# [UPDATED] Has ADVENTURER'S HANDBOOK Been Cancelled?



## variant (Jan 20, 2015)

I hope someone at WotC will address this. Maybe they've changed the name. Adventurer's Handbook isn't the best name for something that only has elemental themed content.


----------



## Nebulous (Jan 20, 2015)

I cannot imagine that a product so far along into the development process would be cancelled.  I suppose it is possible.  Weird.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jan 20, 2015)

Maybe they are addressing the branding and naming.  From what I've seen so far, I'm really confused about what this book is.  Is it stand-alone? Is it required for the new Elemental Evil module?  Both?

I'm also not a fan of bringing the EE story to Forgotten Realms, not am I a fan of WotC having an outside developer write "core" books so early in the 5E lifespan.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 20, 2015)

It hasn't been pushed back? Seems like the release date of the adventure was originally march 17 and now it is april the 7th. 

This was probably too a big an order for the small Sasquatch Games. Not really surprising. Paizo releases that kind of adventure over 6 months and the team of designers doesn't have to write a splat that is almost as big as the adventure and release at the same time. I guess they are learning the limites of their new business model. One 3PP can only do one book at a time.


----------



## Barantor (Jan 20, 2015)

I think they are rolling it into the main book and also having most of the items that affect players be in a free download. This backs up their 'no splatbook' type system it seems.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

UPDATE: Mike Mearls answers "We can't cancel a book we never announced!" So that sounds like the Adventurer's Handbook will definitely not be appearing.


----------



## skotothalamos (Jan 20, 2015)

"Princes of the Apocalypse is available on April 7, 2015 and includes an epic adventure for characters levels 1–15 as well as new elemental spells and the element-touched genasi as a new playable race. In addition, a free download will be available in mid-March that includes more new races plus the player content available in Princes of the Apocalypse,"

The new spells and race in the adventure sounds to me like they combined it into one book, with an online component.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 20, 2015)

They suck at managing our expectations. Apparently they plan to release almost nothing for the rpg


----------



## Loki-lie-Smith (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> UPDATE: Mike Mearls answers "We can't cancel a book we never announced!" So that sounds like the Adventurer's Handbook will definitely not be appearing.




I mentioned this in the other thread: the first mention of the books was from a posting on FRPGames. I don't know from where the covers came from but I think it wasn't from WotC. 

I don't know how FRPGAMES got hold of the books name so early but truth is until is officially announced it is speculation and rumors.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 20, 2015)

Zaukrie said:


> They suck at managing our expectations. Apparently they plan to release almost nothing for the rpg




The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released. The only difference now is that if you buy the adventure you will get more for your money. How does that suck?


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 20, 2015)

roadtoad said:


> "Princes of the Apocalypse is available on April 7, 2015 and includes an epic adventure for characters levels 1–15 as well as new elemental spells and the element-touched genasi as a new playable race. In addition, a free download will be available in mid-March that includes more new races plus the player content available in Princes of the Apocalypse,"
> 
> The new spells and race in the adventure sounds to me like they combined it into one book, with an online component.




So it's like we're getting the meaty part of the "adventurer's handbook" for free?

I'm pretty cool with this.

I'm slightly less enthusiastic about the adventure. I honestly don't know what would appeal to me in an adventure. Most of the time, I get so much joy out of the DIY aspects of making an adventure, that I don't care to pay money to have WotC do it for me. The big epic arc seems cool, but...eh. 



			
				Mike Mearls said:
			
		

> Mike added "we've played things close to the vest is that it's a huge, open question on what support for the RPG should look like... we do a lot of stuff that may or may not end up as a released product. For instance, we now know that the high volume release schedule for 3e and 4e turned out to be bad for D&D"




This is an interesting statement because it implies that the question of what "support for the RPG should look like" is a more fundamental question at WotC than it is among the fandom (which makes a certain amount of sense). Possibly they're not just contemplating a "slower" splat schedule, but re-evaluating the practice of splatbooks altogether.

At any rate, I'll be interested in seeing the genasi! They'll be tired to the Elemental Evil plotline, m'sure, but fluff aside...


----------



## variant (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> UPDATE: Mike Mearls answers "We can't cancel a book we never announced!" So that sounds like the Adventurer's Handbook will definitely not be appearing.




It was announced though...


----------



## DND_Chris (Jan 20, 2015)

variant said:


> It was announced though...




Not officially


----------



## Nebulous (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> UPDATE: Mike Mearls answers "We can't cancel a book we never announced!" So that sounds like the Adventurer's Handbook will definitely not be appearing.




I don't understand, why is there a cover and a title if it wasn't announced?  Is that just placeholder fan art? I don't care really if this product doesn't come, i'm just confused.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released.




That's a heck of a supposition! Are you sure nothing less is being released?


----------



## Wolfskin (Jan 20, 2015)

Well, I'll grant WocT that THEY didn't announce the product- somewhere along the way, both books were merged into one and it was decided the player content would be up for free. I'm really cool with this.

PS: Also, Genasi FTW!


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

Nebulous said:


> I don't understand, why is there a cover and a title if it wasn't announced?  Is that just placeholder fan art? I don't care really if this product doesn't come, i'm just confused.




Sounds like it was planned, but not "announced"; "announced" being the technicality, because the info was certainly out there and it's not like we managed to invent it whole cloth.


----------



## doctorhook (Jan 20, 2015)

This is definitely mysterious, and a bit disappointing, but it's heartening to know that we'll be getting new free content online!

Hey, weren't we supposed to be getting Warforged for free online too?


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 20, 2015)

It is about managing our expectations. ....which I am pretty sure is what I typed. Also, they have announced one book for the year....so it is probably ok for me to say they don't plan to release much. More free is good. One book a year, not good. YMMV.


----------



## TwoSix (Jan 20, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released. The only difference now is that if you buy the adventure you will get more for your money. How does that suck?




For me, I know I wasn't going to buy the adventure anyway, so the inclusion of the material is a moot point.  And it seems unlikely they developed a full 160 or 192 page book full of crunch, but decided to suddenly release it all online.  More likely, the amount of solid crunch material developed was far less than necessary to fill a book.  

Now, while I'm not unhappy that they aren't releasing a $40 book that's mostly filler, I was looking forward to some new subclasses, at the very least (which would seem to be a minimum standard in releasing a book of player options).  New races and spells are fine, but don't really scratch that "new shiny" itch like a new class or subclass would.


----------



## Wolfskin (Jan 20, 2015)

TwoSix said:


> New races and spells are fine, but don't really scratch that "new shiny" itch like a new class or subclass would.



I also would've loved some new subclasses. My guess is that new subclasses will show up in an adventure-agnostic supplement, probably announced by GenCon. Just guessing, though!


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> Mike added "we've played things close to the vest is that it's a huge, open question on what support for the RPG should look like... we do a lot of stuff that may or may not end up as a released product. For instance, we now know that the high volume release schedule for 3e and 4e turned out to be bad for D&D. It wasn't too many settings that hurt TSR, but too many D&D books of any kind. lots of experiments ahead..."




I can't say how they can said lots of books where bad for 3e and 4e when both sold very very well and really restored the game after the doldrums of being almost forgotten in the 2e era.


----------



## Gadget (Jan 20, 2015)

I fail to see what the big hubub is about.  WOTC never announced the product.  Obviously they did some initial work and a mock up cover as planning and development, but decided not to go forward with the project in this format.  Maybe some of the material that was planned for the book will be in the adventure, maybe other material will be released on line.  It's almost like an apple rumors forum in here where people get all upset about the latest product because it didn't have all the features that the rumor mill said it would have.


----------



## lkj (Jan 20, 2015)

As I mentioned in another thread, I think they might be experimenting with a new strategy.  They are trying to release fewer books, but they know that existing gamers still want new content (like genasi). They also probably want to avoid the critique (which might have been legitimate) that someone who just wanted bits and pieces of mechanics from various storylines were being 'forced' to buy multiple expensive books that contained lots of content they didn't actually want.

This way, those who are gung-ho, can buy the fancy book packed with an adventure and lots of elemental options. Others can get the mechanics out of a free download. 

And that free download might just tempt some to go ahead and buy the book. 

The strategy would presumably limit the number of books they print per year (clearly a goal of theirs), while still allowing them to expand the game (via free stuff) to keep people engaged.

I'm just speculating. But I think it might be a good strategy to try if I'm right.

AD


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 20, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> I can't say how they can said lots of books where bad for 3e and 4e when both sold very very well and really restored the game after the doldrums of being almost forgotten in the 2e era.




'cuz neither of them could last more than ~3 years without a new suite of "core rules" (3.5, or Essentials), I'd wager.

If the job of the supplements is to support the game, and if they cost more to make than they're bringing in after a year or two, then they're not doing a very good job of that.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 20, 2015)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> 'cuz neither of them could last more than ~3 years without a new suite of "core rules" (3.5, or Essentials), I'd wager.
> 
> If the job of the supplements is to support the game, and if they cost more to make than they're bringing in after a year or two, then they're not doing a very good job of that.




Well puts me in a real spot.  I like splat books, I like having new content.   I miss Dragon Magazine BADLY!!!!!     I agree with slowing down but this is crazy slow, way too slow for my tastes.   I want an active updating game, and pathfinder doesn't capture me.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 20, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> Well puts me in a real spot.  I like splat books, I like having new content.   I miss Dragon Magazine BADLY!!!!!     I agree with slowing down but this is crazy slow, way too slow for my tastes.   I want an active updating game, and pathfinder doesn't capture me.




You might be in the market for EN5IDER!

It's also possible we'll see Dragon/Dungeon revived or put up as a series of articles or somesuch, as a low-cost solution for those who want more material.

And the OGL might yet solve all those issues with a firehose of products! 

Those last two are kind of waiting on WotC still, and the first one isn't off the ground quite yet, but I think your need is answerable without WotC needing to spend the money to produce stuff (necessarily).


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

Gadget said:


> I fail to see what the big hubub is about.




There's no particular "hubub". Just some people chatting.  If you're not interested in the subject, you don't have to participate. There's lots of other threads here!



> WOTC never announced the product.  Obviously they did some initial work and a mock up cover as planning and development, but decided not to go forward with the project in this format.  Maybe some of the material that was planned for the book will be in the adventure, maybe other material will be released on line.  It's almost like an apple rumors forum in here where people get all upset about the latest product because it didn't have all the features that the rumor mill said it would have.




People like talking about stuff they're interested in.  This is a good thing.  What would be bad is if nobody was speculating about WotC's plans.  Many RPG companies would kill for 5% of the amount of interest people have in what WotC does.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 20, 2015)

Oh yeah already told Morrus, I'll subscribe if he can put 5e material in it.


----------



## Blackbrrd (Jan 20, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> Well puts me in a real spot.  I like splat books, I like having new content.   I miss Dragon Magazine BADLY!!!!!     I agree with slowing down but this is crazy slow, way too slow for my tastes.   I want an active updating game, and pathfinder doesn't capture me.



Personally, I kind of burnt out on all the options for 4e (and 3e for that matter). It made me want to look at a simpler game system. Now, if they put the splat book stuff in Dragon Magazine and mark it as "optional" instead of "core" like they did with the splat books for 4e, I think we could both be happy.

I think part of the reason 5e has sold so well is that it's, for being a D&D game, quite complete. I don't think there has been a previous edition that has included so many options as 5e did. Maybe they are looking into what can get new gamers to buy it instead of selling splat books to existing gamers. The latter option does seem to make the original game unsellable to new customers (my assumption).

It really seems like they are undecided on what to actually do with 5e, and will be taking their time deciding what to do. Maybe instead of going the splat book way, they decide to go the way of do-it-yourself, or just skip it and go into adventure/setting support. I think it would be really cool if they made settings with tools for helping you create your own adventure/campaign.


----------



## Curmudjinn (Jan 20, 2015)

Christ,  what does this company have to do to appease people?
Every announcement or rumor is flooded negativity. The core books have came and were spectacular.

Expect more of that and carry on!


----------



## kettite (Jan 20, 2015)

While a public announcement was not made, Wizards of the Coast did provide solicitation information to a book distributor, from which book and game stores would make orders.  So sometime between August 20 when the catalog was posted on the Edelweiss site and today, a decision was made to cancel the solicitation for the book.


----------



## Joe Liker (Jan 20, 2015)

I greatly dislike online-only content because I try very hard to keep electronic devices away from my table. And before anyone mentions the obvious, a printout is not nearly as satisfying as a professionally bound hardcover book.

So yes, I'm disappointed.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that (with the arguable exception of the Starter Set) every outsourced 5e product so far has been met with immense dissatisfaction for one reason or another. Maybe they are starting to realize that the realities of quality control require that official WotC products need to be made by official WotC employees.


----------



## Drudenfusz (Jan 20, 2015)

I hope that this strategy is not also problematic. Sure, i can understand that too many sourcebooks was an issue, but too few could also create the feeling that the system is not properly supported. I thought the Advanturer's Handbooks twice a year would have been fine. Anyway, now it seems like we getting some stuff in a PDF, so at least it is not nothing, but I have to say I prefer to my stuff in books!


----------



## delericho (Jan 20, 2015)

Well, that's unfortunate. I really liked the idea of an Adventure Path with an associated supplement. And while there's going to be a free download, I will be extremely surprised if it will be the equivalent of the 160-ish page book we were expecting.

Without the supplement, I'm probably going to give this path a miss.


----------



## Remathilis (Jan 20, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> I greatly dislike online-only content because I try very hard to keep electronic devices away from my table. And before anyone mentions the obvious, a printout is not nearly as satisfying as a professionally bound hardcover book.
> 
> So yes, I'm disappointed.
> 
> I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that (with the arguable exception of the Starter Set) every outsourced 5e product so far has been met with immense dissatisfaction for one reason or another. Maybe they are starting to realize that the realities of quality control require that official WotC products need to be made by official WotC employees.



You mean both of them? There is only 6 products; three core books, two modules, and a dm screen. And both middle were made by the same company while the rules were being finalized. I can't blame KP for having some weak slots there.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 20, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> You mean both of them? There is only 6 products; three core books, two modules, and a dm screen. And both middle were made by the same company while the rules were being finalized. I can't blame KP for having some weak slots there.




That would be fine if even a single one of my complains with HotDQ had anything to do with rules.


----------



## M.L. Martin (Jan 20, 2015)

Nebulous said:


> I cannot imagine that a product so far along into the development process would be cancelled.  I suppose it is possible.  Weird.




  It happened before, with stuff that _had_ been officially announced and even mentioned in published products. The _Nentir Vale Gazetteer_ comes to mind, as well as the _Class Compendium_.

  I'm not convinced by Mearls' assertion that "a lot of products hurt D&D". Unless perhaps the plan is to build community and brand loyalty by starving everyone of alternatives to the One Campaign to Rule Them All ...


----------



## Arallu (Jan 20, 2015)

Zaukrie said:


> It is about managing our expectations. ....which I am pretty sure is what I typed. Also, they have announced one book for the year....so it is probably ok for me to say they don't plan to release much. More free is good. One book a year, not good. YMMV.




I thought it was 2 storylines (books) per year.

Note the updated text, foreshadowing this

*So what do we get every six months?*
 It appears that each storyline will provide some of the following:


Optional: storyline specific Adventurer’s Handbook, with new races, classes, backgrounds, feats, equipment lists.
“_Not every story will necessarily include a player option type book_” – Chris Perkins 
Adventure for that storyline (1 or 2 books) for the Dungeon Master  with additional details for that setting such as adventure specific  bonds, locations, monsters, magic items and NPCs. 
Free downloadable storyline supplements at official D&D site 
Support with storyline specific video games, comics, miniatures and more. 
Digital Versions: “_We have every intention of releasing the books in electronic versions. But we don’t have a date at this time._” – Chris Perkins


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 20, 2015)

Per Mearls. ....we should remember nothing is real until announced. And, I don't care about video games, or board games. I am interested in RPG products, but I know others care, so cool for them.


----------



## gweinel (Jan 20, 2015)

Matthew L. Martin said:


> I'm not convinced by Mearls' assertion that "a lot of products hurt D&D". Unless perhaps the plan is to build community and brand loyalty by starving everyone of alternatives to the One Campaign to Rule Them All ...




Hoard of the Dragon Queen actually isn't the adventure which "will rule them all". 

However, i agree with you...and i am very sceptical with Wizard's moves


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Jan 20, 2015)

Personally, I'm not very keen on the Adventurer's Handbook path. The price to content ratio just doesn't feel like a value. Including the core player material with the adventure itself is best.

An online supplement has advantages too. They don't need to fill an entire book with content. Instead, they can focus on a handful of the best elements. It also leaves them the option to reprint the material later as part of a compendium of player options that offers a better value proposition and takes up less space on the shelf.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jan 20, 2015)

it seems a bit funny, but people who dislike digital stuff will have no option to buy a dead tree version...


----------



## DaveMage (Jan 20, 2015)

The interesting thing to me is that mearls indicates that support for the RPG *is still an open question*.

Wow!

How times have changed.

Only 1 D&D tabletop RPG product for February, March, and April as far as we know.  The last time something like this happened, there was a "problem with the printer".


----------



## SkidAce (Jan 20, 2015)

I'm cool with *one *or *two* supplements a year.

There's enough stuff in the three core books to play a campaign for years.

Why do I need any supplements?  Well, I would like to see their take on psionics (2/3rds done with mine), and I could use some elemental love.

Other than that, I'm doing it myself or converting from older editions. (Rune Magic, Bloodmagic, martial arts, etc.)


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 20, 2015)

Can't say I was surprised. The announcement not coming from them was never a good sign.


----------



## turkeygiant (Jan 20, 2015)

Nergal Pendragon said:


> Can't say I was surprised. The announcement not coming from them was never a good sign.




I'm surprised they let it hang out there so long as a possibility. Honestly I think the "leaked" info on the what was going to be two books was just a trial balloon from WotC to test the waters. If the majority of people seemed interested in two books we would probably be getting two books, but my impression id that a more condensed release was the favorite opinion on the forums, so that's what we are getting instead.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 20, 2015)

turkeygiant said:


> I'm surprised they let it hang out there so long as a possibility. Honestly I think the "leaked" info on the what was going to be two books was just a trial balloon from WotC to test the waters. If the majority of people seemed interested in two books we would probably be getting two books, but my impression id that a more condensed release was the favorite opinion on the forums, so that's what we are getting instead.




After running a 2 year playtest with couple hundred thousand people and talking over and over about how much they learned that most dnd fans opinions do not match up with forums, I doubt they'd base they're plans on forum reactions.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 20, 2015)

turkeygiant said:


> I'm surprised they let it hang out there so long as a possibility. Honestly I think the "leaked" info on the what was going to be two books was just a trial balloon from WotC to test the waters. If the majority of people seemed interested in two books we would probably be getting two books, but my impression id that a more condensed release was the favorite opinion on the forums, so that's what we are getting instead.




Or they were trying to identify the person behind the leaks and gave everyone different bits of false information to see what got leaked.


----------



## pukunui (Jan 20, 2015)

What I don't get is this: If all the Elemental Evil-themed player content is going to be available for free come mid-March, while the adventure isn't coming out until mid-April, why bother putting any player content in the adventure at all? Everyone will have all that content for free already? Why pay to have only *some* of it in hardcopy form?


----------



## SkidAce (Jan 20, 2015)

Reading the wording of the release, I am not certain that ALL of the crunch will be in the free download.


----------



## Joe Liker (Jan 20, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> You mean both of them? There is only 6 products; three core books, two modules, and a dm screen. And both middle were made by the same company while the rules were being finalized. I can't blame KP for having some weak slots there.



You forgot spellbook cards (also by gf9), which completely ignored concentration and omitted at least one spell that I'm aware of.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 20, 2015)

I'm thinking it'll be like a Pathfinder adventure path; the crunch in the free book will just be what you need to make starter characters, with additional stuff coming in the actual releases.


----------



## chriton227 (Jan 20, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> Well puts me in a real spot.  I like splat books, I like having new content.   I miss Dragon Magazine BADLY!!!!!     I agree with slowing down but this is crazy slow, way too slow for my tastes.   I want an active updating game, and pathfinder doesn't capture me.




I would love to see a revival of Dungeon and Dragon.  I think back to all of the old issues of Dragon I read from the 1e/2e days, a lot of the articles were talking about things like unusual magic items, small optional rules modules (arctic weather, fleshing out art objects and gems, random encounter tables, seafaring gear, etc.), class variants, ecology articles, and the like, all things that seem like they would be good fits for the touted "modular" aspect of 5e.  I also loved the articles of advice on how to run games and build campaigns.  

And the modules in Dungeon, I loved seeing 3-5 adventures a month for a variety of levels and tastes.  Even the ones I didn't run could usually be mined for ideas or maps or NPCs, and it was a great resource when I needed something quick to fill in a session or two between major events or to help the party get an extra level before moving on to the next big thing.  I also liked the disconnected nature of the modules, I find with the APs that if I didn't want to use the first adventure of the AP, the remaining 11-12 adventures were a lot less useful because of the amount of work necessary to disconnect them from the overall AP, but with the stand-alone adventures they were much easier to grab and run on the fly.


----------



## pukunui (Jan 20, 2015)

SkidAce said:


> Reading the wording of the release, I am not certain that ALL of the crunch will be in the free download.




_"In addition, a free download will be available in mid-March that includes more new races plus the player content available in _Princes of the Apocalypse_"_. 

That reads as being all-inclusive to me.


EDIT: Mike just answered my question on Twitter:

*pukunui81:* Why put player content in the new adventure if you're going to give it out for free before the adventure is even released?
*mikemearls:* DM reference - most (all, I think) of that material is also used by NPCs in the adventure


----------



## Staffan (Jan 20, 2015)

I would like a little more support for the game than this, but not by a whole lot. I think my ideal release schedule for a year would have a total of twelve releases, one per month, distributed as follows:

Two big adventure/campaign books (a la Princes of the Apocalypse).
One rule-focused book, with a bit of everything. Think 3.5e's PHB2 or Rolemaster's Compendiums.
A big "special" book. For the first year, this should probably be a campaign setting overview. Maybe do those every 2-3 years. Next year, maybe something about rulership, or whatever.
4 smaller adventures covering varying levels. I'd probably go with one apprentice-tier, two heroic-tier, and alternate between paragon and epic tier each year.
4 smaller setting sourcebooks (e.g. "Silver Marches", "Breland", "City of Greyhawk", "Dune Traders").


I think the thing that hurt 3e in the long run wasn't too much stuff as a whole, but too much _player-focused_ stuff. At the end, 3.5e had over 40 base classes (11 in the PHB, 4 in PHB2, 4 in the XPH, 5x3 from the Complete books, 3 in Tome of Magic, 3 in Tome of Battle, 3 in Magic of Incarnum, 2 in Heroes of Horror, 1 in Eberron, 1 in Dragon Magic, and I'm probably forgetting something), who knows how many prestige classes, and thousands of feats. Even ostensibly setting-focused stuff had a bunch of player stuff in them. For example, the FR sourcebook Unapproachable East spends 50 pages (out of 192) on races, prestige classes, regions & feats, spells, and magic items, and an additional 23 on monsters. That's something like 25% spent on player-accessible rules and 15% on monsters. I believe the thinking at the time was "there are five times as many players as DMs, so let's focus our books on them instead!" That gave us a lot of cool stuff real fast, but was problematic in the long run, and they were scraping the bottom of the barrel inspiration-wise pretty quickly (how many really played a Lurker?)


----------



## MoonSong (Jan 20, 2015)

Blackbrrd said:


> I think part of the reason 5e has sold so well is that it's, for being a D&D game, quite complete. I don't think there has been a previous edition that has included so many options as 5e did..




YMMV on this one, overall 5e feels somewhat complete to me in comparison with the core 4e, but not exactly the most complete version ever. Particularly I feel like I cannot truly convert certain characters made entirely on core 3e or core 3.5, I still miss out a lot of domains and I feel I need more non-blasty options for sorcerers -and more thematic diversity beyond monster sorcerer and homage sorcerer-. Having warlocks and tieflings in core is nice though, but I've come to appreciate and miss warlords too. I was pretty excited about adventurer's handbook for this reason, more options is always nice.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 20, 2015)

> "We can't cancel a book we never announced!"



 Whelp, that is a bit pedentic. Not very respectful to fans. Especially considering the cover for the book was shown to us not too long ago. We expected a splat book coming out with the adventure. There is nothing wrong with telling is that the 3PP bite more than it could chew. WotC has some problems with 5ereleases. DMG being pushed back and Morningstar also being cancelled are indicators of this. Maybe it will stabilize with time.

I do not buy (pun intended) the whole too many books are bad for the brand. Well, I understand and believe releasing too many books is not good for their bottomline, but they still need to release _some_ books to make money.

There has been some backlash with the adventure being set in the Forgotten Realms and not everyone buys adventures. Not sure this is good for business.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Jan 20, 2015)

For me, ditching the Adventurer's Handbook and giving away most of its material for free actually makes me _more_ likely to buy Princes of the Apocalypse--and I don't even buy adventures.

Had they put the expansion content into another book I had to buy to go along with the adventure, I may or may not have bought the expansion, depending on what content it had. I certainly would _not_ have wasted my money on the adventure. By giving me the material I want most (genasi and whatever other classics are coming back) for free, they both increases my desire to support the company, and free up my financial resources to potentially buy the adventure.

So in my case, they might just end up making more money from me for less cost on their end. If this is a common phenomenon, then it's a great marketing decision for them.


----------



## TDarien (Jan 20, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Whelp, that is a bit pedentic. Not very respectful to fans. Especially considering the cover for the book was shown to us not too long ago. We expected a splat book coming out with the adventure. There is nothing wrong with telling is that the 3PP bite more than it could chew. WotC has some problems with 5ereleases. DMG being pushed back and Morningstar also being cancelled are indicators of this. Maybe it will stabilize with time.
> 
> I do not buy (pun intended) the whole too many books are bad for the brand. Well, I understand and believe releasing too many books is not good for their bottomline, but they still need to release _some_ books to make money.
> 
> There has been some backlash with the adventure being set in the Forgotten Realms and not everyone buys adventures. Not sure this is good for business.




But neither WotC, nor Sasquatch ever announced anything.  Everything we saw was from leaked documents, meaning somebody probably broke an NDA. Stuff in development gets changed or scrapped _all the time_.  How many projects do you think Google starts and scraps in a year that never see the public eye?  How often do you see corporations declice to comment on product rumors?  (Hint: it happens a lot) Everybody in the D&D fan community took those leaked documents as an official announcement from on high when it was _nothing_ of the sort.


Yes, originally there were two planned publications, somewhere along the line that changed.  WotC is under no obligation to tell us their internal release plans or fulfill every customer expectation based on rumor.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 20, 2015)

goldomark said:
			
		

> Whelp, that is a bit pedentic. Not very respectful to fans. Especially considering the cover for the book was shown to us not too long ago. We expected a splat book coming out with the adventure.






			
				TDarien said:
			
		

> Everything we saw was from leaked documents, meaning somebody probably broke an NDA. Stuff in development gets changed or scrapped all the time.




Man, this, in a nutshell, is *why* WotC needs to play things so close to the chest.

Someone takes some leaked information and goes and gets their hopes up and then it's like that Christmas where you peaked in the closet and saw s bit of the presents and you were pretty sure you were getting an N64 and got really excited but it turns out to be, like, Mario underpants or something. And then you go to the Internet and complain about how your parents aren't very respectful of your wishes and that maybe your Dad bit off more than he could chew when he said that Christmas was going to be small this year because Momma lost her job at the bank 'cuz of her broken knee and how does that reflect on the _brand loyalty_ your parents are trying to cultivate, anyway?

"Next year," Dad says, "You're getting coal."


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> Man, this, in a nutshell, is *why* WotC needs to play things so close to the chest.




I disagree. All this discussion and speculation is good for WotC.  It's exactly what any RPG company wants. 

Imagine if nobody was talking about 2015 products. All that silence from the public. It'd be like they were just an ordinary RPG company!

Like I said before, many RPG companies would kill for fan passion like this! 

And that info wasn't conjured prophetically out of the ether. It originated with WotC.

Even negative posts are better than no posts. Shows people care. There's nothing worse than no posts.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 20, 2015)

TDarien said:


> But neither WotC, nor Sasquatch ever announced anything.  Everything we saw was from leaked documents, meaning somebody probably broke an NDA.



Or it was leaked on purposed to create a buzz. It is a common marketing strategy. 



> Yes, originally there were two planned publications, somewhere along the line that changed.  WotC is under no obligation to tell us their internal release plans or fulfill every customer expectation based on rumor.



I'm not saying they have an obligation. That is just a strawman. I'm just saying we aren't being respected with the line "we didn't announced anything so nothing is cancelled". We knew there was a splat book coming out. Expectations were created. The book is cancelled. People are disappointed. Now were told this disappointement is our fault cause nothing was announced. Please. 

This tells us how communications from WotC haven't imprived that much. It also tells us other stuff.

This cancellation, the push back of the release date of the adventure (from mach 17 to april the 7th), the push back of the DMG and the cancellation of Morningstar are indicaters of how things are going with the management of the D&D brand.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 20, 2015)

What 2015 products?


----------



## Loki-lie-Smith (Jan 20, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> it seems a bit funny, but people who dislike digital stuff will have no option to buy a dead tree version...




No, we just have to print it. If we feel risqué we may even get a fancy cover and nice binding using Lulu or other such service.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> I disagree. All this discussion and speculation is good for WotC.  It's exactly what any RPG company wants.




I can see the logic there, but the other side of the coin is when one gets a "reputation" (earned or otherwise) for not delivering. Who's gonna talk about the Next Hotness when there's no telling when or if or how that Next Hotness will even materialize? Negative posts may be better than no posts, but it's a tough balancing act, because negative posts can turn into no posts in a hurry (people don't tend to do things that make them feel bad, and if getting excited for new products makes them feel bad repeatedly....)

*PLUS MY CHRISTMAS WAS REALLY HARD, OKAY MAN?!*


----------



## soulcatcher78 (Jan 20, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released. The only difference now is that if you buy the adventure you will get more for your money. How does that suck?




Because if you were giving away free money ($100) someone would complain that you didn't give it to them in their preferred denomination ("why does it have to be a single $100 bill?")


----------



## AmerginLiath (Jan 20, 2015)

Publishing projects being cancelled before any announcement – or changed from printed books into online materials with a change of formatting – is de rigeur, regardless of the industry. Some of that comes from the author's end in terms of how material is written or compiled, while some comes from market research in how sales or use is expected. Now, I'm accustomed to it from a textbook perspective from work (probably a quarter of my illustrator work in some years is either prospective work for cancelled projects or else work held over to be rolled into later combined books/online supplements, given how paper costs have risen), but roleplaying books are surprisingly textbook-like in their production and use (compared to, say, novel publishing).

I'd guess that the costs involved needed a 160-page hardcover and they realized they couldn't put together as mechanically-complete a 160-pager on an Elemental theme that would be worth the price for the consumer. Therefore, releasing the core material within the adventure path and online allows them get what they want out there out there (expanding the game resources) while letting them take what's remaining and rework/expand it for future use. I've said before that there are certain timeframes that a publisher wants a book or books to exist in their current state in (before new editions are released, or in this case before new physical splatbooks that appear at least pseudo-core are released). Given the sense that 5e has of bringing in new players or bringing back lapsed players, having a longer period of less non-adventure books on the shelf (even with more material accessible online for those who wish to download it) makes for less "buy-in" for a project that already has a three-book base. It's the same reason that more of the textbook projects that I'm seeing are becoming smaller but with online or CD/DVD supplements so as to appear more easily accessible for a purchasing agent...


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> UPDATE: WotC's Mike Mearls answers "We can't cancel a book we never announced!" So that sounds like the Adventurer's Handbook will definitely not be appearing. WotC certainly wrote ad copy and designed a cover for the book (see below). Mike added "we've played things close to the vest is that it's a huge, open question on what support for the RPG should look like... we do a lot of stuff that may or may not end up as a released product. For instance, we now know that the high volume release schedule for 3e and 4e turned out to be bad for D&D. It wasn't too many settings that hurt TSR, but too many D&D books of any kind. lots of experiments ahead..."





That makes it sounds like the OGL is and has always been a non-starter in WotC's opinion, unless their research of 3E and 4E support trends was done just in the last couple weeks.  I'd have to guess that the lack of an OGL plan, limited WotC releases, and limited licencing to some select 3PPs has been their plan all along judging by that quote.


----------



## Blue (Jan 20, 2015)

KaiiLurker said:


> YMMV on this one, overall 5e feels somewhat complete to me in comparison with the core 4e, but not exactly the most complete version ever.




At the least I'm jonesing for enough spells to make a elementalist besides fire.  More interesting non-combat spells as well.  A *few* more sub-classes, specifically cleric domains and another option each for sorcerers and monks, would fill out thin bits.

And lots of optional rule systems with supporting bits.  Say a book to run a navel campaign with equipment, pirates, officers, vehicle combat, oversea and undersea exploration, sea monsters.

I don't want the bloat of 4e or 3.x even though I enjoyed those system.  But I'm still a target to sell more player and more DM options at this point.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 20, 2015)

soulcatcher78 said:


> Because if you were giving away free money ($100) someone would complain that you didn't give it to them in their preferred denomination ("why does it have to be a single $100 bill?")




It's more like seeing discussion of being given a hundred dollar bill, not mentioning that it's a reproduction of the Confederate $100 bill... worthless as currency, valueless as collectible, and of curiosity/educational value slightly higher than the paper it's on...

I'll note that Amazon puts up a page for any item solicited for. Some times companies solicit for a product, specify that it's not finalized, judge the sales potential by the early order responses, and either go or no-go based upon that judgement. And solicitations predating public announcements are VERY common.

Amazon often winds up listing as cancelled things that were never firmly on schedule anyway. Some of which wind up merely late.


----------



## Loki-lie-Smith (Jan 20, 2015)

Are the Elemental Evil books even listed at Amazon? They are at some gaming sites but I haven't seen them at Amazon.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

aramis erak said:


> It's more like seeing discussion of being given a hundred dollar bill, not mentioning that it's a reproduction of the Confederate $100 bill... worthless as currency, valueless as collectible, and of curiosity/educational value slightly higher than the paper it's on...
> 
> I'll note that Amazon puts up a page for any item solicited for. Some times companies solicit for a product, specify that it's not finalized, judge the sales potential by the early order responses, and either go or no-go based upon that judgement. And solicitations predating public announcements are VERY common.
> 
> Amazon often winds up listing as cancelled things that were never firmly on schedule anyway. Some of which wind up merely late.





Are you suggesting they use Amazon as a way to gauge the market for a potential book?


----------



## TDarien (Jan 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> I
> And that info wasn't conjured prophetically out of the ether. It originated with WotC.



It originated from WotC in that they were planning a book.  There's no indication is was ever intended for public consumption.  As I understand it, the info came from a distributor document, not directly from WotC.



goldomark said:


> Or it was leaked on purposed to create a buzz. It is a common marketing strategy.



This is pure speculation, you have no evidence of this.



goldomark said:


> I'm just saying we aren't being respected with the line "we didn't announced anything so nothing is cancelled". We knew there was a splat book coming out. Expectations were created. The book is cancelled. People are disappointed. Now were told this disappointement is our fault cause nothing was announced. Please.



But WotC did not create those expectations.  You did not _know_ there was book. You saw a leaked document about a planned book.  You essentially heard a _rumor_ about a book, nothing more Any expectations you had were based on information from a non-official source that was subject to changed at any moment, without notice.  Nothing was ever confirmed, yet you took the information as gospel.  Your disappointment is _absolutely_ your fault.

The same goes for the change in release date.  WotC cannot be held responsible for not communicating the change of a date they never announced. Projected release dates change all the time internally.  I would bet money that the projected release date for the PHB change _at least_ once in its two-year development.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 20, 2015)

TDarien said:


> You're disappointment is _absolutely_ your fault.




"Fault"? This conversation went weird quickly. It's some fans talking about some games they like. There's no "fault".  Not from the fans who like talking about the games they like, or the publisher who is producing the games they like.

It's just people talking about stuff.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

TDarien said:


> But WotC did not create those expectations.  You did not _know_ there was book. You saw a leaked document about a planned book.
> 
> (. . .)
> 
> You're disappointment is _absolutely_ your fault.





I call shenanigans!  "Planned" has a precise meaning.  It is past tense.  It is not synonymous with "kicking around the idea" or "thinking about it as possible."  Making a distinction between "planned" and "announced" so long after word going around online was that it was in the pipeline seems a bit like doublespeak.  This probably could have been cleared up sooner if they weren't utilizing the time to gauge whether to produce the book in earnest.  Sorry, but this seems like a screw up followed by a ham-handed correction.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 20, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Or it was leaked on purposed to create a buzz. It is a common marketing strategy.
> 
> I'm not saying they have an obligation. That is just a strawman. I'm just saying we aren't being respected with the line "we didn't announced anything so nothing is cancelled". We knew there was a splat book coming out. Expectations were created. The book is cancelled. People are disappointed. Now were told this disappointement is our fault cause nothing was announced. Please.
> 
> ...




My next question to Mike Mearls, after he said "we do a lot of stuff that may or may not end up as a released product," was going to be (before the Twitter thread got sidetracked), "Since "a lot" of stuff doesn't end up as a released product, can you tell us how many other potential 5e products (aside from this one) have seen adcopy and cover art commissioned, but never ended up as that released product?"


----------



## TDarien (Jan 20, 2015)

Mark CMG said:


> I call shenanigans!  "Planned" has a precise meaning.  It is past tense.  It is not synonymous with "kicking around the idea" or "thinking about it as possible."  Making a distinction between "planned" and "announced" so long after word going around online was that it was in the pipeline seems a bit like doublespeak.  This probably could have been cleared up sooner if they weren't utilizing the time to gauge whether to produce the book in earnest.  Sorry, but this seems like a screw up followed by a ham-handed correction.




What screw up?  You don't think companies have all sorts of internal plans that get cancelled before seeing the light of day?  I'm sure that distributors see _all kinds_ of release dates for products that get cancelled before being   Yes, they planned to release a book.  Then at some point in the development they changed their minds.  Companies do that all the time. The only screw up is somebody got information that wasn't intended to be public.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 20, 2015)

goldomark said:


> This cancellation, the push back of the release date of the adventure (from mach 17 to april the 7th), the push back of the DMG and the cancellation of Morningstar are indicaters of how things are going with the management of the D&D brand.




And I knew that would be some of the buzz from this...and tried to ask Mike proactively, with a softball question, to head that issue off at the pass.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

TDarien said:


> What screw up?





Word was out and they didn't get in front of it as not being a definite product in the pipeline.  Now, they are parsing language to shrug off the confusion as their responsibility.  That seems like a screw up followed by double speak but I think most people understand that.


----------



## Ace (Jan 20, 2015)

If WOTC decides to focus on adventures for pay and the splat content for free, while its a benefit to my budget ,doesn't seem like a smart business decision. They can't really bury it in the book either and hope it spurs sales if that was a plan. Its pretty easy to scan and format a few  bits from a  page or five  and while I sure as heck don't  advocate piracy, you can be pretty sure crunch will show up in the Internet within days and that people who wouldn't pirate say the whole book, might just grab the crunch. 

Even those who won't may well decide to wait till the eventual "best of the adventures unearthed arcane secrets" comes out  

From a money posture at most each group will buy and play an adventure once but several people will but say an Elemental Heroes Handbook or whatever. Its far more profitable and even limiting splats to one or two  a year is still good churn. TSR back in the day  stopped focusing on modules as well called them  it when they realized that they'd sell several splat books for every adventure and that the customer will get much more use from them anyway. Almost anyone can use new options but lots of people, myself included don't use canned adventures at all. As such, they've essentially lost a lot of  people like me as a sale completely. Another thing, splats build excitement for the line as whole  , oh I can't wait till the power up handbook 32 comes out whereas adventures are, meh doesn't fit my homebrew so people take it  take it or leave it.

However it really is wait and see so we will wait and see,


----------



## chriton227 (Jan 20, 2015)

Mark CMG said:


> I call shenanigans!  "Planned" has a precise meaning.  It is past tense.  It is not synonymous with "kicking around the idea" or "thinking about it as possible."  Making a distinction between "planned" and "announced" so long after word going around online was that it was in the pipeline seems a bit like doublespeak.  This probably could have been cleared up sooner if they weren't utilizing the time to gauge whether to produce the book in earnest.  Sorry, but this seems like a screw up followed by a ham-handed correction.




Say I _planned_ on getting my kids a Wii U for Christmas but didn't tell them, and then due to unexpected financial situations couldn't afford to do it.  One of the kids went snooping on my computer and found a document where I was making notes about what I was planning on getting everyone and saw the Wii U on the list, then told the other kids and they all got excited.  Come Christmas morning, there is no Wii U under the tree and the kids are disappointed.  Whose fault is that?  Regardless of what I _planned_ at any point in time (even if I got so far as to put it on layaway that I later had to cancel), I never _announced_ to the kids that it was coming, so how can I be faulted for their disappointment for not delivering something I never told them I was going to deliver? 

The D&D team has limited manpower available.  I'd rather they use that manpower developing cool new things to go along with 5e rather than searching for and addressing all the 5e rumors on the internet.  Given that the release dates are still months away, it's possible that they make an announcement as soon after the final go/no-go decision on the project as was feasible, especially if legal had to be involved to review things before making the announcement. We don't know how far into the product development they got before the decision was made, for all we know the book may have been nearing completion.  I've been involved in IT projects that were cancelled after all of the development was completed but before the product was rolled out due to higher-ups deciding that we were "changing direction", it sucks but it happens.  On the plus side, it sounds like whatever work they had completed will see the light of day either as part of the adventure or on the web, which is a lot better than it being sent to the circular file.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

chriton227 said:


> Come Christmas morning (. . .)





Nope.  Come Thanksgiving, word gets around among your kids about the gift and instead of getting in front of it you wait until cornered closer to Christmas and then squirm and say, but I only planned to get you the gift, I never told you you were getting it.  Bad parent!  Bad!


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Jan 20, 2015)

Blue said:


> A *few* more sub-classes, specifically cleric domains and another option each for sorcerers and monks, would fill out thin bits.




Of all the PHB classes, monk seems the _least_ likely to get a new elemental subclass, because they already _have_ an elemental subclass.


----------



## steeldragons (Jan 20, 2015)

Ya know, if it is cancelled/doesn't exist at all, then I will be disappointed.

What I am not disappointed about is, now, if we do get it, it won't be tied to ToEE.

I very much want an "Unearthed Arcana" style book...and "Adventurer's Handbook" seems like a nice way/title to do that. I don't really think/want something entitled "Adventurer's Handbook" should be all about elemental-related stuff.


----------



## TDarien (Jan 20, 2015)

Mark CMG said:


> Word was out and they didn't get in front of it as not being a definite product in the pipeline.  Now, they are parsing language to shrug off the confusion as their responsibility.  That seems like a screw up followed by double speak but I think most people understand that.




Not really.  It more sounds to me that they just ignored the fact that there was leaked information, like most companies who choose not to comment on product rumors, instead choosing to wait until they make an official announcement.  The issue here is people took the leaked information as fact, when it wasn't yet.  

I don't know what you expected WotC to do.  Word leaked out of two books.  They could have confirmed the rumor, but then when they changed their mind and decide to scrap one book, what then?  They get lots of flack for announcing a book and pulling it from the schedule.  Or, they could have denied it.  That looks worse, because they would then release a book they outright denied was in publication.  Neither of those options are attractive.

So instead, they do what _every company does_ when faced with a product leak.  They declined to comment (neither confirming nor denying).  

Production schedules change all the time.  Products get planned and scheduled internally and later canceled. Some even further in the development process.  The fact that this one was leaked doesn't really change anything.


----------



## Vael (Jan 20, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> For me, ditching the Adventurer's Handbook and giving away most of its material for free actually makes me _more_ likely to buy Princes of the Apocalypse--and I don't even buy adventures.




I kinda agree. I wasn't super stoked with the idea in the first place. If the player material was too focused on the adventure, I was probably going to pass on both. And I'm already a little leery of another adventure in the Realms. I was probably only going to get the adventure if I get back into organized play, since I'd be guaranteed to at least be running part of it.

But now ... now that I'm going to get the player material regardless, I could see myself buying and running the adventure, if there's demand for it. Or at least I could see someone in my gaming group buying it and running it. So, ultimately, my willingness to buy has somewhat increased.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 20, 2015)

TDarien said:


> It more sounds to me that they just ignored the fact that there was leaked information





And if you read my posts again, you'll see that is exactly what I am saying seems to be the initial screw up (ignore your own posts and the misinterpretation therein as to what I was saying).  The ham-handed response to Morrus's query with doublespeak being the follow up problem.




TDarien said:


> instead choosing to wait until they make an official announcement.





There is no official announcement.  I repeat, there is no official announcement, just a planned product, whatever that now means. 




TDarien said:


> I don't know what you expected WotC to do.





I don't "expect" them to do anything.  I am discussing what they did do. which is ignore a leak and allow expectations in the market place to apparently be incorrect and then when asked directly parse language in such a way that seems ill-advised at best.


I really think you fully understand what I am saying here but have decided to keep adding language of your own with which to argue.  You keep asking questions beyond the scope of what I post, then acting as if I answered them in a way in which you can easily debate the pretend answer.  I've posted precisely what I meant to say several times and yet somehow you find a way to quote me, and then go beyond what I have said off on some tangent.

It's pretty simple.  I think it was a mistake to let the rumor circulate and then to respond to direct query in the manner in which they did.  It seems to show poor judgement and clearly has some fans very upset.  That can't be good.


----------



## rjfTrebor (Jan 21, 2015)

WotC is all about pushed back dates and "we'll let you know"


----------



## HobbitFan (Jan 21, 2015)

This doesn't make WOTC look very good.  Quite frankly, it makes them look like they don't know how to manage their own game....


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

TDarien said:


> This is pure speculation.



Indeed. I was offering a alternative to one possible narrative to the "leaks". Maybe someone broke an NDA. Maybe it was part of a marketing stragegy. Morrus seems to think they originated from WotC, for what it is worth.



> But WotC did not create those expectations.



Unless they are behind the leaks.  



> You did not _know_ there was book.



It was something reasonable to expect. Heck, there was a "leak" of the cover with "Adventurer's Handbook" written on it. I think I and a lot of people _knew_ a book was coming.



> Your disappointment is _absolutely_ your fault.



You do not understand what I said. What I said was that Mearls' comment wasn't respectul. He acted as if any expectation we might of had was our only fault. The thing is they were developping a splat book and there were leaks of it. We know WotC commissioned a cover for a book with the words "Adventurer's Handbook" written on it. Who does that just for fun?

Maybe they aren't behind the leaks, but they certainly didn't come out and say "People, do not get your hopes up, that book might just be an experiment that will never be published". Expectations do not seems to be unreasonable in this case as were are beyong rumors when it comes to this specific product. Cancelled products aren't a stable of D&D either (aside from 2011 when a lot of books were cancelled or rescheduled. I'm sure some can point to the 90s when TSR had problems too). This doesn't look good.



> The same goes for the change in release date.  WotC cannot be held responsible for not communicating the change of a date they never announced.



Except for the DMG, right? But you miss the point about my comment about release dates. 

To me it seems WotC is acting like it still is a big RPG producer, but they lack resources to be one. Maybe a smaller Adventurer book would have helped. It would have been cheaper to buy too. Maybe they should have used two different 3PP to do the adventure and the splat book. Seems SG couldn't deliver on two big books. Maybe WotC doesn't have enough money to subcontract to two different compagnies. Maybe they do not have the resources to edit and playtest that amount of content. 

That being said, even if WotC didn't announced the splat book, you do recognize they wanted to publish one, right?


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> IMorrus seems to think they originated from WotC, for what it is worth.




Only in the sense that product ad copy and artwork can't originate from anywhere else, and nobody imagined it into existence. That doesn't mean it was deliberate.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

Morrus said:


> Only in the sense that product ad copy and artwork can't originate from anywhere else, and nobody imagined it into existence. That doesn't mean it was deliberate.



I'm not really a fan of "Someone pressed the wrong button. Twice." theories. Where did the art cover leak started?


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

cbwjm said:


> We got excited about something that wasn't confirmed, no fault of WotC. Maybe next time people will wait for an official statement before getting too excited about new products that might not even be released.




Meh. Getting excited a or something isn't a crime. It isn't even a bad thing. That's why we're here, right? We're not here because D&D bores us!


----------



## Remathilis (Jan 21, 2015)

I get it.

They're dolling them out like Magic Expansions. 

1 Module.
1 Online/MMO expansion.
1 Mini Set
1 Related Product (Board Game)

Each one has a "theme" (Dragons, Elemental) and eventually, they move to different "realms" (settings). No tread-mill of books, just a few things at a time. 

I'm wagering the "Core Update" will be a new "rulebook" every year; everything else will be modules and supplements (with online support). 

...

Fine by me. Aids my wallet and I might get PotA now because of it.


----------



## Mercurius (Jan 21, 2015)

To be honest, I always found the idea of an "Elemental Adventurer's Handbook" to be a bit odd, especially when it is for only one other book. I mean I can see an AH for an entire world, or perhaps a multi-volume epic campaign, but it seemed out of place.  Also, it isn't clear to me whether or not this was actually planned. It seems that if it was never planned then Mearls would have refuted it earlier. But the reason it is only being refuted now seems to be because they decided not to publish it.  Now the interesting question is why? Maybe they are re-allocating resources to another project?  







HobbitFan said:


> This doesn't make WOTC look very good.  Quite frankly, it makes them look like they don't know how to manage their own game....



  If so, so what? I think they've admitted as much that they aren't entirely sure how to make 5E a roaring success. I mean, how could they? They've stated that they don't want to take the approach of editions past, and seemingly they don't want to model themselves after Pathfinder. So they're left with....well, as Mearls said, experimentation. Hey, I'm game for some experimentation.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 21, 2015)

Mercurius said:


> I mean I can see an AH for an entire world, or perhaps a multi-volume epic campaign, but it seemed out of place.





Yeah, or AH as an alt-title for a PHII-type book.  A new way to spin expanding player's options perhaps.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

cbwjm said:


> True, and getting excited about a possible product is fine. But that doesn't mean that the company has done something bad just because the possible product doesn't eventuate.




Exactly. There is no fault. Nobody has done anything wrong. WotC hasn't, and we haven't. Folks should stop wondering about who they can blame.


----------



## guachi (Jan 21, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> You forgot spellbook cards (also by gf9), which completely ignored concentration and omitted at least one spell that I'm aware of.




The second printing of the cards added a concentration marking. You can look on the back of the box to see if it's second printing. In addition, every spell but two (and there are a LOT of them) that has a duration of "up to ...." is concentration. So the first printings aren't quite the pain I initially thought they.

I initially rated them low but I quite like them now. Very good to hand to new players.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 21, 2015)

Mark CMG said:


> Yeah, or AH as an alt-title for a PHII-type book.  A new way to spin expanding player's options perhaps.




Actually that'd be a great name for something like that, but I'd want to see completely different classes and races, like you could play with PHB or AH, like monte cook's arcana unearthed, that would be cool.


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 21, 2015)

I love that the players part is going to be free.  Lower cost of entry for the players. Makes it much easier for those not already invested in the games who might be interested with 5e.


----------



## Remathilis (Jan 21, 2015)

bmfrosty said:


> I love that the players part is going to be free.  Lower cost of entry for the players. Makes it much easier for those not already invested in the games who might be interested with 5e.




To be honest, that gets me excited for PotA more than I was. I was going to buy the Adventurer's Handbook and skip the module, but with the stuff I wanted out of AH free (genasi, spells, etc) I might pick the module up to either run or just pick apart for ideas.


----------



## Jester David (Jan 21, 2015)

Looking at the responses, it's no wonder WotC is playing things close to their chest. If people are this upset by the cancellation of a leaked product imagine the reaction if WotC has actually announced it. 

Still, some *honesty* from Mearls and the WotC team would be nice. The vague veiled comments were old years ago and now they're just cringe worthy. A quick sentence saying "yes, we had the product in the works but the content <didn't meet our standards/ seemed inappropriate this soon after launch/ didn't seem to be worth the price of the book/ etc>" would be awesome. I think most people would understand if they talked to us like grownups instead of letting speculation run rampant. From all appearances, WotC seems to have stopped all work on D&D, aside from cryptic hints on Twitter.

I understand the whole "too many products sunk TSR" argument (although the "It wasn't too many settings that hurt TSR, but too many D&D books of any kind" runs contrary to what the actual people who studied the numbers concluded). Fewer books that are more important and less disposable does seem to be a good strategy (it's working well for Paizo) and a generic "elemental evil" sourcebook is a little weak for the first primary sourcebook. Going with one big PC splatbook each you would be enough content. August seems the probably time for that. Still, it would be nice to hear about that before June.

Still, if WotC is uninterested in supporting D&D for the first half of 2015, the fans sure seem to be willing. I'm doing my part to write some 5e content, and with no elemental book forthcoming I'm free to brainstorm a Primordial pact warlock, elemental druid, and more.


----------



## turkeygiant (Jan 21, 2015)

TDarien said:


> Not really.  It more sounds to me that they just ignored the fact that there was leaked information, like most companies who choose not to comment on product rumors, instead choosing to wait until they make an official announcement.  The issue here is people took the leaked information as fact, when it wasn't yet.
> 
> I don't know what you expected WotC to do.  Word leaked out of two books.  They could have confirmed the rumor, but then when they changed their mind and decide to scrap one book, what then?  They get lots of flack for announcing a book and pulling it from the schedule.  Or, they could have denied it.  That looks worse, because they would then release a book they outright denied was in publication.  Neither of those options are attractive.
> 
> ...




You are pretty much right, though I think they probably should have stepped in and said something when the covers were leaked as well and their distributors started adding BOTH books to their pre-order lists. I think a lot of the frustration some people are feeling is that they were under the impression that the solicits were official and WotC didn't step up to tell them they weren't. I totally thought the books were officially announced, they were even on the ENWorld upcoming releases page.


----------



## turkeygiant (Jan 21, 2015)

Morrus said:


> Only in the sense that product ad copy and artwork can't originate from anywhere else, and nobody imagined it into existence. That doesn't mean it was deliberate.




How did the leaked ad text and covers make their way to you? Do you remember where they first showed up?


----------



## pukunui (Jan 21, 2015)

turkeygiant said:


> How did the leaked ad text and covers make their way to you? Do you remember where they first showed up?



Their source was a German gaming store. Eidelweiss or something.


----------



## turkeygiant (Jan 21, 2015)

pukunui said:


> Their source was a German gaming store. Eidelweiss or something.




So maybe from an over-eager sales rep then? I know with Games Workshop their reps are pretty notorious for spilling info on soon to be announced products to drum up sales. I wonder if somebody at WotC thought these books were closer to finalization when they really weren't because of the delays last fall?


----------



## Loki-lie-Smith (Jan 21, 2015)

FRPGames had them listed too. Actually they are still listed.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Jan 21, 2015)

This heading reminds me of some of the tabloid covers in UK.
Anywho, I dont think its cancelled, I think its delayed. Fret not, its probably something they'll announce soon. It is, afterall, being published by 3rd PP.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

How did Morrus get his hands on this in August anyway? 







> Adventurer's Handbook (March 17, 2015; hardcover; $39.95) -- A Dungeons & Dragons Accessory.
> 
> Create Heroic Characters to Conquer the Elements in this Accessory for the World’s Greatest Roleplaying Game
> 
> ...




If it didn't come from WotC directly, it seems WotC gave that this part the info. I mean who could invent all that and the sells price? I wouldn't call those rumors or leaks.


----------



## pukunui (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> How did Morrus get his hands on this in August anyway?



It was a scoop from [MENTION=43548]kettite[/MENTION]. I asked him where he got it and this is what he said:



kettite said:


> Back alley, very shady.  Mugged a guy, stole his Hachette catalogue listings.
> 
> Where, as fate would have it, the Adventurer's Handbook status is showing as cancelled: http://edelweiss.abovethetreeline.c...roupID=0&catalogID=407200&org=&sku=0786965770
> 
> Don't quite know how that squares with the recent showing of the cover, but there it is.  Go figure.  I hope this news doesn't set the community into a tizzy of over-reactions and raging.


----------



## guachi (Jan 21, 2015)

I wonder why we couldn't have gotten, say, 64 pages of saddle-stitched material.  That'd probably be cheap enough to produce. Price it at $10-15 or something.

It'd give players something to have without it costing an arm and a leg.


----------



## SkidAce (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Or it was leaked on purposed to create a buzz. It is a common marketing strategy.
> 
> I'm not saying they have an obligation. That is just a strawman. I'm just saying we aren't being respected with the line "we didn't announced anything so nothing is cancelled". We knew there was a splat book coming out. Expectations were created. The book is cancelled. People are disappointed. Now were told this disappointement is our fault cause nothing was announced. Please.
> 
> ...




It is our fault.  I have no problem saying I was taking what we knew too seriously.  I should have waited for solid info before considering it a done deal.


----------



## Jester David (Jan 21, 2015)

I wonder if the reason for the cancellation was the amount of material.
They were planning a $40 _Adventurer's Handbook_, which was potentially half fluff and a description of the elemental planes. But they might have realized that the page count was too high for what they wanted and instead moved the mechanics into the adventure itself, making that larger. At $50 it was pretty pricey sounding, so adding an extra 50 pages would be nice and make the product reasonable. And more people might buy the adventure if there was crunch included.


----------



## pukunui (Jan 21, 2015)

guachi said:


> I wonder why we couldn't have gotten, say, 64 pages of saddle-stitched material.  That'd probably be cheap enough to produce. Price it at $10-15 or something.
> 
> It'd give players something to have without it costing an arm and a leg.



Instead we get it for free! And then some of it will be in a book you can buy if you want to have a dead tree version of it.


----------



## Echohawk (Jan 21, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> You forgot spellbook cards (also by gf9), which completely ignored concentration and omitted at least one spell that I'm aware of.



Just a note on this -- both the missing _mislead_ spell and the lack of any concentration indicators were fixed in the second printing of these cards.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

pukunui said:


> It was a scoop from [MENTION=43548]kettite[/MENTION]. I asked him where he got it and this is what he said:



I was wondering about the info Morrus got in August of 2014. This one.  







> Adventurer's Handbook (March 17, 2015; hardcover; $39.95) -- A Dungeons & Dragons Accessory.
> 
> Create Heroic Characters to Conquer the Elements in this Accessory for the World’s Greatest Roleplaying Game
> 
> ...



Sounds official. Like something WotC gives to retailers (price included). Not something a retailed makes up.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

SkidAce said:


> It is our fault.  I have no problem saying I was taking what we knew too seriously.  I should have waited for solid info before considering it a done deal.




Oh please. They were making the book. They subcontracted Sasquatch Games to do it, we knew that, right? They ordered art for the books, we knew that, right? They sent this to retailers in august of 2014(!) 







> Adventurer's Handbook (March 17, 2015; hardcover; $39.95) -- A Dungeons & Dragons Accessory.
> 
> Create Heroic Characters to Conquer the Elements in this Accessory for the World’s Greatest Roleplaying Game
> 
> ...



.

The book was teased if not essentially announced. It certainly wasn't denied. Mearls is playing on words. This approach to communication is not respectful of his clients' intelligence. Just say the two books were too much to handle. WotC isn't the big producer of RPGs it use to be. We know, no need to be keep it a secret.


----------



## Oakfist (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Oh please. They were making the book. They subcontracted Sasquatch Games to do it, we knew that, right? They ordered art for the books, we knew that, right? They sent this to retailers in august of 2014(!) .
> 
> The book was teased if not essentially announced. It certainly wasn't denied. Mearls is playing on words. This approach to communication is not respectful of his clients' intelligence. Just say the two books were too much to handle. WotC isn't the big producer of RPGs it use to be. We know, no need to be keep it a secret.




I'm actually inclined to agree with the notion that someone scraped up some trade information that was floating around somewhere and we as a community just ran with it and speculated. Bottom line, we don't know why WotC decided to collapse everything into one book, but it seems like a better value (especially if they plan to release a portion of it for free) and the right thing to do. While I don't think WotC should be let off the hook when they mess up or outright lie to a community, I'm not seeing that happen here. Wonder why WotC holds things close to the vest? Posts like one quoted above. As an aside, I never see Paizo cast in such a negative light when they change release dates or cancel titles. Lighten up, Francis...


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

If I'm to be honest here, I'm glad it got dropped. I also wish the rest of these lame niche products would get dropped as well. 

I want more generic supplements and adventures released for the core game while the more niche products be released with their respective settings. 

I'm not a fan of these tie in with video game products, especially based on a mediocre game such as Neverwinter. 

They've done great with the three core but outside of that, I don't see it looking too good for D&D. 

I really wish a company that was just focused on table top gaming would take control of D&D.


----------



## pukunui (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> I was wondering about the info Morrus got in August of 2014. This one.  Sounds official. Like something WotC gives to retailers (price included). Not something a retailed makes up.



Yeah, that came from kettite, who found it on the Eidelweiss website.


----------



## delericho (Jan 21, 2015)

Oakfist said:


> As an aside, I never see Paizo cast in such a negative light when they change release dates or cancel titles.




The biggest part of that is that Paizo are simply much smaller. D&D, and especially shiny new editions of D&D, are just news in a way that Pathfinder simply isn't.

But the other big factor is that Paizo are remarkably up-front and open in their communications. They announce products well in advance, they let their fans know what's coming, and they maintain first-rate customer service. That buys a _lot_ of goodwill, and it means that when they do have to delay or cancel something they can make the announcement safe in the knowledge that their fans will accept it without too much grief.

There are many reasons why WotC simply can't operate like Paizo, so this isn't a "WotC should be more like them" rant. But there is a reason the companies get treated differently, and it's not just a matter of double standards being applied.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

delericho said:


> The biggest part of that is that Paizo are simply much smaller. D&D, and especially shiny new editions of D&D, are just news in a way that Pathfinder simply isn't.
> 
> But the other big factor is that Paizo are remarkably up-front and open in their communications. They announce products well in advance, they let their fans know what's coming, and they maintain first-rate customer service. That buys a _lot_ of goodwill, and it means that when they do have to delay or cancel something they can make the announcement safe in the knowledge that their fans will accept it without too much grief.
> 
> There are many reasons why WotC simply can't operate like Paizo, so this isn't a "WotC should be more like them" rant. But there is a reason the companies get treated differently, and it's not just a matter of double standards being applied.



I wish I could XP the hell out of this post.

Spot on!


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 21, 2015)

Mark CMG said:


> Are you suggesting they use Amazon as a way to gauge the market for a potential book?




Not as such, no. But they have, in the past, solicited game stores  and then cancelled product due to lack of apparent interest.

Amazon, however, puts up a page for almost anything solicited for.. and has, in the past confused "delayed several months" with "Canceled"...


----------



## Jester David (Jan 21, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> This heading reminds me of some of the tabloid covers in UK.
> Anywho, I dont think its cancelled, I think its delayed. Fret not, its probably something they'll announce soon. It is, afterall, being published by 3rd PP.



Maybe. But the press release does have the genasi in the _Princes of the Apocalypse_ book along with new spells, and they're planning on giving that content away for free. Not the kind of thing they'd do if they had an elemental splatbook in the wings.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 21, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released. The only difference now is that if you buy the adventure you will get more for your money. How does that suck?




It took two books to do Tyranny of Dragons, also 1-15, and they were bare bones and had a lot cut from them for space.   Now we have a single book that is supposed to take PCs through their entire lifetime plus everything they planned for the handbook?  I think that sucks pretty hard.  

They cancelled the one book I wanted and I don't know if I want to pick up another adventure path.  I was not impressed with Hoard of the Dairy Queen to the point where I didn't bother running Rise.  This news tells me that the D&D tabletop portion of WotC is under-supported and it's not going to get any better.


----------



## delericho (Jan 21, 2015)

Zaran said:


> It took two books to do Tyranny of Dragons, also 1-15, and they were bare bones and had a lot cut from them for space.   Now we have a single book that is supposed to take PCs through their entire lifetime plus everything they planned for the handbook?




Yeah, but not all books are created equal. If this single book is indeed $50, it may well have a greater page count by itself than the two ToD books put together.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> If I'm to be honest here, I'm glad it got dropped. I also wish the rest of these lame niche products would get dropped as well.
> 
> I want more generic supplements and adventures released for the core game while the more niche products be released with their respective settings.
> 
> ...




But we aren't getting anything at all.  They aren't going to announce anything for half a year so the only thing in the limelight is Elemental Evil.  This media ploy isn't for the tabletop game.  It's so they can sell Neverwinter Online and that Board Game.   The tabletop game is getting drekked on.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 21, 2015)

Zaran said:


> It took two books to do Tyranny of Dragons, also 1-15, and they were bare bones and had a lot cut from them for space.   Now we have a single book that is supposed to take PCs through their entire lifetime plus everything they planned for the handbook?  I think that sucks pretty hard.
> 
> They cancelled the one book I wanted and I don't know if I want to pick up another adventure path.  I was not impressed with Hoard of the Dairy Queen to the point where I didn't bother running Rise.  This news tells me that the D&D tabletop portion of WotC is under-supported and it's not going to get any better.




I'm not familiar with any of the published adventures except Phandelver and I'm probably not going to get the Elemental evil one either. I don't resent WOTC for under-supporting 5E at all. The core set feels very much like a complete game and the system makes it easy to create new monsters, magic items, & other stuff as I need it. 

The tabletop D&D game to me has always been about making stuff up and having fun with it. To be angry with a company for not doing all of your imagining for you is a bizarre attitude IMHO. I also think that if WOTC doesn't want, or cannot create enough add on products to satisfy the demand, then getting out a set of guidelines for publishers should be high on the priority list. There is probably a wealth of material already produced by third parties just waiting for a means to share it.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 21, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The tabletop D&D game to me has always been about making stuff up and having fun with it.





Hear!  Hear!  When my friends and I began back in the day, 40 years ago, my buddy had dibs on the TSR stuff (and then claimed the JG stuff and Mayfair stuff too as time went on), so I had to create my Grymvald setting whole cloth, with guidance from the game books of course.  A system set up to ease GM creation of setting and adventures doesn't need a lot of support.  A system with fewer mechanical options encourages RPing by the players rather than reliance on dice.  Keep it thin, I say, and keep it real.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 21, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> I'm not familiar with any of the published adventures except Phandelver and I'm probably not going to get the Elemental evil one either. I don't resent WOTC for under-supporting 5E at all. The core set feels very much like a complete game and the system makes it easy to create new monsters, magic items, & other stuff as I need it.
> 
> The tabletop D&D game to me has always been about making stuff up and having fun with it. To be angry with a company for not doing all of your imagining for you is a bizarre attitude IMHO. I also think that if WOTC doesn't want, or cannot create enough add on products to satisfy the demand, then getting out a set of guidelines for publishers should be high on the priority list. There is probably a wealth of material already produced by third parties just waiting for a means to share it.




That's the issue though.  I was planning on using that Handbook for my own elemental magic based campaign.  I do not plan on getting that new adventure path.  I don't want to run adventure paths.  I want modules and settings that I can pull from or put into my own world.   I'm all for keeping the bloat down but there is still a lot that can be expanded on.  Now I will have to spend extra time trying to fill in the gaps that I was hoping the handbook would take care of.   It would be different if there were new magazines but there isn't.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 21, 2015)

Zaran said:


> (. . .) but there is still a lot that can be expanded on.  Now I will have to spend extra time trying to fill in the gaps that I was hoping the handbook would take care of.   It would be different if there were new magazines but there isn't.





Or an Internet and a website with more creative minds than you can shake a stick at?  Start a thread on it, rally the troops, fill in the gaps collectively if you are pressed for time and cannot do it on your own.  Even official stuff is never complete nor covers everything, so it's not like there is ever a perfect solution.  Plus, official channels are limited by their inability to glean material from every possible source due to copyright laws, trademarks, and plagiarism, something that doesn't stop an individual when working on his home campaign.  So, you've got more people, more resources, and (frankly once you count up the man hours of the people), more time than WotC has to create this thing you say you want.  You have the time to post here to say you want, then you certainly have the time to start a thread and check back in on it in a day or two and see what has become of it.  Go forth and do what GMs really do!


----------



## SkidAce (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Oh please. They were making the book. They subcontracted Sasquatch Games to do it, we knew that, right? They ordered art for the books, we knew that, right? They sent this to retailers in august of 2014(!) .
> 
> The book was teased if not essentially announced. It certainly wasn't denied. Mearls is playing on words. This approach to communication is not respectful of his clients' intelligence. Just say the two books were too much to handle. WotC isn't the big producer of RPGs it use to be. We know, no need to be keep it a secret.




I never said the book wasn't being produced at some point.

I'm not going to build a house of cards of doom and gloom or assume I'm being insulted over anything.  

You do not know that the two books were to much to handle...thats an opinion or a guess.

I do not agree.


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 21, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> To be honest, that gets me excited for PotA more than I was. I was going to buy the Adventurer's Handbook and skip the module, but with the stuff I wanted out of AH free (genasi, spells, etc) I might pick the module up to either run or just pick apart for ideas.




I'm coming in with very little pen and paper RPG background, but a lot of CRPG and JRPG behind me.  I've looked at DnD multiple times, but before, it's always come with so much cruft, that it seemed impenetrable enough that I couldn't know everything I needed to know before starting, and with that, I couldn't really start.  I didn't know where to begin.

I'm massively impressed with the change that's come with 5e.  Instead of be a bunch of books for everyone to buy, it seems like one book for the player to buy (be they casual or hardcore), and a multitude of books for the DM to buy.

Not that they have everything set perfectly for a new player, but it didn't take me long to work out that I just needed the Player's Handbook to get started.  I also picked up the beginners box, and realized that the mini player's handbook within was redundant to the Player's Handbook, and that the PDF of the Basic Rules was a middleground.

With what appears to be another change with the Elementals storyline, with a hefty DM's guide for the adventure, and the player stuff (the meaty bits hopefully) all being dropped onto a website or PDF, it's starting to look even better, and the barrier for entry is even lower.  If the pattern holds, all I'll need as a player will be the Handbook, and a collection of online resources!

I can not applaud WotC and Hasbro enough.  They've taken what has for a long time been to me a long time opaque game with an apparent high cost of entry, and made it cheap.  $20 for a starter set ($12 on Amazon), $50 ($30-36 on Amazon) for a Player's Handbook, or just the basic rules for free on the website.  It's almost obvious how little investment is needed to start.  The only thing I'd do more would be to put up a banner that says "New to D&D?", and run into a small faq about how little investment it takes to get started, and links a youtube video or two of a play session.

Thanks to WotC and Hasbro for making it all the more beginner friendly.  Hopefully they'll be able to keep it that way.


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 21, 2015)

guachi said:


> I wonder why we couldn't have gotten, say, 64 pages of saddle-stitched material.  That'd probably be cheap enough to produce. Price it at $10-15 or something.
> 
> It'd give players something to have without it costing an arm and a leg.




If it's a website like this:

http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop/players-basic-rules

I don't know what the need is for a paper manual.  If you want one, and they offer one like this:

http://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/PlayerDnDBasicRules_v0.2_PrintFriendly.pdf

Then it's easy enough to print and bind yourself.

I think there's more than anything an ideal to all of it.  Keep it cheap and transparent for beginning players as much as possible, and let those who are going heavily invest do so.  Those who DM will invest, and those who are interested in more will invest.  Those that just want to jump into one of the big adventures (like Elemental Evil), might download the basic rules for free and sit in on a game as it starts at a game store.  Very accessible and easy to get started.  Brings characters from level 1 to level 15.  If a new player comes in and does this, maybe they make some friends in store, and maybe have more interest in buying the players guide and maybe the monster manual.

I think they're really going to try to have very low barriers of entry.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

SkidAce said:


> You do not know that the two books were to much to handle...thats an opinion or a guess.



Actually, I know. In fact, we all know. Everything is there in front of us.

The books was ordered by WotC and up to a few weeks ago it was still on track to be released. We even got a teaser of the art. Now everything as changed around the time the books should go to the printer, even the content of the adventure book as changed. The release date has been pushed back too. Why?

Cause suddenly Mearls realized that too many books hurt D&D? Please. They would need to release books for that to happen. Between the release of the DMG and the adventure, 4 months will have past. Not what I would call saturating the market. He had since august to realize that D&D was already too bloatted(!). Realizing this just before he has to send the books to the printer is not reassuring.

Nah, they were doing an adventure path to be released all at once, a splat book, a board game and online stuff. All at the same time with a staff of 15 people (7 of which are working on the RPG). It was too big to handle.

That is what she said. Tee hee!


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jan 21, 2015)

Still only a wild guess...

also I can´t see a failure of communication. They were very upfront about only announcing something they are 90% sure about. This is wy we have heard litterally nothing about an OGL.
This is why announcements are that late, not 6 months in advance.

That too many books hurt D&D is obviuos from looking at 3rd edition or 4th. As an example of 4th edition, we had thounds of feats to go through. And so many powers. Completely not manageable without the electonic character builder.
I don´t want that anymore. Wizards is well served about not releasing 12 books per year.
There wqas some speak about some annual rules updates. I would be glad, if the best races and class builds/revisions will be delivered in a yearly hardcover. That´s it.
For the rest of the year I prefer online rules updates.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

Just say no to splat books. No more crunch bloat. Leave the edition treadmill. I don't run published adventures, but it makes sense to me that WotC should devote itself strictly to adventures, campaign settings, and only the crunch necessary to run them. I, for one, am thankful my players aren't going to be bringing any new splat material to my table for me to veto in 2015.


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 21, 2015)

Zaran said:


> But we aren't getting anything at all.  They aren't going to announce anything for half a year so the only thing in the limelight is Elemental Evil.  This media ploy isn't for the tabletop game.  It's so they can sell Neverwinter Online and that Board Game.   The tabletop game is getting drekked on.




The tabletop game is _out_. It's been released, and has been very warmly received. It is "complete".

Will they release more products for it down the line? Sure. But splatbooks beyond the core three have never generated enough profit to support the D&D division hence Christmas lay-offs and perpetual core revision and new edition treadmill (3.0 --> 3.5 --> 4E --> Essentials --> 5E). 

This time, the philosophy is different - produce a solid, well-received game, and treat it as an evergreen product to perpetually sell to new players, like Monopoly or Scrabble. The real money is to be made in moichandizing which means things Neverwinter, D&D board games and a Hollywood movie. 

They're using the tabletop game to build the D&D brand loyalty for those products which will continually make them money, and in turn those products will attract more fans to the pen and paper game - all the little tykes and college nerds who end up buying the core books because "this is the game that Neverwinter / Lords of Waterdeep / the D&D movie was based on". _That's_ how you create an "everlasting edition". 

This is the best possible model for D&D going forward because otherwise it's just not going to earn enough money for Wizards to avoid new editions continually being churned out. The lack of product coming out isn't Wizards not knowing how to make D&D profitable, it's Wizards deciding that spending time and resources putting out books for the pen and paper RPG is just about the _least_ profitable thing they could do with the IP - it's _always_ been small potatoes compared to MTG and this time they've decided on a new strategy of much less bloat to make sure someone 25 years from now can walk into a Toys-R-Us and still buy the same core rulebook I've got on my bookshelf right now.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

bmfrosty said:


> I'm coming in with very little pen and paper RPG background, but a lot of CRPG and JRPG behind me.  I've looked at DnD multiple times, but before, it's always come with so much cruft, that it seemed impenetrable enough that I couldn't know everything I needed to know before starting, and with that, I couldn't really start.  I didn't know where to begin.
> 
> I'm massively impressed with the change that's come with 5e.  Instead of be a bunch of books for everyone to buy, it seems like one book for the player to buy (be they casual or hardcore), and a multitude of books for the DM to buy.
> 
> ...




I don't buy this.

All you have ever needed to buy was the core three and nothing else. There was nothing you needed to penetrate through. Once you had the PHB, DMG, and MM you were set. 

That's kind of like going to a buffet style restaurant and giving out because there is so much food to choose from. Pick what you want and leave the rest for those who want it.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> All you have ever needed to buy was the core three and nothing else. There was nothing you needed to penetrate through. Once you had the PHB, DMG, and MM you were set.



Nevertheless, splat-bloat has a deleterious effect on whatever edition it's a apart of. If WotC (as it has in the past) banks its revenue stream on splat, then splat becomes a cancerous growth; it gets bigger and bigger because it _must_. PF did a good job staving this off longer than WotC ever did, but you can see it even now with all the "Ultimate" books. I don't want WotC to produce rules bloat not because it's bad for MY game, but because it's bad for THE game. It keeps us on the treadmill. It also distracts from material that is more supportive of long-term interest in the edition, such as adventures and settings.


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I don't buy this.
> 
> All you have ever needed to buy was the core three and nothing else. There was nothing you needed to penetrate through. Once you had the PHB, DMG, and MM you were set.
> 
> That's kind of like going to a buffet style resteraunt and giving out because there is so much food to choose from. Pick what you want and leave the rest for those who want it.




That's actually a perfect analogy. I'm going to make it into a Chinese buffet because it's nearly lunchtime here and I'm jonesing for some Chinese food.

Let's say there's a Chinese Buffet, with plenty of options - shrimp fried rice, sweet and sour chicken, egg drop soup, orange chicken, barbecue pork, Mongolian beef, moo goo gai pan, what have you. 

When you walk down the buffet, the first three options are the three most popular, the ones everyone buys. Let's say, the shrimp fried rice, sweet and sour chicken, and egg drop soup - the core three entrees in any Chinese buffet experience. After those three, the amount served drops off dramatically - most people's plates are pretty full at this point so they're only going to get a few more items. 

Sure, there are a few gluttons who REALLY love themselves some Chinese food and will go down the line and pile everything onto multiple plates, and as a small business owner you're grateful for their patronage, but putting out a lot of food that's likely going to just go to waste costs you money. Sure, some regular folks are going to pick the Mongolian beef for lunch this week, but if not enough of your customer base likes it you're better off not even offering it - fuel for keeping all those buffet stations warm is expensive, not to mention all the chefs you have to keep on the payroll to keep churning out all that food.

Rather than selling 30 less-popular Chinese food dishes, WotC is focusing on the 3 that everybody always orders, and adding other options very slowly.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 21, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> That's actually a perfect analogy. I'm going to make it into a Chinese buffet because it's nearly lunchtime here and I'm jonesing for some Chinese food.
> 
> Let's say there's a Chinese Buffet, with plenty of options - shrimp fried rice, sweet and sour chicken, egg drop soup, orange chicken, barbecue pork, Mongolian beef, moo goo gai pan, what have you.
> 
> ...




Thanks. Now I'm really hungry for some Chinese food.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> Thanks. Now I'm really hungry for some Chinese food.



Baha! I was reading my email and wondering why I had a sudden craving for it. This explains it. Ok, it's lunch time and I *AM* getting Chinese food.


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 21, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> and this time they've decided on a new strategy of much less bloat to make sure someone 25 years from now can walk into a Toys-R-Us and still buy the same core rulebook I've got on my bookshelf right now.



Which is an bad strategy. Just the sales from the 5 Fighter Handbooks they could have sold for the 5 editions they could have put out during these 25 years alone certainly make more revenue than the latecomer buying the 20-25 year old PHB during the last 5 years. Not even talking about all the other books they chose to not sell during that time. They're not making new books and after a few years they're not selling their old books anymore either.


Trickster Spirit said:


> Rather than selling 30 less-popular Chinese food dishes, WotC is focusing on the 3 that everybody always orders, and adding other options very slowly.



 But they only serve it once to each customers, hoping that there will be still be coming new customers from somewhere after all fans of chinese food have eaten at their restaurance once only.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Which is an bad strategy. Just the sales from the 5 Fighter Handbooks they could have sold for the 5 editions they could have put out during these 25 years alone certainly make more revenue than the latecomer buying the 20-25 year old PHB during the last 5 years. Not even talking about all the other books they chose to not sell during that time. They're not making new books and after a few years they're not selling their old books anymore either.



You're still in the mindset of selling books to make a profit big enough to sustain WotC. That is no longer an option for D&D. It never will be again. Sell one book; make it evergreen. Sell multimedia tie-in's. It's the Marvel method, and it is proven to work where putting out "Player's Guide 3" and "Complete Commoner" have utterly and spectacularly failed.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 21, 2015)

Halivar said:


> You're still in the mindset of selling books to make a profit big enough to sustain WotC. That is no longer an option for D&D. It never will be again. Sell one book; make it evergreen. Sell multimedia tie-in's. It's the Marvel method, and it is proven to work where putting out "Player's Guide 3" and "Complete Commoner" have utterly and spectacularly failed.




Then why not just kill it all together, Why did they even bother making a 5e if they arn't going to give us 5e material?    If the focus is on the video games and the fiction and the board games why spead all this time making a new edition.

I like splat books, I love to read them.     I want about 1 a month.    1 a year or if they're only publishing adventures it feels like the edition is already dead,  If they arn't going to publish more books than this for 5e how long till 6e?


----------



## exile (Jan 21, 2015)

6th edition will be outsourced. Another game publisher will pay handsomely for rights to the "D&D" name. This is, of course, idle speculation... and three years away.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 21, 2015)

exile said:


> 6th edition will be outsourced. Another game publisher will pay handsomely for rights to the "D&D" name. This is, of course, idle speculation... and three years away.




Seventh Edition will be diceless free-form roleplay where you write your own settings. WotC will sell blank books for people to use for this.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> Then why not just kill it all together, Why did they even bother making a 5e if they arn't going to give us 5e material?    If the focus is on the video games and the fiction and the board games why spead all this time making a new edition.



Because no previous edition is undiluted enough to use as an evergreen product that will serve as a gateway into the greater money-maker.



dream66_ said:


> I like splat books, I love to read them.     I want about 1 a month.



I sincerely hope that never happens again.



dream66_ said:


> If they arn't going to publish more books than this for 5e how long till 6e?



The idea is to stop the treadmill right here for as long as possible.

UPDATE: And why not kill it? Because it has the potential to be an explosively profitable brand if they stop putting out pulp crap and sell crappy knick-knacks instead. Nobody says Avengers suck because their Avengers lunch box fell apart. If D&D ruins the books, though, it ruins the entire brand.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 21, 2015)

I just dont understand why people who don't want the treadmill can't simply get off.   You only want the core books.. fine buy them an done, why is it nessicary to say I can't have 1 book a month in order for you to not buy them?


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I don't buy this.
> 
> All you have ever needed to buy was the core three and nothing else. There was nothing you needed to penetrate through. Once you had the PHB, DMG, and MM you were set.
> 
> That's kind of like going to a buffet style restaurant and giving out because there is so much food to choose from. Pick what you want and leave the rest for those who want it.




Me in 1995 walking into a store and thinking about what the whole AD&D thing was about.  I see the following 2nd edition books:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...oks#Advanced_Dungeons_.26_Dragons_2nd_edition

I turn around and walk out of the store.  Don't even want to start.

I do the same sometime during 3rd or 4th edition again - same results.

I start investigating again last year in September or October after some good press and see like 4 books are available.  This is much more transparent to me and easier to sort out.  I can put an hour or two into seeing what it's all about.

Before this, I know a few people who played and had like 50 books.  This is much more manageable and easier to get into.

This gets me - the somewhat interest potential customer - to take a look.  Potentially becoming a real customer.  I bought a players handbook and skimmed through it.  I've registered to go to DunDraCon with the intent of playing some beginners 5E games.

I wouldn't be doing this or be on this board if 5E hadn't gotten the press it did last year, and it wasn't easy to see where to start, I wouldn't be going.  No way, no how.

I suspect that it will do the same for others.

EDIT:

I would love to see displays up in game stores and book stores that carry RPG stuff for the Players Handbook stating "This is all you really need to play D&D".  Full stop.

Anyone ever read "Blue Ocean Strategy"


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> I just dont understand why people who don't want the treadmill can't simply get off.   You only want the core books.. fine buy them an done, why is it nessicary to say I can't have 1 book a month in order for you to not buy them?



Because the quality of the books I *do* want goes in the crapper, such as every previous edition, ever. Pathfinder only puts out one big splat every couple years, and it is doing quite well keeping new crunch only in the relevant AP's. And it is growing, not shrinking like D&D would be at this point in its life-cycle.


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 21, 2015)

Mirtek said:


> Which is an bad strategy. Just the sales from the 5 Fighter Handbooks they could have sold for the 5 editions they could have put out during these 25 years alone certainly make more revenue than the latecomer buying the 20-25 year old PHB during the last 5 years. Not even talking about all the other books they chose to not sell during that time. They're not making new books and after a few years they're not selling their old books anymore either.




Increasingly smaller fractions of the player base purchasing each subsequent Fighter's Handbook mean that splatbooks are always a matter of diminishing returns; chump change to the makers of Magic and quite frankly of a questionable level of quality that will only harm the brand they're working so hard to turn into The Next Big Thing™.



Mirtek said:


> But they only serve it once to each customers, hoping that there will be still be coming new customers from somewhere after all fans of chinese food have eaten at their restaurance once only.




Wizards of the Coast does not care about D&D book sales. Let me repeat that:

*WotC does not care whether they are leaving money on the table by not producing D&D splatbooks for us.*

The reason being that even if those books sold very well for non-core D&D books, it'd still be just a drop in the bucket compared to Magic. No WotC edition has ever made bank off of splatbooks - the inevitably end up having to put out revised corebooks or a new edition if they want to see a steady profit. This time, they're saying screw making money off of D&D books, that's not worked out the last couple of editions, this time we're going to leverage great stories and cross-media events to turn D&D into a juggernaut brand like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, with successful movies and novels and videos games and yes tabletop rpg books, but the focus is on the whole, not the pen and paper line. D&D is already more than halfway there, with dozens of best-selling novels to draw from and a huge base of lapsed players and non-players who've nevertheless been exposed to D&D through the internet, video games and nerd culture in general.



dream66_ said:


> Then why not just kill it all together, Why did they even bother making a 5e if they arn't going to give us 5e material?    If the focus is on the video games and the fiction and the board games why spead all this time making a new edition.
> 
> I like splat books, I love to read them.     I want about 1 a month.    1 a year or if they're only publishing adventures it feels like the edition is already dead,  If they arn't going to publish more books than this for 5e how long till 6e?




The same reason Marvel puts out comic-books, despite the fact that they've long since ceased being Marvel Entertainment's bread-and-butter. Indeed, the comics are probably the _least_ profitable venture for the for the mass-media empire - movies, the tv shows on ABC and Netflix, toys and costumes at the Disney Store... the comics tie that all together and are the "origin" of the brand.

Theoretically they could cancel The Avengers print run and still have decades of stories to draw on, but the comics serve as a continual farm for new properties - last summer's Guardians of the Galaxy was based on a new line-up from the 2009 reboot series. 

Wizards wants there to be "one D&D" going forward to serve as a stable foundation for that brand; the aim is for there to never be a 6E, just a 5E that draws in new players the same way new X-Men storylines draw in new comic book fans. They're playing the long game with this edition, and are ignoring small-time cash in the short-term (bloated splatbook sales that will hinder a "timeless" D&D edition) in favor of banking on bringing in the Big Bucks when a Drizzt movie gets made (or a hugely popular Planescape MMO, or an Eberron tv show on HBO, or even just a solid D&D video game like the old Baldur's Gate series, etc.)


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 21, 2015)

Halivar said:


> Because no previous edition is undiluted enough to use as an evergreen product that will serve as a gateway into the greater money-maker.



Neither is 5e. The tabletop RPG is so unimportant that 98% of the people they're trying to sell the brand too with all this tie-in will have never picked it up. Almost no Neverwinter player will care or even know which edition is current and how many books it has or even that the RPG is still being made and not something that D&D started with but has long since abandoned.


bmfrosty said:


> I turn around and walk out of the store.  Don't even want to start.



 As opposed to someone walking into a store in 2016, seeing that this edition only has three rule books to it's name and decides better not to buy it because it seems to be already discontinued?


Halivar said:


> Sell one book; make it evergreen. Sell multimedia tie-in's



 Except that's not how it works. It's the tie-ins who might help sell some of the books, which are otherwise unknown by the vast majority of your tie-in customers.


Halivar said:


> It's the Marvel method, and it is proven to work



Actually Marvel is still releasing dozens of comics every month


Halivar said:


> where putting out "Player's Guide 3" and  "Complete Commoner" have utterly and spectacularly failed.



 They have made more money than just putting one book out that almost no one is going to buy after at most a year and have virtually no impact on your tie-in, as these target group doesn't know how many books exist anyway


dream66_ said:


> Then why not just kill it all together, Why did they even bother making a 5e if they arn't going to give us 5e material?    If the focus is on the video games and the fiction and the board games why spead all this time making a new edition.



 Indeed. It's not as if the RPG books are contributing in any significant way to the success of the multimedia tie-ins.


Halivar said:


> If D&D ruins the books, though, it ruins the entire brand.



 Not at all. Most brand customers won't ever hear or care about what happened to the books. Heck, most people wanting a Baldur's Gate 3 don't even know that the FR have advances a 130 years since then as they never bought a single D&D book.

Neverwinter MMO is still full of 4e terms (applied to mechanics that have nothing to do with the 4e RPG, even while 4e was the current edition) and the vast majority of players don't even know that these are technically outdated as far as D&D is concerned


----------



## skotothalamos (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I don't buy this.
> 
> All you have ever needed to buy was the core three and nothing else.




Sure, if you hate Barbarians and Bards and Druids and Monks and Gnomes and Half-Orcs, that's a great way to get into 4e.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 21, 2015)

UngeheuerLich said:


> This is wy we have heard litterally nothing about an OGL.



Actually, we literally have heard something about the OGL. From Chris Perkins aka the Prince of Words Spoken that Mean Nothing. http://www.enworld.org/forum/conten...Return!-And-Other-Short-Stories!#.VMAhUvl5OT8

Is it official? No. 

Is it something? Yes. 

Does it means it will happen? Hahaha!


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Actually, we literally have heard something about the OGL. From Chris Perkins aka the Prince of Words Spoken that Mean Nothing. http://www.enworld.org/forum/conten...Return!-And-Other-Short-Stories!#.VMAhUvl5OT8
> 
> Is it official? No.
> 
> ...




You missed the important question.

Is it "announced"?


----------



## Joe Liker (Jan 21, 2015)

Echohawk said:


> Just a note on this -- both the missing _mislead_ spell and the lack of any concentration indicators were fixed in the second printing of these cards.



Small consolation for anyone who paid good money for the first printing.

It does not speak well of a company's ability to deliver quality product when errors as big as these have to be caught by the customer.

Should I therefore wait until the second printing of everything gf9 produces?


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> Should I therefore wait until the second printing of everything gf9 produces?




If you like.


----------



## painted_klown (Jan 21, 2015)

RE: GF9 Spell cards

Does the box the cards come in clearly indicate what printing of them you are purchasing?
I ask because these are something I have been wanting to buy, and my players REALLY like the idea as well.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 21, 2015)

Morrus said:


> You missed the important question.
> 
> Is it "announced"?





I doubt the OGL is even "planned."


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 21, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Actually, I know. In fact, we all know. Everything is there in front of us.
> 
> The books was ordered by WotC and up to a few weeks ago it was still on track to be released. We even got a teaser of the art. Now everything as changed around the time the books should go to the printer, even the content of the adventure book as changed. The release date has been pushed back too. Why?
> 
> ...



Well then you are already wrong. Sasquatch games is making PotA. Not Wizards.


----------



## Mark CMG (Jan 21, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> Small consolation for anyone who paid good money for the first printing.
> 
> It does not speak well of a company's ability to deliver quality product when errors as big as these have to be caught by the customer.
> 
> Should I therefore wait until the second printing of everything gf9 produces?





Send them back and insist on a replacement.  I thought one of the reasons for the targeted, limited licensing with 5E was to maintain close oversight and control, ensure quality and avoid the so-called chafe the OGL supposedly produced.  Aren't products under this licensing scheme run through WotC for quality control prior to approval?


----------



## guachi (Jan 21, 2015)

bmfrosty said:


> If it's a website like this:
> 
> http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop/players-basic-rules
> 
> ...




I actually bought (well... Christmas gift) a comb binder to bind all the dndclassics material I bought. But it's generally cheaper (after enough pdfs, $70 for a binder is amortized nicely) and easier to just buy something.

I imagine a conversation like this:
Executive 1: You aren't going to make and sell a companion players book for the upcoming adventure?
Executive 2: No, we are giving it away for free!
Executive 1: How do you plan to make any money?
Executive 2: Volume!!!
Executive 1: ?????

Yes, I can do it myself. In fact it's easier for me than most people. But I don't want to. Convenience! Give me convenience!!!

I really hope the new adventure sells well, even if I have no interest in getting one. I just think they'd sell a ton of books for players if it was small enough and reasonably priced (because it was small). A nice, easy to reference document for players who picked one of the new races/classes. 

I can guarantee that most of the players at the games I play will not print it up themselves.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 21, 2015)

Anyway some news from twitter. Princes of the Apocalypse is in the 256 - 320 page range according to Mike Mearls. Also all the material made for the Handbook will be in the PDF. Which will have stuff the the Adventure does not. 

Also some people on here are acting super bratty about this.


----------



## guachi (Jan 21, 2015)

painted_klown said:


> RE: GF9 Spell cards
> 
> Does the box the cards come in clearly indicate what printing of them you are purchasing?
> I ask because these are something I have been wanting to buy, and my players REALLY like the idea as well.




Yes. It says on the back of the box. I ordered the Paladin and Arcane cards before Christmas. Paladin was in stock; Arcane wasn't. Paladin arrived; it was first printing. Arcane arrived a few days later. 

It says on the bottom right side of the box above the UPC code:
GF9 73904
2nd print run


----------



## gweinel (Jan 21, 2015)

Do we know if it will be one volume or two like tiamat adventure path?


----------



## painted_klown (Jan 21, 2015)

guachi said:


> Yes. It says on the back of the box. I ordered the Paladin and Arcane cards before Christmas. Paladin was in stock; Arcane wasn't. Paladin arrived; it was first printing. Arcane arrived a few days later.
> 
> It says on the bottom right side of the box above the UPC code:
> GF9 73904
> 2nd print run



That is EXACTLY what I needed to know. Thank you!


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 21, 2015)

gweinel said:


> Do we know if it will be one volume or two like tiamat adventure path?




Please look at my comment on the last page. 




MonsterEnvy said:


> Anyway some news from twitter. Princes of the Apocalypse is in the 256 - 320 page range according to Mike Mearls. Also all the material made for the Handbook will be in the PDF. Which will have stuff the the Adventure does not.



It's one volume. But it's a much bigger book.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Please look at my comment on the last page.
> 
> 
> It's one volume. But it's a much bigger book.




256-320 range?  Wowzers!  That's one uncertain book!  The full quote is more interesting - Mike Mearls has no idea. He *thinks* it's in an 80-page range.

Maybe he really does have more than one book to remember!  He must have; there's no way he doesn't know the page-count of the _only_ book on the schedule.  



			
				Mearls said:
			
		

> I *think* it's in the 256 - 320 range - can't remember off the top of my head


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 21, 2015)

Morrus said:


> 256-320 range?  Wowzers!  That's one uncertain book!




Well Mearls said he could not remember the page count off the top of his head. So he thinks it's in that range.


Greg just confirmed the page count in the twitch chat for their game


> *Gregbilsland*: PotA is 256 pages. Books are printed in 32-page increments, which is what accounts for the odd page count.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Jan 21, 2015)

If the goal is the grow the brand, that it's wise to wait on releasing a player focused book until they can make it a surefire hit. Right now, the focus should be on selling Player's Handbooks. The big adventure stories help do that. Each creates an entry point into the game, either through organized play, the MMO, or simple word of mouth. In a few months, _Prince's of the Apocalypse_ will be the adventure people are playing and talking about. If successful, it will sell more Player's Handbooks than it ever would have sold Adventurer's Handbooks.

Don't get me wrong. I love new hardcovers. I buy them up, read them, and love them. But as for what I actually want to use in a game, and what I think is healthy for the brand, it's not yet time.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

I honestly don't think a Wizards needs to worry about growing the brand and just focus on creating material to use with the new rules. D&D has been around for 40 years now and is only going to played by certain people so trying to focus on a brand that has been around for donkey's years is just wasting time.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I honestly don't think a Wizards needs to worry about growing the brand and just focus on creating material to use with the new rules. D&D has been around for 40 years now and is only going to played by certain people so trying to focus on a brand that has been around for donkey's years is just wasting time.




Is that your Serious Business Advice?  Maybe you should apply for the job as CEO!


----------



## Halivar (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> D&D has been around for 40 years now and is only going to played by certain people so trying to focus on a brand that has been around for donkey's years is just wasting time.



Well, I suppose no growth at all is a fine business strategy. Just suffer a slow, withering death and all.

An aside: my introduction to D&D was Baldur's Gate, the video game, that by your advice would never have been made.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

Morrus said:


> Is that your Serious Business Advice?  Maybe you should apply for the job as CEO!



What makes my claim questionable? 

Give us your business expertise then?


----------



## Parmandur (Jan 21, 2015)

Free stuff is great.  If they have subclasses for PHB classes, such as Sorcerer,it might be a great ad for the PHB...


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 21, 2015)

Halivar said:


> Well, I suppose no growth at all is a fine business strategy. Just suffer a slow, withering death and all.
> 
> An aside: my introduction to D&D was Baldur's Gate, the video game, that by your advice would never have been made.




That's great, but do you have any data as to how many people came to D&D through a video game?

D&D will always be a niche area. It will never be a global phenomena that is going to attract millions upon millions of people. If you spend the most time creating quality products for your table top game, you will do fine. 

D&D is not as valuable as they think it is.


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 21, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I honestly don't think a Wizards needs to worry about growing the brand and just focus on creating material to use with the new rules. D&D has been around for 40 years now and is only going to played by certain people so trying to focus on a brand that has been around for donkey's years is just wasting time.




Wasn't a popular meme going around EnWorld and other boards a couple of years ago that the hobby was dying because the only dedicated players were the aging grognards and that young people just weren't getting into it because they'd been raised on video games?

(I'm legitimately asking that - I know that was a common sentiment on more than one board at one point, but can't recall if EnWorld was one of them!)

It's not true, mind you, but a few years ago people were bemoaning the fact that there wasn't enough of a focus on getting new players into the game. 

That existing 40 year audience is exactly the reason why D&D is such a great contender for a huge movie / TV / video game / all of the above franchise, but growing your brand is never pointless. The more people stoked about D&D, the better the odds of that franchise taking off. The huger the movies / TV series / game series work out to be, the more people will be introduced to the pen and paper game.

Sure, a lot of people have heard about D&D, but most of those folks discount it as nerds rolling dice. Hostility towards nerdy things has mostly faded but D&D is still the arch-nerdom - have a huge, popular movie franchise take it mainstream and you'll reap an incredible number of curious newcomers looking for their first game.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> Wasn't a popular meme going around EnWorld and other boards a couple of years ago that the hobby was dying because the only dedicated players were the aging grognards and that young people just weren't getting into it because they'd been raised on video games?
> 
> (I'm legitimately asking that - I know that was a common sentiment on more than one board at one point, but can't recall if EnWorld was one of them!)
> 
> ...



If you remember an interview that had Bill Slavicsek in it when introducing 4th edition, their motivation for the design was to compete with video games by trying to attract people who played video games. Well look how that turned out. 

D&D will never ever pull enough people away from video games to make a blip on the radar. Being a good business person is knowing the limits of your product. The best thing for D&D is to keep their table top game and any video games separate. Let software companies handle the video games and let your table top designers focus on putting out product for the current rules.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> What makes my claim questionable?



Well, for one, your advice is to keep churning the same mill we've been on since the 90's. That dog won't hunt anymore.



Sailor Moon said:


> Give us your business expertise then?



Morrus? What that _that_ guy know about the gaming industry, anyway?


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 22, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> Well then you are already wrong. Sasquatch games is making PotA. Not Wizards.



You miss the part where I say WotC ordered the adventure and the splatbook.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> That's great, but do you have any data as to how many people came to D&D through a video game?




At least two on this forum if you include me.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Nergal Pendragon said:


> At least two on this forum if you include me.



Oh yeah? Prove you're not just my sock puppet account!


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 22, 2015)

Morrus said:


> You missed the important question.
> 
> Is it "announced"?



Nope. I just corrected someone who was saying we heard literally nothing about the OGL. We heard literally something about it. After that if you wanna nitpic, meh, whatever rocks your boat.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> Oh yeah? Prove you're not just my sock puppet account!




Are you an Eliza program hooked up to a psychological warfare computer?

If not, I'm pretty certain we're not the same


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> That's great, but do you have any data as to how many people came to D&D through a video game?
> 
> D&D will always be a niche area. It will never be a global phenomena that is going to attract millions upon millions of people. If you spend the most time creating quality products for your table top game, you will do fine.
> 
> D&D is not as valuable as they think it is.




Agree to disagree. There's nothing that Star Wars or The Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy or Peter Jackson's LotR and Hobbit movies have that Dungeons and Dragons doesn't have in spades.



Sailor Moon said:


> If you remember an interview that had Bill Slavicsek in it when introducing 4th edition, their motivation for the design was to compete with video games by trying to attract people who played video games. Well look how that turned out.
> 
> D&D will never ever pull enough people away from video games to make a blip on the radar. Being a good business person is knowing the limits of your product. The best thing for D&D is to keep their table top game and any video games separate. Let software companies handle the video games and let your table top designers focus on putting out product for the current rules.




Right, which is why this edition of the game has doubled down on all the things that differentiates D&D from video games. I agree the video game and tabletop division should remain clear, but hey video games need good stories and we know the D&D team is working on story bibles right now anyway, no reason they can't cross-promote each other.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> What makes my claim questionable?
> 
> Give us your business expertise then?




I'm not the one offering expert business advice.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

goldomark said:


> Nope. I just corrected someone who was saying we heard literally nothing about the OGL. We heard literally something about it. After that if you wanna nitpic, meh, whatever rocks your boat.




Dude. For the first time since you joined this board, I agreed with you and made a joke supporting your position. 

One step forward, two steps back, eh?


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> Agree to disagree. There's nothing that Star Wars or The Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy or Peter Jackson's LotR and Hobbit movies have that Dungeons and Dragons doesn't have in spades.
> .




GotG I'll give you. It was a masterful bit of marketing unlikely to be repeated.

Star Wars and LotR? They have branding power several orders of magnitude higher than D&D. There's no comparison.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> Well, for one, your advice is to keep churning the same mill we've been on since the 90's. That dog won't hunt anymore.
> 
> Morrus? What that _that_ guy know about the gaming industry, anyway?



Ever hear of product control? 

It doesn't have to be all bloat or nothing. 

You can put out a significant amount of material without going overboard.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 22, 2015)

If they gave us the same page counts as Dairy Queen and Laundry Mat.  That would give us 64 pages for Elemental Magic.  I would be much happier about this if there was also Magazine content to back up their seasonal themes as well.


----------



## Trickster Spirit (Jan 22, 2015)

Morrus said:


> GotG I'll give you. It was a masterful bit of marketing unlikely to be repeated.
> 
> Star Wars and LotR? They have branding power several orders of magnitude higher than D&D. There's no comparison.




Was referring more to the actual content then the brand sizes in that instance, fully agree on the sizes of the existing audiences. That said, I don't think Guardians' success was as much of an unlikely-to-be-duplicated fluke as you think - certainly no more so than the original Star Wars film, which nobody expected to take off like it did.

I think GotG proves that with clever marketing, the right casting and (most importantly of all) _a script actually worth filming_, any property can strike it huge - in Guardian's case, even those with an intricate and obscure decades long history and gonzo source material known only to arch-nerds.

Sound familiar?


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Nergal Pendragon said:


> Are you an Eliza program hooked up to a psychological warfare computer?
> 
> If not, I'm pretty certain we're not the same



WHAT ABOUT PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE COMPUTERS WOULD YOU LIKE TO TALK ABOUT?
>_


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> the original Star Wars film, which nobody expected to take off like it did.




You k ow how often that doesn't happen? Pretty much all the time, ever. The producers were he first to admit how surprised they were.



> I think GotG proves that with clever marketing, the right casting and (most importantly of all) _a script actually worth filming_, any property can strike it huge - in Guardian's case, even those with an intricate and obscure decades long history and gonzo source material known only to arch-nerds.




Like I said, the clever (read: genius) marketing doesn't happen all the time. If it were that easy to replicate, every movie would make a billion dollars like GotG did.  As it happens, only a dozen or so movies in the history of ever have done that.

Not likely to replicate.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 22, 2015)

The movie rights for D&D are even being fought over right now. The game is selling very well and we have a new adventure coming out. I think stuff is going pretty well.

The fact D&D has a brand name makes it more likely to do well.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Jan 22, 2015)

Wow, sorry, but are you guys listening to yourselves?? I would love this Adventurer's Handbook, but why bitch? Whether it was officially announced or not, and now this reaction from fans. Really guys/gals, lets excercise patience instead of labelling things as 'cancelled' which is a bit unfair (now the release schedule has a big X on it, really not fair).

Come on, these guys are delivering a quality product, not when *you* want it, when its ready.  WotC is not going to churn out an endless supply of books ala 2e or even PF, so if what you need is a regular consumerist fix of books, probably best to look to PF (they got you covered).

So lets just settle back, play with the books we have and wait patiently for a quality product that is not going to be rushed.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Wow, sorry, but are you guys listening to yourselves?? I would love this Adventurer's Handbook, but why bitch? Whether it was officially announced or not, and now this reaction from fans. Really guys/gals, lets excercise patience instead of labelling things as 'cancelled' which is a bit unfair (now the release schedule has a big X on it, really not fair).




Calm down. We're just some gamers discussing a game we like. No need to get upset; I'm sure WotC is OK.


----------



## Iosue (Jan 22, 2015)

Trickster Spirit said:


> I think GotG proves that with clever marketing, the right casting and (most importantly of all) _a script actually worth filming_, any property can strike it huge - in Guardian's case, even those with an intricate and obscure decades long history and gonzo source material known only to arch-nerds.
> 
> Sound familiar?



And it's not like the GotG script is any great shakes. GotG was a case of a movie knowing exactly what it was and being comfortable with (read: well-executed), backed by marketing that knew how to present it so that audiences knew what they were getting into, and saw the kind of movie they expected to see.  It's very easy to imagine the same movie not having that, and ending up as a cult classic like Big Trouble in Little China or the Princess Bride.



Morrus said:


> Like I said, the clever (read: genius) marketing doesn't happen all the time. If it were that easy to replicate, every movie would make a billion dollars like GotG did.  As it happens, only a dozen or so movies in the history of ever have done that.
> 
> Not likely to replicate.



I disagree, in a way.  Every year there's a surprise performer, a movie without a whole lotta buzz or branding that makes lots of money.  GotG is exceptional only in degree, not kind.

There's a tendency to bring up particularly successful examples (Iron Man, GotG, LotR) because they readily come to mind, but those movies aren't necessarily the bar for success.  Consider "Stargate" or "Highlander".  A somewhat successful movie later turned into a long-running fairly popular TV series.  Now imagine they were based off an RPG, and a lot of ancillary merchandise and tie-ins were available.  If D&D can reach that, great!  Iron Man, GotG levels of penetration is gravy.

Also, I hesitate to mention it, but Transformers.  Old, niche, nostalgic toy line reinvigorated by relentlessly crappy movies.  That's also a possible outcome.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (Jan 22, 2015)

Morrus, belive me, Im super calm 
Maybe my tone was a bit harsh, but I was merely trying to be the voice of reason. Im reading comments that are practically accusatory towards the good folks of D&D. They are doing a bang up job of delivery super quality as best they can with a 4-5 staffer team. 

I just see 5e in its infancy, and being accused of "cancelling" things that have not been officially announced really does not help these guys. 

So Im calm, Im happy, Im A-OK, but forgive me if I try to get some folks to tone-down the aggro towards WotC.


----------



## MoonSong (Jan 22, 2015)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Wow, sorry, but are you guys listening to yourselves?? I would love this Adventurer's Handbook, but why bitch? Whether it was officially announced or not, and now this reaction from fans. Really guys/gals, lets excercise patience instead of labelling things as 'cancelled' which is a bit unfair (now the release schedule has a big X on it, really not fair).
> 
> Come on, these guys are delivering a quality product, not when *you* want it, when its ready.  WotC is not going to churn out an endless supply of books ala 2e or even PF, so if what you need is a regular consumerist fix of books, probably best to look to PF (they got you covered).
> 
> So lets just settle back, play with the books we have and wait patiently for a quality product that is not going to be rushed.




Well, there are reasons. One is because we care and we want new shiny. Another reason is because we want to support the game we love, but we can only do so if we get a product we can get plenty of use, as much fun as it could be, a hardcover adventure path is of limited use, instead a splat has more uses and a broader appeal. I was so ready to shill $40 and a bunch of time in hunting down the book, but somehow I don't feel like spending ten more dollars on something I will only use once (at best). 

As for wanting to know in advance when a book will come out, it isn't just out of bratty entitlement, it is because money doesn't grow on trees, unless you are very rich it takes time and planning to separate a budget for gaming. If I would like to know what launches will happen this fall, is because very likely I need to start saving right now for it.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 22, 2015)

goldomark said:


> I'm not really a fan of "Someone pressed the wrong button. Twice." theories. Where did the art cover leak started?




Amazon.

If you don't want the illos leaked, don't let amazon see them.


----------



## guachi (Jan 22, 2015)

Joe Liker said:


> Small consolation for anyone who paid good money for the first printing.
> 
> It does not speak well of a company's ability to deliver quality product when errors as big as these have to be caught by the customer.
> 
> Should I therefore wait until the second printing of everything gf9 produces?




Well, you can write on the cards. Just mark the few spells that have "up to..." as a duration and AREN'T concentration. It's really not that many.


----------



## Jeremy E Grenemyer (Jan 22, 2015)

Hrmm....perhaps this is why the Realms hasn't seen more than some adventures of late. 

I am curious to see what's next for my favorite campaign setting.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 22, 2015)

Iosue said:


> /snip
> Also, I hesitate to mention it, but Transformers.  Old, niche, nostalgic toy line reinvigorated by relentlessly crappy movies.  That's also a possible outcome.




Hate the movies all you like, Hasbro and Michael Bay are laughing all the way to the bank.  I mean, we're getting a Monopoly movie because Battleship did pretty darn well over all.  Absolutely horrible movie, but, it made a crap ton of money in the end.  Heck, even the Hercules movie made a profit.  I just checked the Wiki site for it and it doubled its money.  That's certainly respectable for a pretty C grade movie.

Get the right names in there, some passable writing and lots of action and the D&D movie will make enough money to earn the rights to a second and maybe a third.  Which is what Hasbro is aiming for.


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 22, 2015)

guachi said:


> I actually bought (well... Christmas gift) a comb binder to bind all the dndclassics material I bought. But it's generally cheaper (after enough pdfs, $70 for a binder is amortized nicely) and easier to just buy something.
> 
> I imagine a conversation like this:
> Executive 1: You aren't going to make and sell a companion players book for the upcoming adventure?
> ...




Maybe a combined approach?  Release them free online at first, and then take multiple online releases and combine them into a single book? 

Let's say that in 2015 and 2016 we get adventures covering:

Elementals
Planescape
Dragonlance
Ebboron

Each Adventure gets an accompanying free online release that includes the players/adventurers/planewalkers handbook bits for that particular adventure, and then when there are 4 adventures worth of new player handbook material ready, they put out a $40-$50 book containing it for those who like to collect?

I'm just trying to think of ways that WotC could refactor the way they do the D&D business, especially if - as has been suggested elsewhere in the thread - they're trying to move into more media - TV, Movies, Video Games, Comic Books, Whatever - again.


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I honestly don't think a Wizards needs to worry about growing the brand and just focus on creating material to use with the new rules. D&D has been around for 40 years now and is only going to played by certain people so trying to focus on a brand that has been around for donkey's years is just wasting time.




This is exactly the wrong idea.  This is the death spiral.  This is where businesses go to die.

There are 7 billion people on this earth.  Let's says 100,000 are already inclined to play 5E.  The company should be trying to keep them relatively happy, and also bring in those other 6,999,900,000 people.  Possibly starting with the 450,423,953 English speakers who aren't playing.  Maybe out of those start with those that have played other editions before.  Add to that people who might have played computer versions of earlier editions.  Then people who have played other CRPGs.  People who have played JRPGs.  People that read fantasy novels.  People that have heard about this RPG thing, but think it's for horrible nerds.


----------



## Celtavian (Jan 22, 2015)

Interesting. The chassis for the game seems very able to handle additional books. I think they have a lot of room to run. They do have to find a schedule that grows the game at a pace that won't overwhelm DMs as new options open for players.

Not sure the release schedule for 3E hurt that edition. 3E lasted a long time and in its _Pathfinder_ form is still going. It's WotC's fault that 3E failed for them, not the game system itself or the release schedule. They switched to a new edition too soon and messed up themselves up shortening the life of a quality edition like 3E. It's obvious at this point that WotC could have extended 3E another five or more years by modifying 3E and improving it. They botched the new edition badly causing a major schism in the community. 

Now they're on 5E. They definitely need to cultivate it so that it continues to bring the player base back together and provide quality growth that will last. I can understand the caution since the goal of this edition is to repair the schism that split D&D. Any mistakes can hurt that goal.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Hussar said:


> Hate the movies all you like, Hasbro and Michael Bay are laughing all the way to the bank.  I mean, we're getting a Monopoly movie because Battleship did pretty darn well over all.  Absolutely horrible movie, but, it made a crap ton of money in the end.  Heck, even the Hercules movie made a profit.  I just checked the Wiki site for it and it doubled its money.  That's certainly respectable for a pretty C grade movie.
> 
> Get the right names in there, some passable writing and lots of action and the D&D movie will make enough money to earn the rights to a second and maybe a third.  Which is what Hasbro is aiming for.



Won't happen.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> Won't happen.




Already happened. The third movie in the series started by the Dungeons and Dragons movie of 2000 was released in 2012.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> Won't happen.



And why not. Hasbro is currently fighting to get the rights for D&D movies. 

I feel like your just cynical. 



Nergal Pendragon said:


> Already happened. The third movie in the series started by the Dungeons and Dragons movie of 2000 was released in 2012.




A thing about those is they were low budget stuff released straight to DVD and stuff. (Other then the first one which was terrible and had nothing to do with Dungeons and Dragons.) 


If Hasbro gets the rights back and puts a major studio and budget under it they could make quite the franchise. And if a major movie stuff happens the rest of the products will get more attention.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 22, 2015)

aramis erak said:


> Amazon.
> 
> If you don't want the illos leaked, don't let amazon see them.



I agree. If WotC didn't want the world to know they were making a splatook, they shouldn't have leak info about said book. Bad WotC, bad!


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 22, 2015)

Morrus said:


> Dude. For the first time since you joined this board, I agreed with you and made a joke supporting your position.
> 
> One step forward, two steps back, eh?




Stop oppressing me.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Nergal Pendragon said:


> Already happened. The third movie in the series started by the Dungeons and Dragons movie of 2000 was released in 2012.




And it was crap like all the others. 

You can't compare the Transformers movies to the D&D ones. Hussar was indicating that there could be one, two, maybe three "successful" D&D movies.

You missed the point of the comment.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> And why not. Hasbro is currently fighting to get the rights for D&D movies.
> 
> I feel like your just cynical.
> 
> ...



It's not being cynical, it's being realistic.

You can't compare D&D to Transformers or Marvel or DC. Just because it worked for a few IP's, doesn't mean it's going to work for others.


----------



## Iosue (Jan 22, 2015)

How about Ninja Turtles? Starts as a niche of a niche, gets a cartoon and requisite toy line, then three movies, two more cartoons, and then two more movies.

How about My Little Pony?  That was an entire dead and shelved toy line, known only to women in their 30s, now a gangbusters IP.

Hell, they're making a JEM movie now.

Looking at a particular project and saying "This won't be a goldmine for them," seems eminently reasonable.  Saying that D&D could never parley it's IP into a multi-product, cross-media franchise because reasons just seems obstinate.  Multiple old IPs have done it.  Entirely unknown IPs have done it.  D&D just isn't _that_ niche.  The vast majority of IPs out there would kill for its cultural penetration.

and I'd be interested in hearing just what you think makes Transformers a bad comparison.


----------



## miniaturehoarder (Jan 22, 2015)

ExploderWizard said:


> The material that was going to be sold in a hardback book for $40.00 is now going to be included in the adventure materials it was designed to support and/or available online free of charge. Nothing less is being released. The only difference now is that if you buy the adventure you will get more for your money. How does that suck?



Well, for some folks they know this backs up the DMs who want to keep players to the PHB. Saying flat out no to a general book of options is a lot harder to justify to a group of relative equals than saying no to an option from an adventure the DM isn't running. 

For folks in organized play, there would definitely be bigger chance of being able to use a book of official options, than if the same option is only tied to Module _Obliterate the Oxmen_. if you aren't making a character for that adventure, you can forget about the kewl options it had.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Iosue said:


> How about Ninja Turtles? Starts as a niche of a niche, gets a cartoon and requisite toy line, then three movies, two more cartoons, and then two more movies.
> 
> How about My Little Pony?  That was an entire dead and shelved toy line, known only to women in their 30s, now a gangbusters IP.
> 
> ...



It's already been there and done that. 

Ninja Turtles will never again be where it was in the late 80's. The movie did okay, but I wouldn't put ot up there as a blockbuster. Also, the Ninja Turtles took off during the late 80's at a level not all IP's get to. Let's not forget this is the Turtles 4th or 5th go at trying to make the name popular again.

My Little Pony isn't really a blip on the radar to be honest. It has a cartoon and some toys but let's not sugar coat it more than it is. 

Okay they are making a Jem movie, so? Jem has never had a movie so it's bringing something that jas never been a film. 

You aren't comparing like for like to be honest.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> Ninja Turtles will never again be where it was in the late 80's. The movie did okay, but I wouldn't put ot up there as a blockbuster. Also, the Ninja Turtles took off during the late 80's at a level not all IP's get to. Let's not forget this is the Turtles 4th or 5th go at trying to make the name popular again.




It's the highest grossing TMNT movie.



> My Little Pony isn't really a blip on the radar to be honest. It has a cartoon and some toys but let's not sugar coat it more than it is.




MLP is pretty darn popular for what it is. It's no Transformers, but you don't need to be Transformers to be considered successful.


----------



## IchneumonWasp (Jan 22, 2015)

Tabletop Roleplaying games like D&D are never going to get mainstream popularity, even if the brand of D&D is becoming more well known and popular (through movies and computer games etc.). Look at what happened to Marvel. Even though their movies are in almost every way a huge success and characters like Iron Man that no one knew 20 years ago are now widely popular and well known, but it hasn't translated in comic books becoming widely more popular too. In fact, looking at what critics say, the comic books are now more and more seen as just a way to advertise for the movies, since that is where the money is and the content and stories suffer due to that.

As a role-player and comic book reader I don't like this one bit, but this is how it is.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 22, 2015)

roadtoad said:


> Sure, if you hate Barbarians and Bards and Druids and Monks and Gnomes and Half-Orcs, that's a great way to get into 4e.




I keep being told 5e core is a complete game that I don't need more books yet I don't have Warlords or Psionics, so yeah sounds fair.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 22, 2015)

I want adventures you can play in 3 or 4 sessions. I am not all that interested in 300 page paths. I am a very busy adult, I would like to buy them, rather than make them up. For 4 decades they supported this model.  I miss it.


----------



## MonsterEnvy (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> It's not being cynical, it's being realistic.




No it's called being Cynical. D&D is selling very well right now and it's movie rights are being fought over. If they make a Drizzt movie or something and put the right amount of advertising, budget and a good studio behind it. It could do very well.


----------



## Iosue (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> It's already been there and done that.



Been where and done what?  What does that even mean?



> Ninja Turtles will never again be where it was in the late 80's. The movie did okay, but I wouldn't put ot up there as a blockbuster. Also, the Ninja Turtles took off during the late 80's at a level not all IP's get to. Let's not forget this is the Turtles 4th or 5th go at trying to make the name popular again.



This is ridiculous.  Turtles merch made Nickelodeon _$475 million_ in 2012.  The movie, with horrible reviews and nominations for all the Razzies, made $477 million worldwide, $191 million of that coming from domestic box office.  And sold a crapload of toys.  It's a huge moneymaker.



> My Little Pony isn't really a blip on the radar to be honest. It has a cartoon and some toys but let's not sugar coat it more than it is.



Also ridiculous.  MLP is a _Core Brand_ at Hasbro.  That means it pulls in at least $50 million in revenue -- the target that 4e D&D aimed for but could not reach -- and it probably makes more.  It was a lame duck line, limping along since 1992, and actually discontinued in the States from 1999 to 2003.  And it had "been there and done that" -- a TV series and movie that no one remembers.  Then, Friendship is Magic comes along, a quality show by all accounts, and BOOM!  The line takes off again and gets Core Brand status.



> Okay they are making a Jem movie, so? Jem has never had a movie so it's bringing something that jas never been a film.



It's a cartoon from the 80s that no one cared about for 25 years.  Now Hasbro and Universal think they can make some money off it.  Will they?  It'll probably move some merch.  And the point is, if there's earning potential in Jem, for crying out loud, there's earning potential in a D&D movie produced by Universal.  Not just in movie revenue, but in action figures, video games, books, and a host of other merchandise.  It would put a bump in the RPGs sales.



> You aren't comparing like for like to be honest.



I'm comparing a nostalgic niche IP to nostalgic niche IP that were parleyed into money-making brand franchises.  I'm presenting an argument, you see, using facts, figures and examples to make a projection.  As near as I can tell, all you seem to be doing is saying, "Nuh-uh," to the point of saying that currently successful multi-million dollar franchises are not popular or "a blip on the radar".


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> My Little Pony isn't really a blip on the radar to be honest. It has a cartoon and some toys but let's not sugar coat it more than it is.



I don't know you so I don't want assume anything about you, so I'm asking: Do you have a teenager in your home? Because if you do, ask 'em about MLP. Especially if it's a female teenager. Places like Hot Topic, etc. are STUFFED with MLP crap. My daughter and her friends geek out over it. Whenever I drop my kid off at school or go to a school function there is a surprising amount of MLP merchandise staring me in the face. Anime expos are crawling with MLP Bronies. 

A movie of MLP would do quite well, I suspect, just from the high school students who would flock to it. Would it be GotG big? No. Avengers big? No. Very profitable? Yes, I suspect it would be. 

I'm very, very surprised at how popular it is within that culture.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 22, 2015)

I hope you all realize that people are fighting over the rights for a D&D movie not because they think it's going to make so much money, they're fighting over it because the court case is going to change the difintion of the word sequel.

The ruling will effect far more than just D&D.

People aren't paying attention to get that sweet D&D money, they're seeing if Disney can take Spiderman back from Sony.


----------



## steeldragons (Jan 22, 2015)

All this 80's talk and the "Jem" movie revelation [which I did not know/hadn't yet heard], as much as I would like to see a "good" [i.e. LotR level] D&D movie [we've waited 40 years, we dserve it!], but I would pay cash money for a decent Masters of the Universe/He-Man movie. With the level of CGI/FX tech we now have, they could do it on a LotR scale and have it (and everyone in it, cuz some of them just aren't doable with make-up) visually amazing.

Neither here nor there for the conversation at hand. Just a thought that ran through my heard.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## Parmandur (Jan 22, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> I hope you all realize that people are fighting over the rights for a D&D movie not because they think it's going to make so much money, they're fighting over it because the court case is going to change the difintion of the word sequel.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





That is for sure part of the broader industry interest; but Warner Bros. really wants an evergreen, never ending Marvel-esque replacement for the Tolkien movies: they really do believe they can leverage D&D into billions of dollars of Jacksonian schlock, and Universal thinks so as well.  Hasbro wants a bigger part of the pie.

Just because Sweetpea is incompetent, does not mean that the folks who loved the Hobbit movies wouldn't love Tanis Half-Elven or Drizzt in a movie.  It doesn't have to be particularly good, Peter Jackson has proven that amply.

And yes, people get I to TTRPGs through video games; I did.  And while we don't have the stas on that, Sailor, guess who does?  WOTC, who are making the decisions to support the brand.


----------



## guachi (Jan 22, 2015)

Zaukrie said:


> I want adventures you can play in 3 or 4 sessions. I am not all that interested in 300 page paths. I am a very busy adult, I would like to buy them, rather than make them up. For 4 decades they supported this model.  I miss it.




Basically this for me. I used to burn through an module in 12 hour sessions in grade school through college. I need and adventure I can complete in the same amount of time. Now, that means 3 4-hour sessions or 2 6-hour sessions.

In addition, the cost factor comes in. It's far easier, psychologically, to pay $10 7 times than $50 once. We have a guy in our group who STILL hasn't purchased the PHB because of the price tag. He'd have it twice over at MSRP if he put $10 in a box every time we gamed.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

dream66_ said:


> People aren't paying attention to get that sweet D&D money, they're seeing if Disney can take Spiderman back from Sony.



That makes zero sense, seeing as neither Sony nor Disney are litigants in the case.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> That makes zero sense, seeing as neither Sony nor Disney are litigants in the case.




It sets the precedent.  Precedent is a very big part of litigation.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Morrus said:


> It sets the precedent.  Precedent is a very big part of litigation.



I understand, but that's not a reason for Hasbro or WB to sue Sweetpea; I believe that litigation is motivated by self-interest, not the Spiderman franchise owned by some other schlubs.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> I understand, but that's not a reason for Hasbro or WB to sue Sweetpea; I believe that litigation is motivated by self-interest, not the Spiderman franchise owned by some other schlubs.




I think you're misunderstanding what was said. The reason that the rest of the movie industry is paying attention to this little lawsuit is because the decision made there will affect them in the future.  Sony and Disney, therefore, care what happens in the case because the precedent set in it would apply to things like Spider-man.

I don't know how true that is (I'm not following the subject particularly), but that's what people are saying in this thread.  Nobody's saying Hasbro is suing Sweetpea for Sony's benefit.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Doc_Klueless said:


> I don't know you so I don't want assume anything about you, so I'm asking: Do you have a teenager in your home? Because if you do, ask 'em about MLP. Especially if it's a female teenager. Places like Hot Topic, etc. are STUFFED with MLP crap. My daughter and her friends geek out over it. Whenever I drop my kid off at school or go to a school function there is a surprising amount of MLP merchandise staring me in the face. Anime expos are crawling with MLP Bronies.
> 
> A movie of MLP would do quite well, I suspect, just from the high school students who would flock to it. Would it be GotG big? No. Avengers big? No. Very profitable? Yes, I suspect it would be.
> 
> I'm very, very surprised at how popular it is within that culture.



I'm european and I can tell that MLP is not popular im Europe.


----------



## Sailor Moon (Jan 22, 2015)

Iosue said:


> Been where and done what?  What does that even mean?
> 
> 
> This is ridiculous.  Turtles merch made Nickelodeon _$475 million_ in 2012.  The movie, with horrible reviews and nominations for all the Razzies, made $477 million worldwide, $191 million of that coming from domestic box office.  And sold a crapload of toys.  It's a huge moneymaker.
> ...



D&D has already been there done that with movies, games, comics, cartoons, and toys.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 22, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> A thing about those is they were low budget stuff released straight to DVD and stuff. (Other then the first one which was terrible and had nothing to do with Dungeons and Dragons.)
> 
> 
> If Hasbro gets the rights back and puts a major studio and budget under it they could make quite the franchise. And if a major movie stuff happens the rest of the products will get more attention.




 They may have been low-budget, direct-to-video crap, but they show the franchise has enough fans willing to shell out money for ANY DnD movie that they can still make a profit making them. Even the direct-to-video movies have to make a profit to spawn sequels.

That's part of why Hasbro is fighting for the rights; they know there's money there.


----------



## Nergal Pendragon (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> And it was crap like all the others.
> 
> You can't compare the Transformers movies to the D&D ones. Hussar was indicating that there could be one, two, maybe three "successful" D&D movies.
> 
> You missed the point of the comment.




Actually, I can compare the two. See, the Transformer movies everyone's familiar with are _not_ the first Transformer movies. Most Transformer fans are well-aware of the rather long cinema history the franchise has. Most of the movies were crap; that's why you don't really hear of them. But, they still released, still made money, and still managed to spawn sequels.

And, actually, the 2000 DnD movie _was_ successful in a way; it was nominated for Best Supporting Young Actress at the Young Actress Awards and Cinescape Genre Face of the Future Award at the Saturn awards. And despite its low income, it did make enough money to spawn a sequel. Just like a lot of the Transformer movies did.

Also, he said that a DnD movie would make enough money to spawn a sequel; I'm pointing out that has already happened, while you're claiming it won't.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jan 22, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I'm european and I can tell that MLP is not popular im Europe.




I'm European and it's pretty popular here.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Nergal Pendragon said:


> See, the Transformer movies everyone's familiar with are _not_ the first Transformer movies. Most Transformer fans are well-aware of the rather long cinema history the franchise has. Most of the movies were crap; that's why you don't really hear of them.



There was one previous Transformers movie; it was called Transformers: The Movie (1986), and it was the finest cinema ever produced in the history of man. 

In the history. 

Of man.

_"You got the touch... you got the pooowwwaaaaaaah... YEAH!!!"_


----------



## bmfrosty (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> There was one previous Transformers movie; it was called Transformers: The Movie (1986), and it was the finest cinema ever produced in the history of man.
> 
> In the history.
> 
> ...




You're forgetting the multitude of Japanese Transformers TV Shows and OAVs:

http://anidb.net/perl-bin/animedb.pl?show=rel&aid=2103


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

bmfrosty said:


> You're forgetting the multitude of Japanese Transformers TV Shows and OAVs:
> 
> http://anidb.net/perl-bin/animedb.pl?show=rel&aid=2103



Convoy was not voiced by Peter Cullins, ergo it does not exist in my head-canon.


----------



## ehren37 (Jan 22, 2015)

Halivar said:


> There was one previous Transformers movie; it was called Transformers: The Movie (1986), and it was the finest cinema ever produced in the history of man.
> 
> In the history.
> 
> ...




That movie traumatized many a small boy by killing their toys brutally. It's all fun and games until you see Prowl get his friggin soul snuffed out!


----------



## Parmandur (Jan 22, 2015)

Here's the thong: a fairly mediocre D&D movie, sat Yransformers 2 level production and quality, can make more in sheer profit than the entire TTRPG industry does In a year.  WB has done this three years running with the Hobbit films; they want to keep doing it, which is why they have been pursuing a bottomless pit of IP material, namely D&D.  I know, from personal experience, that many of the people enjoying the Hobbit movies haven't read the book.  People interested in seeing Elf vs. Orc action are not limited by the bounds of literary interest, let alone tabletop gaming circles.  Wizards is making smart decisions by looking to the brand to make money rather than the game by itself.


----------



## Halivar (Jan 22, 2015)

Parmandur said:


> Here's the thong:



Ok... _you have my attention._



Parmandur said:


> a fairly mediocre D&D movie, sat Yransformers 2 level production and quality, can make more in sheer profit than the entire TTRPG industry does In a year.



Yep. Note that the original brand product, the toys, do not suffer from the expansion of the brand beyond the core product; rather, the core product benefits pretty well from it.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 22, 2015)

MonsterEnvy said:


> D&D is selling very well right now.



As WotC/Hasbro officially announced it?


----------



## TDarien (Jan 22, 2015)

goldomark said:


> As WotC/Hasbro officially announced it?




I don't think they've made a press release, but both Mearls and Perkins have said in interviews and on Twitter that 5e sales exceeding expectations by quite a bit.

EDIT:
Here's an interview from August about the release of the PHB and Starter set.


----------



## Lee Singleton (Jan 22, 2015)

goldomark said:


> As WotC/Hasbro officially announced it?




I don't think they have but as nearly everywhere sold out of PHB's sometime around October last year and has been desperate for the reprint which has only just arrived, I think that it has probably exceeded their expectations.


----------



## guachi (Jan 22, 2015)

A resurgent D&D is probably a key piece of any further mainstream licensing success, movies primarily. Any buzz about a movie can be burnished by fans saying good things about the game to their friends and press saying good things about the sales of the game.


----------



## Kramodlog (Jan 23, 2015)

TDarien said:


> I don't think they've made a press release, but both Mearls and Perkins have said in interviews and on Twitter that 5e sales exceeding expectations by quite a bit.
> 
> EDIT:
> Here's an interview from August about the release of the PHB and Starter set.



The bit about the online sells of older editions was very interesting. It is like good will toward fans. 

Thanks.


----------



## Jeff Carlsen (Jan 23, 2015)

IchneumonWasp said:


> Tabletop Roleplaying games like D&D are never going to get mainstream popularity, even if the brand of D&D is becoming more well known and popular (through movies and computer games etc.). Look at what happened to Marvel. Even though their movies are in almost every way a huge success and characters like Iron Man that no one knew 20 years ago are now widely popular and well known, but it hasn't translated in comic books becoming widely more popular too. In fact, looking at what critics say, the comic books are now more and more seen as just a way to advertise for the movies, since that is where the money is and the content and stories suffer due to that.
> 
> As a role-player and comic book reader I don't like this one bit, but this is how it is.




I suspect the reason that the Marvel movies haven't translated to a greater interest in the comics is because the comic books are nearly impenetrable to newcomers due to the overwhelming amount of content produced with no clear place to start.

The similarity to D&D in this regard is obvious. Earlier editions quickly developed an overwhelming catalog of books.

As an aside, I wonder what the adoption rate for the PHB has traditionally been among players. At the moment, fewer than half my players have one.


----------



## The Mirrorball Man (Jan 23, 2015)

This whole thing has considerably cooled off my enthusiasm for 5e. I enjoy the three books we've got, but I'm not interested in any adventure path or module and now I don't expect to buy anything more from Wizards. I guess Monte Cook will get my RPG money.


----------



## Gecko85 (Jan 23, 2015)

Lee Singleton said:


> I don't think they have but as nearly everywhere sold out of PHB's sometime around October last year and has been desperate for the reprint which has only just arrived, I think that it has probably exceeded their expectations.




They've been killing it on Amazon, too. As of today, the Sci-Fi/Fantasy Games sales ranks have the DM Screen at #1, PHB #2, DMG #3, MM #4, and HotDQ #6. In overall Book sales (taking any and all books into account - novels of any genre, children's books, cookbooks, etc.), the PHB is #100, DMG #149, and MM is mid 200's (don't remember exactly what rank). Those are all very, very good numbers.


----------



## gyor (Jan 23, 2015)

I don't understand the people who are complaining because they're getting AH for free. Okay there's no physical product, but your still getting it for free! Print it out if you want, three hole punch it, and use a ring binder. Hell add Basic DnD, the Hoard of Tiamat supplement and future online material to it, as well as notes and character sheets.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jan 23, 2015)

The Mirrorball Man said:


> This whole thing has considerably cooled off my enthusiasm for 5e. I enjoy the three books we've got, but I'm not interested in any adventure path or module and now I don't expect to buy anything more from Wizards. I guess Monte Cook will get my RPG money.




Well, either you play D&D or you don't play D&D.  Whether or not you spend money on it has nothing to do with it.

If you are playing D&D because you want to play D&D, then WotC is happy.  There's nothing further you need to do or that WotC is expecting you to do.  You're playing the game.  That's all that matters.

But if you *only* play games of which you can continuously spend money on... then... okay?  I personally do not understand that way of thinking... to me, if I want to play a game, I'll play a game, regardless of how much it cost me to get it... but if that's the only way a game matters to you that you can continually pay for it... then more power to you.  But I would imagine that is not a way of thinking that WotC is currently trying to court or encourage in any way, shape, or form.  So if you give up on 5E because you can't make compelling games out of the three books already in existence... and instead are going to play Numenera... then best of luck to you.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 23, 2015)

Jeff Carlsen said:


> As an aside, I wonder what the adoption rate for the PHB has traditionally been among players. At the moment, fewer than half my players have one.




I'm running a home game, and playing in AL in a story.    In my home game I'm the only one that owns any books, I printed them a copy of the basic rules so they'd stop taking my PHB when I need it for enemy spellcasters

In the Adventure's Leauge game, I own a PHB and the DM does, and I loan him my MM, DMG and HotDQ.    No one else has any books.    They did at least start bringing dice after a few weeks though.


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Jan 23, 2015)

gyor said:


> I don't understand the people who are complaining because they're getting AH for free. Okay there's no physical product, but your still getting it for free! Print it out if you want, three hole punch it, and use a ring binder. Hell add Basic DnD, the Hoard of Tiamat supplement and future online material to it, as well as notes and character sheets.



I don't hole punch, I buy sleeves and put pages back to back, thus creating the illusion of a book. I did it with Basic D&D and keep it as a resource for new players that don't have the PHB.


----------



## dream66_ (Jan 23, 2015)

CasvalRemDeikun said:


> I don't hole punch, I buy sleeves and put pages back to back, thus creating the illusion of a book. I did it with Basic D&D and keep it as a resource for new players that don't have the PHB.




I took it to Staples, had it spiral bound with plastic covers.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 23, 2015)

Sailor Moon said:


> I'm european and I can tell that MLP is not popular im Europe.




There's a documentary called "Bronies" - it shows that you're dead wrong. 

Lots of things have small but stable fanbases that aren't readily visible, but exist right under the noses of people too arrogant to admit there might be a fanbase there. And growing those fanbases is the job of the marketing department.

Just like there were a lot of people who got pissed off when I told them (back in AD&D 2e days) that I wasn't buying splats, and if I didn't own a copy for myself, it wasn't in my D&D game. (I wound up with a complete run of _complete ___'s handbook_s because of that policy, and a much much much worse experience for everyone involved overall. I quit playing D&D except for running it for my FLGS, in the retail play program, from about '93 to '98.)


----------



## Oakfist (Dec 28, 2016)

delericho said:


> The biggest part of that is that Paizo are simply much smaller. D&D, and especially shiny new editions of D&D, are just news in a way that Pathfinder simply isn't.
> 
> But the other big factor is that Paizo are remarkably up-front and open in their communications. They announce products well in advance, they let their fans know what's coming, and they maintain first-rate customer service. That buys a _lot_ of goodwill, and it means that when they do have to delay or cancel something they can make the announcement safe in the knowledge that their fans will accept it without too much grief.
> 
> There are many reasons why WotC simply can't operate like Paizo, so this isn't a "WotC should be more like them" rant. But there is a reason the companies get treated differently, and it's not just a matter of double standards being applied.




I don't even understand what you mean by this.


----------



## CapnZapp (Dec 29, 2016)

Thread necromancy alert!


----------



## BookBarbarian (Dec 29, 2016)

Oakfist said:


> I don't even understand what you mean by this.




None of us do, because to understand what was meant we would have to dig into a thread that hadn't been posted in for two years.


----------

