And that's something else you pointed out. Wizards Of The Coast Is. owned. by. {{Hasbro's}}.
There is an absurd amount of marketing potential in merchandising to be made. Think about all the stuffed owlbears and collectible Gelatinous cube sets they could sell.
Don't they like making money?
edited 21st Jan '12 10:58:38 AM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupid
Speaking as a Transformer's collector, Hasbro's relation with the non-kids toy-buying demographic is almost non-existent. Only recently have they really started to make any sort of released aimed towards said demographic, and that's on huge lines like Transformers and Gi Joe (And you'd not believe the years it took to get it that far). Dungeons And Dragons and other wotc products... I doubt are on Hasbro's priorities. It'd take a concerted effort of D&D fans to convince hasbro D&D themed products are worth making.
edited 21st Jan '12 11:04:33 AM by Ghilz
![]()
Why am I not surprised?
You know Hasbro is responsible for the James Cameron and Guillermodel Toro's AtTheMountainsOfMadness being shelved?They were literally on the way to the set to start filming when universal studios called to say they decided to divert their efforts into making an adaptation of the board game battleships.
Hasbro... from hell's heart i stab at thee.
edited 21st Jan '12 11:24:41 AM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupidI'd certainly purchase minis and battle maps and the like.
The reason I didn't do so in the past is because I live in Abstolutely Fucking Nowhere, OH. Once I move to a more inhabited area with a sizeable geek population (and thus, demand for tabletop game products) I'll buy the merch.
Also, stuffed owlbears? Best idea ever.
Mura: -flips the bird to veterinary science with one hand and Euclidean geometry with the other-One issue D&D has had in general over the past few years is that, from Wizards' perspective, it's their #2 line (after Magic, which, by virtue of its sales model, is pretty much always going to be #1.) It's very important to them, and they understand the history, the cultural value, the incredible loyalty of their consumer base, etc. If you read the 30 Years of Adventure coffee table book, you can see Peter Adkinson (then-CEO of Wizards) talking about buying TSR and it's obvious how much that acquisition meant to him.
From Hasbro's perspective, D&D is practically nothing. Even during the glory days of early 3rd Edition, when it seemed like not just anything Wizards put out, but everything anybody put out with a d20 logo on it, sold like hotcakes, I doubt D&D made more than a fraction of what Hasbro expects a triple-A property to make. And I honestly don't know that there is a business model that would make D&D sell at a level that Hasbro would appreciate.
Honestly, I think all of Wizards of the Coast, from Hasbro's Perspective, is small peas. Let's face it, D&D's commercial and financial impact, even at its peak, probably doesn't exactly measure compared to some others of Hasbro's major properties (Transformers, Marvel Comics, Star Wars and Gi Joe toys). Even Magic The Gathering probably pales compare to those giants. Still, Hasbro's seemed more than willing to pour some resources in Wizards for them to experiment and invest (even if that didn't work out).
I think for Hasbro, D&D matters more as a licence (That can be applied to videogames and other more "mainstream" products) than an actual product. But hey, Wizards' doing stuff with the licence, and it's still good.
edited 21st Jan '12 4:04:26 PM by Ghilz
I imagine it's more "That thing we own that makes products for teens and young adults we aren't sure we understand. But they returns more money than we put in it so we leave them mostly alone to do what they want." (As opposed to Parker Brothers and Milton Bradley who are "These guys we own who make board games. And we conned hollywood into making a Battleship movie.")
Though all in all, can't complain. If anything, D&D passing to Wizards had plenty of good effect. Every reasonably sized library in Montreal sells D&D books. And many of them sell other RP Gs too (Pathfinder, World of Darkness some other stuff). And I think D&D suddenly having a giant who can produce a shit ton of books and make sure they are everywhere helped Tabletop RP Gs find that mainstream outlet that was almost unthinkable in the 90s - and that other RPG benefited from that when the door was opened...
You know, I can't help but think that, before they did *any* revision to the game, the company should first *define* what Dungeons & Dragons is about. I've been a fan since the days of the First Edition, and the impression I've mostly gotten is that they used a throw-things-on-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks approach, both with the settings and the rules. (To their credit, a lot of good things stuck.
)
But today, when there's been so many Fantasy Games with so many variant ideas -some of them, like World Of Warcraft, known even better than their inspiration- I don't think that will be enough. They need to come up with one specific setting with some epic event happening in it, and rules that feel traditional (and easy to use) but that allow room for individual GM modification.
I mean, seriously, just *what* should D&D be about?
- Should it have character classes? (I like them, but not absurdly strict ones, eg. if I want my mage to learn to use a sword, he should be able to, though of course he'll have to sacrifice some other skill for play balance.)
- Should the game include Science Fiction elements such as dinosaurs? (I don't think so, except on variant settings.)
- Should there be a single official setting eg. The Forgotten Realms? (I'd say yes, with others published according to demand.)
edited 23rd Jan '12 4:23:23 AM by Sijo
Read the 'Legends and Lore' blog on the main website.
All of it.
Then come back and talk about what Wizards has or hasn't been considering.
Eh, Dn D has ALWAYS included lots of weird stuff. Psions, for instance.
The adventure included in the D&D expert set (i.e., the one you were supposed to play after you finished with the basic set) in the olden days was the Isle of Dread, which was all about May Inca Tec ruins and dinosaurs. That stuff's always been with the game.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake to define too much about the D&D game beyond "this is a game that, generally, is about fantasy adventurers going on adventures." One of D&D's strengths is that it balances the defined aspects of the fantasy genre with undefined aspects of story possibility. (To put that another way, you know just enough of what you're getting into - you know it's fantasy, so you don't get the analysis paralysis that a truly universal system like GURPS or HERO brings, but it's fantasy with such a broad range of possibilities that the DM can do just about anything she wants and have it fit, which is an advantage over a game like Vampire:The Masquerade. If you're playing Vampire, well... You pretty much have to play Vampire, because to do anything different with it would require rewriting the entire game, more or less.)*
You can have individual campaign settings be more defined, and that is, in fact, a terrific thing to do - Planescape = "philosophers with clubs," Dragonlance = "epic high fantasy," Eberron = "Magitek-laden pulp fantasy," etc. But one of the strengths of the core game is that you can redefine it to do whatever you want with it.
In fairness, those columns are all really short. (In my opinion, a little too short...) And it's only been around for a few months with the current author, Monte Cook. Read it now, before Archive Panic sets in.
edited 24th Jan '12 12:49:25 AM by Aldheim
Can someone explain to me the reasons why Monte Cook is so dreaded? Examples of the kinds of bad decisions or author appeals of his would be appreciated. Seriously, I know nothing about this guy other than his name is Monte Cook and it appears in various D&D books.
Is he the Joe Quesada of RP Gs?
WOOF!One guy pointed out that Monte Cook is Pro-"Bad decisions" being in the game. Magic the Gathering has certain cards that are deliberately worse than other cards, so you learn the game by gaining a certain mastery of it. Cook wanted to take Dn D in that direction, basically.
I think that was him anyway.

Precisely my argument.
I also think that there's a huge market for Dungeon Tiles that are more and more specific.