Wizards informally announces 5.5 edition

[NigelWalmsley]

Trying to monetize a TTRPG that way seems incredibly stupid. Even if you did make Class Boosters or whatever, it's not like MTG where only one person can use any card at a time. Once someone posts your Incarnate on the internet somewhere (that is: roughly 30 seconds after you publish the Incarnate), anyone can use as many Incarnates in their game as they want, regardless of whether they have bought Magic of Incarnum boosters or not.

The smart way to monetize the D&D IP would be to use the TTRPG line primarily as a branding exercise and release a gatcha game using the IP. Though I'm not entirely sure if WotC is technically competent to execute on that, so they may try to squeeze blood from the D&D stone some other way. But I don't see that working out for them. It's no coincidence that the three most successful TTRPGs of the past twenty years (3e, PF, and 5e) have all had some kind of SRD.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

The smart way to monetize the D&D IP would be to use the TTRPG line primarily as a branding exercise and release a gatcha game using the IP.

[Avoraciopoctules]

lol, I think they tried doing a gatcha already

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... n_US&gl=US

[Lago PARANOIA]

The smartest way to monetize D&D would be to go in the exact opposite direction that D&D has been going the past two decades. That is, D&D should be a distinct setting with the 'right' way to play it both aesthetically and rules-wise. You have to be pretty extreme with D&D before someone says 'wait, that's not part of the D&D brand'. And I'm talking 'this setting has space rangers, FATAL-style gore rules, and Toontown in it' extreme.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

The smartest way to monetize D&D would be to go in the exact opposite direction that D&D has been going the past two decades. That is, D&D should be a distinct setting with the 'right' way to play it both aesthetically and rules-wise.

This is probably the one thing that might actually cause a riot among 5e players. The whole point of 5e is that the only "right" way to play it is to have your GM make everything up and fill in the blanks for the rest of the system.

[Lago PARANOIA]

You have to do a delicate dance. Gamers are stupid and easily misled beasts who don't know what they want, so you have to give them a very specific thing with a definite brand and hard aesthetic limits while tricking their peabrains into thinking that they're getting something wide and generic. This will require an intentional campaign of making options technically available while either not elaborating on them or making them unpopular. For example, if I wanted to wean people off of dragonborn and gnomes and in the setting without causing a riot, I might consider pushing all of the kender traits onto the dragonborn while making gnomes inbred cannibals. Dragons are no longer the superboss monsters because I made the lore in the setting of the god of giants killing the god of dragons, making dragons weak and mindless beasts who drag around dung carts. Stuff like that.

[deaddmwalking]

Your premise is false. You cannot wean people off of gnomes and dragonborn by associating them with negative qualities. They will either riot because you are 'ruining them' or, worse, they will adopt those traits and everyone else will riot.

[NigelWalmsley]

D&D has too many legacy settings to start cutting stuff like that. Getting to sell a new Eberron to the Eberron fanboys and a new Forgotten Realms to the Realms fanboys and an MTG splatbook with each set release means keeping the kitchen sink, and honestly that's not a bad thing. The biggest benefit you get from the D&D brand is that it is the only TTRPG you can mention to non-TTRPG fans and get anything other than a blank stare in response. That means you capture anyone trying to pick up TTRPGs by default, and trying to narrow done the setting is going to result in some number of those people bouncing off instead. All you really need to do is start having a default setting you actively push, instead of just namedropping shit that only deeply enfranchised players are going to recognize. The reason D&D doesn't have a recognizable brand isn't because it has too much stuff, it's because it makes no effort whatsoever to push a brand.

[MGuy]

I just think that they haven't done enough work marketing their stuff to children. My nieces were very much into these gatcha doll things from just watching an advertisement pretending to be a YouTube channel. Trying to chase more of the niche audience that are ttrpg fans I think is the inefficient part if they are aiming to make more money. Their brand name is already interchangeable with ttrpgs in casual conversation with the unfamiliar. That probably means they're at a point where putting more effort into that arena will have diminishing returns. Getting a Saturday morning cartoon or something out that a significant portion of the youth might be familiar with, coupled with some stupid advertising vehicle on YouTube or twitch to nice official products (toys and collectables > books), would likely be the best use of any investment that they make into the IP. Maybe a few games that aren't garbage. I don't think the setting being generic is even that big of a deal since kids (and if we're being honest most audiences) are fine with generic fantasy settings.

[JonSetanta]

The closest new thing gamers have to a "new DnD cartoon" is the Critical Role project, which isn't Hasbro, is funded by Kickstarter, and probably won't be free to watch.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Your premise is false. You cannot wean people off of gnomes and dragonborn by associating them with negative qualities. They will either riot because you are 'ruining them' or, worse, they will adopt those traits and everyone else will riot.

That's only half the battle. You have to associate them with negative qualities AND quietly kick them upstairs by starving them of mechanical support and screentime. It's not something that can be done instantly; it'll take years.

I don't think the setting being generic is even that big of a deal since kids (and if we're being honest most audiences) are fine with generic fantasy settings.

That's only going to be the case if D&D doesn't get any competition in the TTRPG space. Which, you know, isn't a bad assumption. But it's taking on risk for no good raisin.

[NigelWalmsley]

That's only going to be the case if D&D doesn't get any competition in the TTRPG space. Which, you know, isn't a bad assumption. But it's taking on risk for no good raisin.

D&D has existed for nearly 50 years at this point. It's been knocked out of the top spot all of twice, and both times were because the people making D&D made catastrophically bad decisions. Even then, one of those times the thing that knocked it out was "some guy's houserules for the last version of D&D". You assume far more risk by cutting things out of the game to build brand identity than you do by having a weak brand identity.

[Krusk]

Trying to monetize a TTRPG that way seems incredibly stupid.

I didn't say it was smart. I said its what I suspect they will do. They have been trying since 3e to get something going. DND Minis had 3.5 monster stat cards included for the DM, 4e sold power cards and a subscription based character builder, 4e gamma world sold booster packs containing additional powers. 5e has DND Beyond subscriptions, and DMG takes +50% of any sales on it.

I wouldn't bat an eye if they start selling single monsters, classes, spells or items in DND Beyond for a couple bucks each. They already sell a virtual die skin for like 12$ or something.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

If they were smart, they would do what the comic book industry does and realize there's absolutely no money to be made in TTRPGs and fully pivot into outsourcing the D&D brand to every form of media so only 5-10% of people who are "fans" of D&D actually play it.
Where's the Dark Sun Funko pops? The movies? The cartoons? People shit out a D&D movie every now and again, just make one that's marketed towards manchildren and their kids and call it a day. You've gotta get the brand emblazoned into the soul of children so they grow up and force their kids to play D&D, keeping your business going for another 40 years. It's like cigarette marketing, or Disney.

[NigelWalmsley]

They're trying to do a MTG Netflix series (or at least they were at one point). And I think there are various MTG Funkos. So I guess maybe the answer is that WotC doesn't even thing it's worth whoring out the D&D IP and would prefer to pivot entirely to selling cardboard crack. Which, financially, makes a lot of sense for them. I don't know the exact numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if MTG makes more in a year than D&D does in a decade.

[Whatever Jr.]

The problem with trying to license D&D is that there are no good stories or characters to sell. It's all trash. That gacha game would have been better if the characters were generics like "elf fighter/mage" and "dragonborn warlock" instead of "Bruenor Battlehammer". That IP is worth less than zero dollars.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

The problem with trying to license D&D is that there are no good stories or characters to sell. It's all trash. That gacha game would have been better if the characters were generics like "elf fighter/mage" and "dragonborn warlock" instead of "Bruenor Battlehammer". That IP is worth less than zero dollars.

They did that? Don't they know the whole point of D&D is playing some sort of self-insert?

[Foxwarrior]

A gacha game where your own D&D characters from your home D&D games randomly drop in packs? Seems hard to program the spyware for that...

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Well, if they had any game design sense, you could easily do a nameless D&D character-building gacha game where every level-up has different grades of classes & features, so your ugly dwarf rogue has Sneak Attack 1 and your hot drow waifu rogue has Sneak Attack 5000 and super-murders everyone despite both of them being level 1.
Does it even matter if they have names? Nobody would care anyway. You could possibly even program a basic bitch dungeon crawl to send your characters on.
Also, I have never played a gacha.

[JonSetanta]

Where's the Dark Sun Funko pops? The movies? The cartoons? People shit out a D&D movie every now and again, just make one that's marketed towards manchildren and their kids and call it a day. You've gotta get the brand emblazoned into the soul of children so they grow up and force their kids to play D&D, keeping your business going for another 40 years. It's like cigarette marketing, or Disney.

3e started the "iconic race/class characters" such as Regdar (RIP), Lidda, Tordek, and so on.
Maybe they were walking stereotypes with chips on their shoulders for beating up bugbears with maces, but ever since I've seen MTG Funko Pop Planeswalkers I keep thinking.... Something reliable to relate to is good.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Nobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.

[JonSetanta]

Nobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.

Heh. You had me chuckling at that.

Tordek DID however continue to fight a colossal Red Dragon after being half-chomped up to his waist.

So, what's your opinion on Mialee's face?

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

So, what's your opinion on Mialee's face?

There's a phrenology joke in there somewhere.

[JonSetanta]

Mialee, played by Anya Taylor Joy.

[Stubbazubba]

If they were smart, they would do what the comic book industry does and realize there's absolutely no money to be made in TTRPGs and fully pivot into outsourcing the D&D brand to every form of media so only 5-10% of people who are "fans" of D&D actually play it.
Where's the Dark Sun Funko pops? The movies? The cartoons? People shit out a D&D movie every now and again, just make one that's marketed towards manchildren and their kids and call it a day. You've gotta get the brand emblazoned into the soul of children so they grow up and force their kids to play D&D, keeping your business going for another 40 years. It's like cigarette marketing, or Disney.

There's a big-budget Forgotten Realms movie in the works, though nothing about it sounds like anything more than another low-brow action flick like a Fast & Furious or Transformers sequel.

There's Baldur's Gate 3 coming out, but that's not going to make any iconic characters because there are no set protagonists.

I am dumbfounded that there is not a Netflix D&D cartoon. The Critical Role cartoon coming to Amazon is the closest thing, and it's not being pushed by Wizards at all. Gygax knew that marketing was D&D's future. The game will never get there, but Saturday morning cartoons, movies, video games, novels, that's where it can gain more cultural cachet.

Part of the problem is that D&D's most iconic protagonist is Drizzt Do'urden, and no producer wants to put purple-face in a movie. There's no other obvious D&D storyline to adapt. Dragonlance, maybe? There's at least characters there.