D reference: It's an OGRE reference.)



Piratecat said:


> With respect, I'd strongly argue that this was also the attitude with OD&D, 1e, 3e and 3.5e. (2e tended towards more story-based railroads when it came to the modules, IMO.) It's hardly new.




(Re: "Kick in the door, kill the monster, take it's stuff")

You can certainly argue that, but it wouldn't be true. In OD&D and AD&D1 combat was treated as the last resort of the competent. In the very first supplement ever published for the game, Gygax redesigned the XP rules in order to further reduce the rewards for combat (and, thus, further de-emphasize the role of combat in the game).

4th Edition certainly didn't invent this (inaccurate) catchphrase. Nor is combat itself some sort of newfangled innovation. But making combat the increasingly central design tenet of the game is a post-WotC development.

This is a trend-line which predates 4th Edition, however. It's a design methodology that dates back into 3rd Edition's development cycle. And, from a purely outsider's perspective, it seems to have accelerated in response to the realization that the D&D miniature line was more profitable than the rulebooks.

If WotC is serious about moving away from that design ethos, I think it's all for the best. About the only thing that could help the game more would be if they released any honest-to-god gateway production version of the game instead of the pay-to-preview sets that have been published since 1991.


----------



## fissionessence

Hussar said:


> One thing I would say is that the VTT should decide what it is.  Is it a virtual tabletop or is it a mapping program.  The major problem I have with Maptool is that it tries to do both and loses a lot of functionality in the process.




If I recall correctly, there was going to be a dungeon designing program that was separate from the VTT. You would then import the dungeon into the VTT.

~


----------



## Intense_Interest

I have a question for the Rouse, but I'm not sure if its a brand or a design/development question:

At what point do you think the game designers will have to "break rules" to fill space in books?  There are jokes around about the Martial Controller or the Ranged-Weapon Defender, but stuff like a Race with a negative stat or Large size, or a Ritual with casting times in the Combat-Encounter zone, or specific rules for killing gods (or a god) and time travel?  Essentially, is there an end-point for design for WotC that can be reached, or has there been discussion of books going out into a decade of print after the original Core?


----------



## Jhaelen

Festivus said:


> The VTT would have to beat the functionality I have currently with Maptool.



Actually, it would have to beat everything comparable already on the market. And that's just one of the many compelling reasons it should be the last tool they develop (if ever).


----------



## Jack99

Beginning of the End said:


> Wasn't the podcast hosted on WotC's website?
> 
> It's still a nice number, but it's people specifically clicking through to WotC's website to grab Penny Arcade content linked from the Penny Arcade site. The real question is how many of those people clicked through to another page.




Erhm. Okay. Saying that a podcast of a D&D session is PA content makes little sense to me though. But your mileage obviously varies.


----------



## Mallus

Beginning of the End said:


> You can certainly argue that, but it wouldn't be true. In OD&D and AD&D1 combat was treated as the last resort of the competent.



Not by any of the players I knew. Nor, by inference, by the authors of many of the 1e modules, which were always heavy on the critters to kill. 



> In the very first supplement ever published for the game, Gygax redesigned the XP rules in order to further reduce the rewards for combat (and, thus, further de-emphasize the role of combat in the game).



Strangely, this did little to deter people from taking great delight in critter-killing.

The game you're describing sounds slightly hypothetical to me, it just doesn't match the actual play experience of anyone I know. 



> But making combat the increasingly central design tenet of the game is a post-WotC development.



I polity think this is batty. My read is that WotC's designs merely refined what was a long-established tradition of kill/take/power-up gaming.


----------



## tuxgeo

Jack99 said:


> Erhm. Okay. Saying that a podcast of a D&D session is PA content makes little sense to me though. But your mileage obviously varies.



In addition to the podcast files themselves (in .mp3 format), the Wizards site also hosted new art by Mike Krahulik (Gabe of PA) (and, for the first series of podcasts, also art by Scott Kurtz, creator of PvP) depicting scenes from the PC action in the respective podcast episodes. 
So people could go from the PA site to the Wizards site to get sound and art showing Mike playing Jim Darkmagic, Jerry Holkins playing Omin Dran, and Scott Kurtz playing Binwin Bronzebottom. I think that the art itself is close enough to be considered PA (and PvP) content.


----------



## ChaosShard

Jhaelen said:


> Actually, it would have to beat everything comparable already on the market. And that's just one of the many compelling reasons it should be the last tool they develop (if ever).




<Derail>
That's why I was asking about a licensing or partnership with an existing VTT producer. The idea being, WotC adds a service for subscribers (say an extra $1/mo. for players, $2/mo. for DMs) that gives you access to all of the 4e rules via the compendium within (ex.) Fantasy Grounds. If WotC included tokens with that, and cross advertised with SmiteWorks you'd probably nab quite a few people who are on the fence about DDi.
</Derail>

I was just hoping The Rouse had some insight for us


----------



## Kwalish Kid

Beginning of the End said:


> You can certainly argue that, but it wouldn't be true. In OD&D and AD&D1 combat was treated as the last resort of the competent. In the very first supplement ever published for the game, Gygax redesigned the XP rules in order to further reduce the rewards for combat (and, thus, further de-emphasize the role of combat in the game).



What supplement are you referring to?


> 4th Edition certainly didn't invent this (inaccurate) catchphrase. Nor is combat itself some sort of newfangled innovation. But making combat the increasingly central design tenet of the game is a post-WotC development.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> If WotC is serious about moving away from that design ethos, I think it's all for the best.



Changing this design ethos would likely be a mistake. If you have detailed rules for fighting, then players will fight. Abandoning the centrality of these rules in what is clearly a fighting game is probably a bad idea. The real change in design ethos is the move to fun-driven (opr impact-driven) design rather than task-simulation-driven design. My guess is that when one sees the Robin Laws chapter of DMG2, we'll see far more of this ethos at work.

On a related note, while films, television, novels, and other media products based on D&D is great, these leave out significant aspects of RPGs that would genuinely inspire many to join the hobby: the co-authorship of narrative and the immersion in the first-person element of the story. Highlighting these aspects of RPGs is something that makes specific D&D appearances in other media so valuable. The best example of this was the D&D scenes in the last episode of Freaks and Geeks. This episode captured the empowering nature of the game, even for those new to the game.


----------



## Cadfan

Kwalish Kid said:


> The real change in design ethos is the move to fun-driven (opr impact-driven) design rather than task-simulation-driven design. My guess is that when one sees the Robin Laws chapter of DMG2, we'll see far more of this ethos at work.



Right.  4e design has always seemed to me to have certain stylistic familiarities with work by Robin Laws, most notably having the guts to actually analyze what it is that makes people play your game, and then to cut extraneous material.

When Mr. Laws writes a detective game, it tends to be a detective game.  Not a modern-world-simulator in which its suggested you might play a detective story.  When he writes an action movie game, its an action movie game, not a universal-combat-simulator in which you might play an action story.  When he writes a kids game its designed to appeal to kids and anything that might confuse a child or not be age appropriate in terms of complexity is axed.

Its as if he's got that editor's talent of looking at a project and going over each piece, asking, "Alright, so what is this section FOR?" and if there isn't a good enough answer, it goes.  It tends to make his games play very smoothly, and gives them a direction and a drive that lets the game actually help you play, instead of just sit there.

Of course, if what you really want is a medieval-world-total-simulator-with-magic, you're probably not going to like his stuff.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Beginning of the End said:


> This would appear to demand explication. 1 in 2 people (150,000,000 in the United States alone) have not played D&D. Exactly what is the scope of this study?




Awareness does not equal play. It was nationally representative but was not a census of all US households. It was a survey among a targeted demographic (for example males 12-45 who play video games). The awareness was among that targeted audience. 



> Wasn't the podcast hosted on WotC's website?
> 
> It's still a nice number, but it's people specifically clicking through to WotC's website to grab Penny Arcade content linked from the Penny Arcade site. The real question is how many of those people clicked through to another page.



It was on both WOTCs website and PVP/PAs website plus iTunes. It was a successful marketing effort so we are going to do more. It did way better than most other ad based campaigns and people find them entertaining. 

<snip>


----------



## Scott_Rouse

On the questions about D&D Insider, Game table etc..

Last week, based on survey feedback from fans, we announced that our next offering for D&DI will be Campaign Tools that provide stuff to help you run your games and ongoing campaigns. The idea is to create an integrated system that includes stuff for monsters, maps, encounters and adventures.  

A while ago we talked about how we were going to focus on one swing at a time and then move onto the next thing. The first swing was the Character Builder and the next is the Campaign Tools. That means we are not actively (as we also posted here today) working on a game table but doesn't mean we won't work on it in the future. 

BTW if you have seen it last night we posted new update info for Compendium and Character builder including glossary tab for compendium and XML output for Character Builder Char sheets data.


----------



## Beginning of the End

Kwalish Kid said:


> What supplement are you referring to?




Supplement 1: Greyhawk



Cadfan said:


> When Mr. Laws writes a detective game, it tends to be a detective game. Not a modern-world-simulator in which its suggested you might play a detective story. When he writes an action movie game, its an action movie game, not a universal-combat-simulator in which you might play an action story. When he writes a kids game its designed to appeal to kids and anything that might confuse a child or not be age appropriate in terms of complexity is axed. (...)
> 
> Of course, if what you really want is a medieval-world-total-simulator-with-magic, you're probably not going to like his stuff.




Whether by accident or design, however, previous editions were capable of catering to and delivering many different styles of play.

For example:



Mallus said:


> Strangely, this did little to deter people from taking great delight in critter-killing.
> 
> The game you're describing sounds slightly hypothetical to me, it just doesn't match the actual play experience of anyone I know.




Mallus is absolutely right in saying that plenty of people play D&D as little more than a fun little combat simulator. (He's wrong in assuming that somehow contradicts what I said. And he's hysterically funny when he claims that the style of D&D played by Gygax and Arneson is some kind of hypothetical non-entity. But I digress.)

But there were plenty of people who found that D&D also suited itself well to "Fantasy ing Vietnam", "medieval-world-simulator-with-magic", hex-crawling, dungeon-crawling, realm ruling, army-leading, and so forth. (These all notably being play styles supported directly and explicitly by OD&D.)

This type of broad support also extended beyond campaign style. The radically different class designs also supported a broad style of individual play styles at a mechanical level. Prefer daily resource management? There's a class for that. Prefer little or no resource management? There's a class for that. Prefer a mix? There's a class for that.

By contrast, 4th Edition's classes are all built on the same chassis: They all have at-will, encounter, and daily powers. This is why the complaint that "all the classes are the same" keeps coming up. There are distinct differences between 4E classes, but they're differences drawn entirely within a single box (whereas 3rd Edition had lots of different boxes and could draw distinctions).

I don't want to turn this into an edition war, but I do think it's pertinent to discuss an area where I find 4th Edition lacking: As a friend of mine says, they chose a sweet spot and designed the game with a very tight focus on that sweet spot. If that was your sweet spot, then the Laws-like laser focus they employed in their design is fantastic. Not only is the entire game catering to you, but the tighter focus also made it possible to make the classes more balanced (since they only had to worry about balancing one style of play and one type of mechanics). 

But if it wasn't your sweet spot, then the game you were playing completely disappeared.

If you had to pick a single style of play to focus on, then certainly combat is probably the way to go given the history of the game. But I would make two points here:

(1) 30+ years of D&D suggest that such focus is unnecessary for the success of the game. I like tightly-focused games, but I'm not convinced that the closest thing RPGs have to a mainstream product should be tightly-focused. It should inclusive, not exclusive.

(2) Combat has certainly always been an important part of the game, so if you were going to choose a focal point then it probably makes the most sense to focus on combat (particularly since, as a company, you still want to keep selling those highly profitable miniatures).

OTOH, if you consider D&D's primary competition to _World of Warcraft_ and other video games, then focusing on combat makes no sense whatsoever. That's the one style of play in which D&D simply can't compete with video games: They can give you the exact same gameplay wrapped in awesome graphics and delivered without the need for getting together a group of your friends (although it can support that, too).

So I go back to what I said: I think D&D's historical strength has been built on both brand strength (which is unchanged) and its broad appeal. So I think if Rouse is serious about returning some of that broad appeal to the game's design, then that's good for the game.


----------



## Beginning of the End

Scott_Rouse said:


> Huh? Awareness does not equal play. It was national representative but was not a census of all US households. It was a survey among a targeted demographic (for example males 12-45 who play video games). The awareness was among that targeted audience.




Awareness doesn't equal play, but I assumed "54% have played D&D" meant "played D&D".

If it's specifically 12-45 year olds who have played video games, that narrows the scope a bit. Although based on polls suggesting 1-in-4 play video games and census data indicating 45% of the population falls in the 12-45 age range, your data still indicates 34,000,000 people in America have played D&D.

That assumes that (a) there are no D&D players who don't also play video games; (b) there are no D&D players who are younger than 12 or older than 45; and (c) the percentage of people who play video games is spready evenly across all age groups. Of course, none of these things are true so the number your poll is suggesting is even larger.

If it's true that there are 34,000,000+ people who have played D&D, that's great. But this would be the first time I've ever seen such a claim. The market research in 2000 claimed 5.5 million people had played tabletop roleplaying games. Assuming that every single one of those people had played D&D, you're claiming to have added nearly 30 million new players in the last 9 years.

That would be an incredible accomplishment.

But is it true?


----------



## Cadfan

Beginning of the End said:


> Whether by accident or design, however, previous editions were capable of catering to and delivering many different styles of play.



I'd love to address that, but not in this thread.  I think my comments on Robin Laws' tendencies in game design in comparison to 4e design were close enough to topic, but I don't think this is.


----------



## Mallus

Beginning of the End said:


> Mallus is absolutely right in saying that plenty of people play D&D as little more than a fun little combat simulator.



I do so like being right )), but that's not exactly what I said, or at least meant. I said the players I've encounter enjoyed combat in their D&D games, and didn't seek to avoid it. 

I said nothing about playing the game as if it were only a combat simulator, which obviously neglects the part of D&D that's like a 3rd-rate dinner theater troupe putting on their own version of _Monty Python and the Holy Grail_.



> He's wrong in assuming that somehow contradicts what I said.



Possibly. You were saying 'the rules emphasized a certain mode of play'. I responded 'despite that, everyone I encountered played a different way'.



> And he's hysterically funny when he claims that the style of D&D played by Gygax and Arneson is some kind of hypothetical non-entity.



I didn't mean to suggest that mode of play didn't exist. I should have said it was no longer the dominant mode of play by the time I started, which was during the height of AD&D, some 15 years before WotC. 



> (1) 30+ years of D&D suggest that such focus is unnecessary for the success of the game.



I'd argue 30+ years of D&D suggests players like the experience of killing things and taking their stuff, even if they bolt a medieval kingdom-running sim on top of it, or ensconce said killing and taking in a plot cribbed from Great Expectations -- note: an actual recent adventure in our 4e campaign.


----------



## Verys Arkon

The Rouse,

Thanks for the update about the DDI tools.  I'm excited to see any details about the Campaign Tools (I know I know, patience!).  I'm one of the ones that ranked something the CT higher then VTT, so I'm not disappointed.

As a stop-gap for the Character Visualizer, how about offering up a massive character portrait collection for the Character Builder instead?  It wouldn't be customizable of course, but WotC has a MASSIVE art collection.  I bet you could get hundreds, maybe even thousands, of portraits.  I'm not sure what your agreements are with the original artists, though.


Thanks for your participation here on ENWorld.  Being able to talk with the folks at WotC is one of the best and cheapest things (though time is precious) you can do for PR, in my mind.

Verys


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Beginning of the End said:


> Awareness doesn't equal play, but I assumed "54% have played D&D" meant "played D&D".
> 
> If it's specifically 12-45 year olds who have played video games, that narrows the scope a bit. Although based on polls suggesting 1-in-4 play video games and census data indicating 45% of the population falls in the 12-45 age range, your data still indicates 34,000,000 people in America have played D&D.
> 
> That assumes that (a) there are no D&D players who don't also play video games; (b) there are no D&D players who are younger than 12 or older than 45; and (c) the percentage of people who play video games is spready evenly across all age groups. Of course, none of these things are true so the number your poll is suggesting is even larger.
> 
> If it's true that there are 34,000,000+ people who have played D&D, that's great. But this would be the first time I've ever seen such a claim. The market research in 2000 claimed 5.5 million people had played tabletop roleplaying games. Assuming that every single one of those people had played D&D, you're claiming to have added nearly 30 million new players in the last 9 years.
> 
> That would be an incredible accomplishment.



So I went back and looked at the question and answer.

The question was:

Which of the following table-top role-playing games and/or electronic role-playing games have you ever played? 

54% answered Dungeons & Dragons. This comes from 35 years years of table top players and 25+ years of video games. This is ever played, not currently playing. BTW we did not make that claim to begin with. In my deck at Gama it stated "54% of respondents say they have played D&D". This is used to illustrate 

1) D&D has a massive amount of brand awareness 
2) Lot's of people have had some interaction with the D&D brand 
3) that interaction has largely been positive 

thus our marketing strategy is to go after those existing "fans" to drive growth in 2009



> But is it true?



It is market research not absolute fact.  It is a lot of people. I don't suspect it is the number you claim above but it is a many many millions.


----------



## avin

Scott,

from AD&D to 3.5 there was always a CRPG for every edition. So, are you guys considering this not that the VTT was postponed (don't know if this is the right word)?


----------



## crazy_cat

avin said:


> Scott,
> 
> from AD&D to 3.5 there was always a CRPG for every edition. So, are you guys considering this...



Good point. 

It was BG, BG2, and then NWN that got me back into D&D after a very long break forced upon me by real life considerations like having a job and relocating several times. 

I've now dropped CRPGs for tabletop again - but I do definitely need a good reason to buy a better graphics card. A good D&D CRPG would be such a reason


----------



## Scott_Rouse

avin said:


> Scott,
> 
> from AD&D to 3.5 there was always a CRPG for every edition. So, are you guys considering this not that the VTT was postponed (don't know if this is the right word)?




Yes we would very much like a host of 4e video games including CRPGs, Action/Adventure games, Turn Based Games etc (with or with out a VTT) and we are working with our partner to make that happen


----------



## Dire Bare

Scott_Rouse said:


> Last week, based on survey feedback from fans, we announced that our next offering for D&DI will be Campaign Tools that provide stuff to help you run your games and ongoing campaigns. The idea is to create an integrated system that includes stuff for monsters, maps, encounters and adventures.
> 
> A while ago we talked about how we were going to focus on one swing at a time and then move onto the next thing. The first swing was the Character Builder and the next is the Campaign Tools. That means we are not actively (as we also posted here today) working on a game table but doesn't mean we won't work on it in the future.




That's a shame, because the Game Table seemed so close and was initially supposed to be part of the starting package.  I know I'd love to see it, to get a chance to game with my college friends who are spread across the country.  I am aware there are other software packages from third-parties that allow for this sort of play, but my old pals generally aren't interested in semi-pro software from unknown sources but they would jump all over an official D&D online service.  Sigh.

However, I trust that you guys are doing your research on what is most wanted by the player base and I certainly could use a Campaign Tools product.  Overall I've been very pleased with D&DI, despite my disapointment with the collapse of Gleemax and all that was initially promised.


----------



## JeffB

Dire Bare said:


> That's a shame, because the Game Table seemed so close and was initially supposed to be part of the starting package.  I know I'd love to see it, to get a chance to game with my college friends who are spread across the country.  I am aware there are other software packages from third-parties that allow for this sort of play, but my old pals generally aren't interested in semi-pro software from unknown sources but they would jump all over an official D&D online service.  Sigh.




Pretty much sums up my feelings as well. The Game Table was a major selling point for me as regards to 4E in general and DDI  in particular- hearing it has been pushed way down the line is a huge let-down. I have already delayed siging up for DDI because the GT was not available and the medioocre articles and adventures seen in the first few free months.


----------



## avin

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes we would very much like a host of 4e video games including CRPGs, Action/Adventure games, Turn Based Games etc (with or with out a VTT) and we are working with our partner to make that happen




Hooray! Obsidian? Bioware? In house? pretty please?


----------



## darjr

From the article about the CB XML output.


> *XML character sheet:* this export now has a new section that is friendlier to third parties, since it does not need to reference the rules engine. This should help modders create their own display options by reading the XML output.




Does this mean I could create a FULL character sheet with all the calculated data and such?  Does it include the individual power rules? In other words could I use this to populate my own custom power cards?


----------



## Scott_Rouse

darjr said:


> From the article about the CB XML output.
> 
> 
> Does this mean I could create a FULL character sheet with all the calculated data and such?  Does it include the individual power rules? In other words could I use this to populate my own custom power cards?





I know it will allow a custom char sheet but I am not sure about power cards. I would guess the data is part of the char sheet so it might but I am not totally sure. Sorry that is beyond the functions of my brain, I am in marketing . 

You may get the answer you want over here or try and send a PM to WotC_DM (Didier Monin)


----------



## Scott_Rouse

avin said:


> Hooray! Obsidian? Bioware? In house? pretty please?




Sorry, I don't have any thing I can talk about at this time.


----------



## Fallen Seraph

I may have missed your answer, but do you have any clue when the next _Mailbag_ podcast will be? With all the new stuff from PHB2, the new stuff we are learning about MM2 and PHB3 I am sure people will have questions, including myself  So do you have any info on if/when there would be the next one?

Thanks


----------



## rounser

> Right. 4e design has always seemed to me to have certain stylistic familiarities with work by Robin Laws, most notably having the guts to actually analyze what it is that makes people play your game, and then to cut extraneous material.



Well, either "what makes people play your game" got misidentified and/or oversimplified, or Robyn Laws' theories on narrow focus deserve to stay academic, IMO.


----------



## alleynbard

rounser said:


> Well, either "what makes people play your game" got misidentified, or Robyn Laws' theories on narrow focus deserve to stay academic, IMO.




Eh....seems to work for a lot of people. To each his own, right?

Your opinion is valid though, so *please* don't take that as a criticism.   We all find different things appealing.

Robin Laws is a rather interesting writer.  Did you pick up the DMG2 for 3.5?  He worked on that book and I found his insights very helpful.  If you haven't seen it, it might worth finding a used copy for that material alone.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

Fallen Seraph said:


> I may have missed your answer, but do you have any clue when the next _Mailbag_ podcast will be? With all the new stuff from PHB2, the new stuff we are learning about MM2 and PHB3 I am sure people will have questions, including myself  So do you have any info on if/when there would be the next one?
> 
> Thanks





No idea


----------



## nnms

Scott_Rouse said:


> XML output for Character Builder Char sheets data.




!!!

Awesome.  I can't wait to see what people come up with for automatic character sheets that import the produced XML files.


----------



## rounser

> Eh....seems to work for a lot of people. To each his own, right?



No.  The focus has gone from broad to narrow.  Why should a significant section of the former audience be excluded for the gratification of another section of it?  At least release such a product under another name, and keep the broader one going (yes, I know, impractical, so don't go down the narrow path at all then).


> Robin Laws is a rather interesting writer. Did you pick up the DMG2 for 3.5? He worked on that book and I found his insights very helpful. If you haven't seen it, it might worth finding a used copy for that material alone.



I've read articles from him.  I know he sounds plausible and logical, but so do many generalisations, quotes, ideologies and extreme stances that fail when they meet the real world, if implemented without moderation.  That's why they're referred to as "academic".

There was a link to a famous article about "what D&D can learn from spaghetti sauces" that seems plausible and logical too.  It also doesn't jibe with a narrowly focused game design theory.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

rounser said:


> No.  The focus has gone from broad to narrow.  Why should a significant section of the former audience be excluded for the gratification of another section of it?  At least release such a product under another name.
> 
> I've read articles from him.  I know he sounds plausible and logical, but so do many generalisations, quotes, ideologies and extreme stances that fail when they meet the real world, if implemented without moderation.  That's why they're referred to as "academic".




Can you guys fork this or move on? The 4e DMG2 isn't even out yet so the discussion isn't needed in this thread


----------



## alleynbard

rounser said:


> No.  The focus has gone from broad to narrow.  Why should a significant section of the former audience be excluded for the gratification of another section of it?  At least release such a product under another name.
> 
> I've read articles from him.  I know he sounds plausible and logical, but so do many generalisations, quotes, ideologies and extreme stances that fail when they meet the real world, if implemented without moderation.  That's why they're referred to as "academic".




Well...okay. I tried.


----------



## alleynbard

Scott_Rouse said:


> Can you guys fork this or move on? The 4e DMG2 isn't even out yet so the discussion isn't needed in this thread




I'm sorry this derailed the conversation, Scott.  I certainly wasn't trying to do that.   The topic isn't worth a fork, honestly.

But you are right, this thread is not the place for me to play peacemaker. Please accept my apologies.


----------



## Mephistopheles

Jack99 said:


> Erhm. Okay. Saying that a podcast of a D&D session is PA content makes little sense to me though. But your mileage obviously varies.




I've been playing D&D a lot longer than I've been reading webcomics but I considered it Penny Arcade and PvP content. I wasn't listening to it to hear a random bunch of guys playing D&D, I was listening to it to hear the Penny Arcade and PvP guys crack jokes and play D&D. Having said that, it obviously brought traffic to the D&D site and that was largely the point of the exercise for WotC. I thought it was a good initiative.



avin said:


> Hooray! Obsidian? Bioware? In house? pretty please?




Obsidian, perhaps, although I believe it would still be published by Infogrames - when they bought Hasbro Interactive they also got the rights to make D&D computer games until at least 2015. Bioware, very unlikely, even if they hadn't become a subsidiary of Electronic Arts.



Scott_Rouse said:


> A while ago we talked about how we were going to focus on one swing at a time and then move onto the next thing. The first swing was the Character Builder and the next is the Campaign Tools. That means we are not actively (as we also posted here today) working on a game table but doesn't mean we won't work on it in the future.




Considering that the electronic game table was a major feature of the announcement presentation - an early version was demonstrated in the presentation, albeit described as a prototype - if it's now the case that it's not being worked on then I'm having my doubts that it will be completed. That would be a shame; it clearly needed some work but looked to be on the right track, and that was nearly two years ago.


----------



## JoeGKushner

If any general questions are being answered, I have two.

1. Will we see something similiar to the Dungeon Delve but for other areas? For example, the old Book of Lairs, Book of Encounters, Tales From The Outer Planes, etc... provided the GM with little encounters that he could slot into his own campaign with little preperation. I know that the sourcebooks have these pre-made lairs but I'd like some themed ones of short duration, like Dungeon Delve, as well.

2. Will we see independent adventurers again? As neat an idea as the Adventure Path is, Paizo still does independent adventurers. As many people who have played through Savage Tide or Shackled City, I can't imagine that those numbers compare favoably with say, White Plume Mountain or other single adventurers. They have the same benefit as #1 above but are meatier. A good place to put more new monsters, magic items, rituals, etc... (as has been done with current adventurers by WoTC 4e.)


----------



## Scott_Rouse

JoeGKushner said:


> If any general questions are being answered, I have two.
> 
> 1. Will we see something similiar to the Dungeon Delve but for other areas? For example, the old Book of Lairs, Book of Encounters, Tales From The Outer Planes, etc... provided the GM with little encounters that he could slot into his own campaign with little preperation. I know that the sourcebooks have these pre-made lairs but I'd like some themed ones of short duration, like Dungeon Delve, as well.




In short yes. I don't have any details to talk about but there will be some of this content. Plane Below should have some of this and there is a title in early 2010 that will have more. I don't know if it will be as concentrated as Dungeon Delve, but there will be more of this type of content



> 2. Will we see independent adventurers again? As neat an idea as the Adventure Path is, Paizo still does independent adventurers. As many people who have played through Savage Tide or Shackled City, I can't imagine that those numbers compare favoably with say, White Plume Mountain or other single adventurers. They have the same benefit as #1 above but are meatier. A good place to put more new monsters, magic items, rituals, etc... (as has been done with current adventurers by WoTC 4e.)




Yes, there are more of these types of adventures coming out in 2010.

Between now and then there will be these types of adventures in Dungeon and there is Revenge of the Giants and Seekers of the Ashen Crown this summer.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Just like to thank Scott for coming by and answering questions, I sure hope this is going on your hours sheet.
Any direct contact is great, things like forums and even twitter give a great sense of community with the 'stake holders'.


----------



## Scott_Rouse

mach1.9pants said:


> Just like to thank Scott for coming by and answering questions, I sure hope this is going on your hours sheet.
> Any direct contact is great, things like forums and even twitter give a great sense of community with the 'stake holders'.




I am a salary man so I don't get no stinkin' time sheet but when I post at home there is beer in the fridge


----------



## Mephistopheles

Scott_Rouse said:


> I am a salary man so I don't get no stinkin' time sheet but when I post at home there is beer in the fridge




You're phoning in "working from home" days that involve posting on forums and drinking beer, right? Right?


----------



## Beginning of the End

Admin here. Please fork this discussion to a different thread if you want to continue it; I think it's interesting for folks, but this thread shouldn't get derailed.

I've put your original post inside spoiler blocks.

~ Piratecat

[sblock=Post inside here.]







rounser said:


> Well, either "what makes people play your game" got misidentified and/or oversimplified, or Robyn Laws' theories on narrow focus deserve to stay academic, IMO.




The problem here can be boiled down pretty simply. If you asked the question:

"What makes you play D&D?"

Then there were many answers to that question. You can try to pick the most popular answer, but even if you pick the right answer you're still excluding all those other answers... and the people who prefer those answers.

In the case of 4th Edition, they picked the answer "combat". And it's not really surprising that the people in this thread saying "my games were always about the combat and you're nuts for suggesting that people played any other way" are... well, they're the exact same people who have adopted 4th Edition.

Nor is it surprising that the people saying "hey, there were other ways and reasons for playing the game" are the people who haven't adopted 4th Edition.

I think there can be a lot of value in Laws' focused design principles. I'm just not convinced that it was appropriate for D&D. D&D isn't _Feng Shui_ or _Burning Wheel_. It has a larger, broader audience and I think it's a mistake to try to narrow that audience. (And a mistake to think that you can narrow the game and yet somehow keep that audience.)

It would be like Disney saying, "Pirates of the Caribbean is the most popular ride at our Disney themeparks. So we're going to add pirates to all of our rides and get rid of all the non-ride activities."

PIRATE WORLD might be a great idea for a themepark. But that doesn't mean it's a good strategy for the broadly-appealing Disneyworld.

I agree with Mr. Rouse that trying to move away from the Pirate World strategy is a good move for Disneyworld.[/sblock]


----------



## fnwc

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes we would very much like a host of 4e video games including CRPGs, Action/Adventure games, *Turn Based Games* etc (with or with out a VTT) and we are working with our partner to make that happen



(emphasis mine)

Please. _Pretty please._ Give me a tactical 4E game!


----------



## fissionessence

fnwc said:


> Please. _Pretty please._ Give me a tactical 4E game!




Give me a game where the combat mechanics are exactly identical to 4E. (So, I suppose that would be a tactical game?) Also, please don't only include the original Player's Handbook. An expandable game that received content updates with PH3, etc. would make me drool and . . . well . . . other stuff.

~


----------



## Tuft

Beginning of the End said:


> The problem here can be boiled down pretty simply. If you asked the question:
> 
> "What makes you play D&D?"
> 
> Then there were many answers to that question. You can try to pick the most popular answer, but even if you pick the right answer you're still excluding all those other answers... and the people who prefer those answers.
> 
> In the case of 4th Edition, they picked the answer "combat". And it's not really surprising that the people in this thread saying "my games were always about the combat and you're nuts for suggesting that people played any other way" are... well, they're the exact same people who have adopted 4th Edition.
> 
> Nor is it surprising that the people saying "hey, there were other ways and reasons for playing the game" are the people who haven't adopted 4th Edition.




Very true. 

You don't have to look long at the debate on non-combat rules to see that there are two camps, one claiming (to paraphrase "Treasure of Sierra Madre") "_Rulez? We dooont need no steeenking rulez!_", the other wanting rules and abilities that encourages, enables and empowers activities done outside of combat. 

Putting the question of "who's right" aside for now - it has enough threads already - you can however note this fact: 


Those that belong to the first camp have most likely already bought the 4E books.
Those that belong to the second camp have most likely _not_.

So, if WOTC wants to sell _more_ books; that is, also sell to those in the second camp, and not only to those in the first, what should they do?

And I don't think browbeating them in internet fora with your stunning rhetoric until they submit and sobbing on their knees recant is a very realistic plan, however satisfying it might seem to those in the first camp...  

No, if you want to broaden your audience, you have to broaden your appeal.


----------



## Baron Opal

Which is the perfect slot for an Unearthed Arcana title.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Scott_Rouse said:


> I am a salary man so I don't get no stinkin' time sheet but when I post at home there is beer in the fridge



Mmmmmmmmm Beer...







			
				Homer said:
			
		

> Here's to alcohol, the cause of—and solution to—all life's problems





fnwc said:


> (emphasis mine)
> 
> Please. _Pretty please._ Give me a tactical 4E game!



Oh yeah, I have really enjoyed NWN1/2, Baldur's Gate, etc etc. but a Turn based, direct 4E game sounds all kinds of AWESOME.

However I think we'll be in the minority so I'll take any good DnD game please


----------



## jensun

Post removed by Admin. You know, there are lots of people I don't agree with, too, but that doesn't give me free rein to give an inflammatory, insulting answer. There are lots of ways to differ without insulting someone and trying to start a fight.

If you have any questions at all as to why your post was inappropriate, please drop me an email.

~ Piratecat


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara

Scott_Rouse said:


> I am a salary man so I don't get no stinkin' time sheet but when I post at home there is beer in the fridge




cheers!

have a good one!

and thanks for all the info you provided

I am looking forward to all the products/media you mentioned, in particular I look forward to the big adventure with all the counters (Against the giant?), also the starter box was nice for non-gamers


----------



## WereSteve

Scott,

Thanks for all of your input in this thread ... after reading through the lengthy posts the following stuck in my mind.
_
And to answer the implied question this does not mean going back and supporting older editions.

_Which, of course, is one thing I would not expect Wizards to do since TSR tried this before and it failed miserably.  However, this said, I am always thankful for my local used book store and eBay.  The need to bring new and younger gamers into the fold will more than likely result in some older leaving the fold for other hobbies.

As for me ... while I still have the vast majority of material from playing way back when ... things like OSRIC are looking better with every new mention of some wonderful McGuffin that Wizards is coming out with for 4E.


----------



## Kzach

Scott_Rouse said:


> Yes we would very much like a host of 4e video games including CRPGs, Action/Adventure games, Turn Based Games etc (with or with out a VTT) and we are working with our partner to make that happen




With your current software development partner?

Ugh.

Just ugh.

Can't you hire someone talented instead?


----------



## Dire Bare

Kzach said:


> With your current software development partner?
> 
> Ugh.
> 
> Just ugh.
> 
> Can't you hire someone talented instead?




Thanks for the thread necromancy, only to threadcrap.  Classy.


----------



## SteveC

Wow, did someone say "rise from your grave!" on this thread?

Still, it's interesting to see the developments since the thread started: the character builder is here, and it is very sharp. The team working on the character builder will hopefully be working on the rest of the tools, which gives me hope that we'll eventually see something pretty good.

Now those people have nothing to do with the team that would develop 4E computer games: WotC has that licensed out entirely.

Still, was there any other reason to bring this thread back, except to poop on it?

--Steve


----------



## Piratecat

Nope. There wasn't.

I'll swing it closed.


----------

