It’s been a while. I’ve been working, laughing, drinking, gaming, and soaking up the fickle Seattle sun whenever I can. Our summer has been as bleak as a Russian novel, so sun and fun trumps commentary.
Despite vitamin D deficiency, I intended to write a rip-roaring call to adventure to tell the RPG fanatic that everything is good and awesome here in the summer of 2011. There are exciting games on the horizon. I felt that I should do this after the tremendous kick in the nuts delivered by Rob Schwalb earlier this week. That guy is an asshole, right? Telling the truth like that. I wanted to balance out Rob dystopian worldview with a whimsy, sometimes obscene, and irreverent romp into RPG goodness. But I can’t do that. We live in strange times, die chuckers. Unless you live under a rock, or just don’t give a fuck anymore, you know that Bill Slavicsek has left Wizards.
It’s just not him. It’s other folks as well. Folks I worked with. Folks I like. Folks who have to go in the world to find a job, and their most practiced skill is knowing Dungeons & Dragons really well. Not too many people outside our little geekish club really give a shit about that. In fact, to most it’s seen as a possible security risk.
I’m not kidding.
Just to recap, if it wasn’t bad enough that getting into the RPG industry was as hard as Rob describes, you also have the joy of knowing that one day, no matter what, you too will be laid off, and set adrift on the wild winds with some of the most arcane job skills around. Think about it. Who do you know in the gaming industry who has served their time and retired with a gold watch? In fact, the stories are nearly always sad falls into a strange purgatory until the eulogy. I tell my students this. I’ll tell you this. If you work in games, expect to get laid off. What do you do after? Whatever you can. I think I’ll just start robbing banks.
Chevy Chase is a few seconds and a log-in screen away from letting the world know how he would have done Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. Fucking designers.
So other than the fact that RPG R&D in the largest RPG company is smaller than it has ever been, what does this mean for our strange little hobby? I have no firm information. I’ve described before the strange dance I play with my friends at Wizards (and yes, there are still a few who still have jobs). We can’t talk; it’s all a strange and sad game of cloak and daggers. We can share a drink, nod, talk about home lives, and play boardgames. Flirt around issues, laugh, and do it again until the night turns awkward, and then you shamble your way on home. It’s a bit like that strange encounter in the kitchen after a one-night stand. Despite my lack of information and that I’m no clairvoyant, I do love me some conjecture. So here is what I think is going to happen. It’s a bit crazy, and likely wrong, but bear with me.
Here’s a fun fact: there will be a new edition of the game. It’s not a question of if; it’s a question of when. Those of you who count .5’s and Essentials as editions (and I’m not saying you are wrong), or you hate the fact that game companies are “making” you buy product, you are probably tapping your feet right and asking how often are we going to get a new edition of the game? The answer? As often as you will buy one.
Here is the simple economics of RPGs. Your early books, especially core books, sell more than your later books. There are rare exceptions, but the fact is more people buy your core game than regularly play your game. Only invested players buy secondary titles, because they are…well…invested. But that’s only a percentage of that first book money. This is also the reason you get a ton of supplements. It’s a good scattershot approach for earning more capital between editions.
Who drops off from that initial purchase? Some books molder in footlockers or moving boxes for years or make their way to used book stores. Many core book buyers are well-meaning enthusiasts who have too much time on their hands. Then there are the folks that thought you fucked this up, or got that wrong—sometimes they’ll come and spit rambling vitriol on the boards and are seen never again. Sometimes they bring up valid points but it’s too late. More often than not, though, it’s gamers like you and me, who already have a favorite system. We may buy a new game, play it once, and then go back to well-worn and well-loved favorites. Don’t believe me? How many first releases of game systems do you have? How many do you play? Just run the numbers.
It’s the cruel trap. This is true about games that are failures, flash-in-the-pans, and even workhorses like D&D and Pathfinder. Even if your game has longevity, your core books continue to be your top sellers purely by momentum and their own intrinsic necessity. Every new release pales in comparison, and the problem compounds. And when the core book well goes dry or can’t support the overhead, you line folks up against the wall, and start digging for a new well. Not one or the other—you do both.
Why do game companies get away with it? We’re junkies for the beginning. We remember painfully, viscerally, joyfully, our first everything—our first love, our first fuck, our first comic, our first game. Geek, by definition, is the prolonging of that initial joy beyond its normal duration. But even the invested fan-boys will consent to a fling with a new edition, hoping that she’ll do dirty things the old one was squeamish or awkward about.
But get ready for the crazy. I think the last thing Wizards wants to do is create a 5th edition of the game. Or at least call it that. It’s too soon. My guess is they’re having branding conversations akin to the creation of Windows 95 or Vista. Don’t give it a number. That sounds too impersonal, something that has blown past you, something you weren’t involved in on the ground floor. Let’s give it something old and new, and just a little blue. Something that makes you feel special. Something that makes you feel smart. Something advanced.
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. It clings to nerd wannabes like cheap cologne, and smells like Nostalgia (TM) to the old guard. I know, I’ve said this before, but I think I’m going to stick with it. I think that the lesson of 4e is that the folks who like to play D&D like that shit complicated and techy. Maybe only game designers believe in the El Dorado of elegant systems. Everyone else wants something with a matrix so complicated that just the knowledge of it makes them feel powerful, not to mention they’ll always be able to find one or two “mistakes” to cling to and feel clever.
WotC is purging people. They are letting their back catalogue drain out of the channel. New product is few and far between and written primarily by freelancers. The staff is making a point of asking a lot of question from the fanbase and posting on Twitter and Facebook that they are playing older editions of the game. They’ll make an announcement at Gen Con. If they are feeling particularly ballsy, they’ll do it at PAX.
And that’s when the fun begins.
And yet…
I’ve been part of a long running Advanced D&D campaign that first broke dirt in 1981. I’ve run every version of the game (except 4e) and have been running 3.5 since 2003 (now Pathfinder), including Basic, Expert and Immortal(ugh).
I’ve never heard anyone wax nostalgic about 2.5 (or Player Option or whatever it was called back then), 3.0 (except cleric-lovers) or 3.5. All the nostalgia I hear about goes back to AD&D. In no small part – speaking for myself – because of how complex it was. It was far from perfect, of course, clunky and in some cases poorly balanced or not well thought out. But we are STILL PLAYING IT!
You need look no further than all the moderately successful “new old school” games that have been released in the last few years: OSRIC, Eldritch and now Goodman’s most recent effort DCCRPG, to name a few. Look at the scattering of popular 1st edition modules being published and sold on RPGNOW or DriveThru. New Old is the New New. Or something.
Why does your 6th paragraph evoke visions of Russian dissidents during the communist era?
Two more thoughts. One is that it would be interesting to consider what would happen if the next edition of D&D were one supported by both Paizo and WotC. Can you imagine how awesome it would be to reunite gamers together? I actually think gamers from both camps would be open to that. Much of the hate is really on an imaginary/perceived level rather than based on some core issues of how either game is played. At some point the massive volume of Pathfinder and 3E product has to run its course. What is true for WotC with core products selling well is true for Paizo… they have their intro set, their tons of setting books, their reprinted world book… is there a reason why this would keep going? Now, I know some individuals have axes to grind, but the majority of gamers have no desire for a continued split, let alone further 3/4/5E fragmentation.
Another thought is around how to not make the change so sharp. What if you retained Essentials and kept that concept of it being a fundamental “evergreen” game, and then added a new version of the original 4E on top of it? Start with Essentials but then go to a new more advanced version of 4E that incorporates everything that has been learned. Could you build in those bits that Mearls writes about and so many blogs discuss? I’m not sure it would work, to be honest. I suspect the next step needs to change how skills work, for example, or substantially change how immediate actions work.
Oh, and one bit on layoffs. None of the past layoffs seemed to fundamentally signal anything. They seemed to just be about reducing costs internally rather than radical changes in direction. Layoffs are always brutal for the individual (I’ve had it happen twice), but the end result is up to the individual. Each time I’ve been laid off it has turned out to be a really good thing and a great improvement in my career. I know it isn’t that simple, but sometimes a layoff is a good thing, especially as a way to find what you really want to do next and approach how you do your business differently. I hope it will be that way for those affected.
What is essential about D&D is purely lives in the head of the beholder (no, not that beholder!) and is subject to the rhetoric within ear’s or eye’s reach. There are no universal truths to game design, only the imagined/perceived phenomena and the slippery eel that is the creation of engaging fun. People in general, and gamers in particular, love to dress up their perceptions in the armor of essential and watch them rattle around the internet, myself included. But we are talking about taste; the things that sing to us. There are little to no necessary truths living under that tent.
Layoffs are always are a fundamental sign of something. Each round of layoffs since the release of 4e (and there has been what? 4?) in order to reduce costs tell you that revenue is not what was projected. If revenue is not what is projected, and projections are based on past performance, what do you think that signals? If they didn’t reduce costs correctly the first time, the second time, the third time, the fourth time, what do you think that signals?
Are they just bad at math? Or is something else going on here?
I don’t know if essentials can be in the eye of the beholder and still be essential. You might want better jeans while I want to watch a movie, but fire, water, food, and shelter are the essentials of our lives. I think the discussion of what is or isn’t essential to D&D is the point to focus on. Are feats essentials? Are powers now essential? There were editions that played fine without them.
I think that the essentials of D&D are fantasy, game mechanics, and story. What if the goal of a new edition wasn’t to build upon previous editions or to work in things like feats that worked well in previous editions but to strive-once again-to build the best fantasy rpg you can?
I think we could have a game without classes or races; without feats or skills. It would have only abilities and you could buy those abilities with your XP as you earned it. Better ones would cost more, and there would be a few dozens pregens in the back to give you an idea of some archetypes your could build for yourself. Likewise the DM would build npcs and monsters alike from the same selection where it’s not a case of players use A and DMs use B, but players get one and it has good odds of survival; DMs get lots and they have poor odds of survival.
Building a character becomes less like ordering from this chef’s menu and more like building a plate at a buffet. Supplements would add more tables to the buffet, but players and DMs alike could always sample from any table.
I’m going to go get some lunch.
So, GURPS then.
Yes, that facetious. But the point is that if you yearn for D&D to be done differently, you’re in good company with just about every designer who has ever published a fantasy game. Those ideas have been done already.
“Just to recap, if it wasn’t were not bad enough that getting into the RPG industry was as hard as Rob describes, you also have the joy of knowing that one day, no matter what, you too will be laid off, and set adrift on the wild winds of the world with some of the most arcane job skills around.”
I have to disagree with the tone of the message here. I mean, these are people who are talented writers, editors, and otherwise good communicators. I can’t imagine it being that hard for them to find good jobs. Maybe not in the RPG industry, as the industry is obviously saturated, but as teachers, technical writers, etc.
I personally have worked with some former game designers that came from the RPG industry. We worked in video games together and they made better money.
The only caveat I can see to this is if the entire job market itself can’t sustain them, but then it’s a problem for everyone, not just those from this particular industry.
In any case, I hope those who are affected will find employment or other success soon. It sucks being out of work.
Anytime you have been in a single and very specific industry, it’s always hard getting your foot in the door and sometimes harder getting up to speed within that new industry. That and the fact that eventually we all fall into a bitter sea of relative obscurity, regret, and submission to the grind of reality before we die is the tone here. Like the most ruthless medieval lords, corporations don’t care what happens to you once they are done using your assets. Disagree with my blunt assessment all you want; I will stand by those truths.
Yes, they can go into computer games, many have, and more will, but that industry has a faster and more ruthless churn and burn cycle than tabletop games. Yes, you can teach (and I do). You can go work for technical companies as technical writers, project managers, and cube cogs. You can do all of that. And when you do, you’re competing with people who already do those things and generated more experience at it while you were off creating RPGs. In those situations, cream and bastards rise. As you can guess, I’ve chosen the latter path.
On one last note, I am with you, brother. I hope they all find good jobs and fulfilling work soon. I also hope they enjoy their severance for a while. Even with a good healthy severance, the first week or two of unemployment can be soul crushing. The next few weeks can be seriously fun. Then it goes back to soul crushing.
I could see it going either way. There are some signs of design space shrinkage and they have been releasing fewer products and clearly thinking about where to go. But, it also seems they still enjoy developing the current space. It would be a big reversal on Essentials if they switched paths now. And, a lot of what they have done (setting up themes for DDI and establishing what will be written up front, errata to PH material, announcing PAX content tied to new 4E content) seems to indicate otherwise.
I can see it going either way. I’m having a ton of fun with 4E. I’ve never been happier with D&D (the system, not all the decisions – especially marketing). I know a lot of people feel that way. Ultimately what matters is revenue and profit. There should be telltale signs if 4E has run out of steam. Numbers should be clear enough for that. Encounters is booming, and that should be driving Essentials sales. If not…
I have mulled it over a lot. I still think it could be a 2012 announcement, or even an earlier announcement but a 2012 release. I can’t see it being sooner. What seems clear is that we are nearing that point.
The huge task with a new edition is that you run the risk of creating three editions. WotC needs a far better model if it will put up with having gamers play 3E, 4E, and 5E. The goal of having everyone want to go to 5E is a substantial challenge. There will be a clear desire to offer up aspects that both 3E and 4E camps will like, which in and of itself makes everything harder!
I think you are dead-on about the risks in creating three editions. It would further fragment sales, but if and only if someone stepped up and made good 4e compatible products with that horrible GSL.
As far as Encounters booming and driving Essentials sales, I have few hard numbers, but the ones that I do and all my anecdotal information tell me “if not…” The story on the game store level seems to be that they are coming in to play, but they are not buying. They don’t need too. They get their character, they get there experience, they can even borrow dice if they have to. Fortune Cards were a way to get people to buy each time. No one seems to be talking about them anymore.
This is coming from someone who plays 4e, loves 4e, and considers it his shared baby (settle down Pathfinder fans, my heart is blackened, but it is big…it has a lot of room for system love). I wish everyone (or a large chunk of the everybody that matters) loved my baby, but as time goes on, I have to admit that doesn’t seem to be the case. Hopefully, I’m wrong. I’m such a cynic at times that I often find great joy in being wrong about things like this.
I am always surprised that player rewards don’t include incentives to buy product. I am also surprised that players can really like the game but not want to buy anything. Is it that we are still such a terrible demographic that can’t afford games? Or are the games somehow not compelling? Do they feel so self-sufficient that no spending is needed? Really? I just don’t understand it.
Oh how I wish I did not think you are right..
I’m sure I’m nowhere near 100% right. Don’t fret.