I'm specifically addressing this towards Hasbro, since IMO, most of the recent controversies/issues are coming from that corporate side, rather than the Wizards creative side.
Again, hi.
I've been playing Dungeons and Dragons since 1982. I started GM'ing in 1984 with Star Frontiers (side note: I'm completely on your side in the NuTSR/Star Frontiers New Genesis idiocy). So, needles to say, I've been around for a long time, seen most of the trends of the industry, and have hundreds of books (not to mention at least $1000's in D&D product alone. And this patronage doesn't extend to Wizards of the Coast and D&D alone; Hasbro was just as much of my childhood, teen and adult years with G.I. Joe (I had some off all 3 Joe lines, the 12" classic, the 9" Action Joe, and of course, the 3.5" Real American Hero) along with Transformers. So, I am deeply physically, financially, and emotionally invested in the success of both companies.
Now, all this distress in the hobby sphere started because "Dungeons & Dragons is 'undermonetized'", as I believe Mrs. Williams commented some months before the OGL news broke.
And you know what? I agree with that. To an extent.
And so, I wanted to share ideas and views I've had on how to monetize D&D far better than changing the OGL will.
1) Do more In-House development and conversion. Seriously, this is the easiest fix. There's no reason why a 3rd Party publisher like Goodman Games should have gotten a license to convert Into the Unknown, Keep On The Boarderlands, Isle of Dread and more. Even though I love the conversion job GG did, this should have been in-house. Also, while I was impressed with the initial rate of Adventures (several of which were created by some of the very same 3rd Party publishers now looking to create an alternative system, I might add) that seems to have slowed down considerably in the past few years. It's not like you don't have 30+ years of TSR published adventures that could be converted and released. The same goes for Settings. While as a fan of the Forgotten Realms, I've been mostly pleased at the amount of 5e content Faerun has gotten, there's still mountains more material that can be converted and released. But beyond the Realms...what else has gotten more than a single adventure or sourcebook? Despite the big announcement about Spelljammer last April...what else has been released? Is the same 'one and done' approach going to be the same for Dragonlance? The recently announced Planescape? By your very approach, you're pushing newer members of the community towards 3rd Party supplements and adventures. Lastly, on this point, Dungeons & Dragons has almost a dozen campaign settings that can be converted to 5e that have been mentioned in the DMG, but never touched or one & done adventures like Curse of Strahd. Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, & Birthright all have active communities on social media. Even Kara-Tur, Al Qadim, Mazteca, and Council of Wyrms has fanbases that would justify at least a sourcebook release.
2) More merchandise/toys. Seriously, I shouldn't have to point this out to HASBRO. You're one of the largest toy manufacturers in the world. This should be second nature to you. But, I've barely seen any toys/action figures beyond Drizz't and his companions, along with the upcoming movie tie-ins and the animated series characters. You literally have hundreds of characters in the D&D IP to establish a toy line off of. The Heroes of the Lance. Elminster. The Circle of Eight. The Knights of Myth Drannor. And, even the Selfie series.
3) Partnership with Paramount on movies and TV. Yes, You're dipping your toe into the waters here in a few months. The question is: what took you so long? A follow-up question: Why isn't this movie Dragons of Autumn Twilight? Seriously. You've had the IP for well over a decade by now. Why haven't you even started on the main IP you have that could rival the Lord of the Rings (in terms of box office dollars)? Why haven't you and Paramount developed a Drizz't series for Paramount+ that could be a competitor with House of the Dragon or The Witcher? The fact that you, Hasbro, are complaining about undermonetization but haven't even started any one of a half-dozen projects, even hinted at any of them, is serious neglect.
Now, on the first 3 points. there could be valid reasons why these steps haven't been taken; most likely due to rights issues. But not pursuing those sorts of projects because it would involve rights and royalty payments is pretty much textbook 'penny-wise & pound-foolish'
Next, a couple of points more involved, but also aligned with a digital monetization of D&D...
4) Purchase HeroForge or some other 3D miniature design tool and incorporate it into D&D Beyond. People make their characters, why not design a mini and/or VTT token for your character as a finishing step?
5) Purchase one of the existing VTTs (I would recommend Foundary, since it's pretty much tailor made to be a D&D VTT) or commission one of your own to incorporate into Beyond. Again, a natural fit for the digital play that you are angling towards.
Again, maybe you're already in talks about this and can't discuss it. Fair enough, that's how the business world works. The points here aren't ones that you aren't currently pursuing; just steps to monetize D&D without touching the OGL that I think the community at large, veteran and new player alike, would be more comfortable with.
Lastly, some personal thoughts...
6) You will not be able to 'lay low until this all blows over', as some reports have been suggesting the overall strategy is going to be. You're talking about a community with a sizeable and vocal population that's still salty about what Gary Gygax did to Dave Arneson almost 50 years down the line. This is not simply all going to blow over quickly; it isn't in the nature of this community.
7) Similarly, expecting royalty payments on streamers and their merchandise is never going to fly. It's a pipe dream. The live streams are the best advertising and ambassadors you have. If you were to try and get royalty payments from the #1 By A Solar System live play/podcast/stream/animated series *cough*youknowwho*cough* that particular DM will simply switch to another system by one of your competitors. Quite simply, whatever effect you feel live play streaming has done for D&D, it can also easily be done for your competitors. Just drop this and enjoy the free advertising.
8) Get Your Big Name Creatives Involved. Ed Greenwood aside, you've missed out majorly by not having your other Big Name Talent involved in your announcements. Announcing Spelljammer and Dragonlance for 5e and having Jeff Grub and Margaret Weiss both respond 'news to us' on social media was a missed opportunity. D&D is pretty unique in that the fans and players are as eager to meet and interact with the creators as play the game itself.To put it another way: nobody in the general public knows who invented Monopoly; you ask 100 people on the street 'who invented Dungeons & Dragons?' and you have at least even odds they'll answer 'Gary Gygax', at least.
9) Don't try to PR spin mistakes. Two big issues this year that were made worse by the initial PR 'spin': OGL and the Hadozee. We're a community that argues rules for fun and have extensive memories for trivia and lore. The issue regarding the Hadozee when Spelljammer was released was compounded by the fact that it was 'spun' on 'legacy lore and legacy art that was missed.' To which I, and lots of other grodnards, called out 'BS!'. Because it was. Running Star Frontiers means that I am very familiar with all the legacy lore surrounding the Yazirians and later Hadozee, and there was never any of that sore of 'engineered race' lore in either Star Frontiers or 2e Spelljammer. The same for the minstrel art. In short, don't try to spin us; we know more about the history and lore and will call you out every time, compounding the issue.
And finally, to end on a positive note. What I think Wizards of the Coast is doing right
10) Increased diversity. I'm a 50 year old, white male, with an upper middle class background. I've never felt D&D or roleplaying failed to represent me. But as my life went on and I moved to more diverse areas and met more diverse people, I realized how much some felt left out of D&D. I had Tanis, for example, as an iconic hero. Where did my new friends who were minorities or LGBTQ+ find their iconic heroes in the lore and products? To your credit, you've taken a product with some problematic issues and done a good job at giving others a chance to see themselves in the various world of Dungeons & Dragons. You've also worked towards deemphasizing Alignment as a biological imperative in mortal races and showing it as more of a cultural issue to free up more characters like Drizz't and Estriss (mind flayer character from the Spelljammer novels that was quite decent and non-manipulative, dietary restrictions aside).
Create and license official tokens, npc’s with stats and other info, adventures, etc. for use on all VTTs. Work with all VTTs to license and sell non-SRD content for use in the VTTs.
I think most of these are good points I would love to see Hasbro explore. A couple already appear to be in the works—a VTT in development for Beyond, likely for release with the next edition, and the investor briefing hinted heavily at new toys and similar products being released.
I take some issue with the film analysis. Films look like super big money makers, but they are incredibly risky ventures. They require an up front drop of tens of millions, if not over a hundred million, in cash just to make the thing, and, once done, another set of tens of millions to market it.
That is a lot to ask for an IP with a track record of spotty movies, in a world where not having Marvel on the title card puts you at a competitive disadvantage. It isn’t like this is Transformers—a Hasbro property that was a safe gamble due to having decades of popular television shows and a premise with international appeal (specifically to the massive Chinese market, which tends not to like Western Fantasy films). Recall, until Stranger Things and the pandemic, D&D was also still pretty niche—it is mainstream now, but the time was not really ripe for a movie until now.
So, I am quite looking forward to seeing what they do in film—and hope they succeed. But not sure it is fair to fault them (or another studio they could have licensed to) for not wanting to take such a higher financial risk on a franchise with bad movie history, a niche audience, limited Chinese market appeal, and in a generally adverse movie environment for new movie franchises. I also think it makes sense for them to be conservative with announcements of what comes next—at least until they have a success under their belt (hopefully).
Still, overall, I’m looking forward to what comes next for D&D - and I’m glad they are looking to expand their line of products rather than just try to squeeze more out of us DMs.
Can monetize old editions and content if done right and work with community.
3.5e archive? 1 dollar a month for access to it.
3.0 books 2.0 books and what not. 1 dollar a month.
Work with community to 're-find' and re-upload everything possible from older editions. Not all of it will be workable into VTT format but you can certainly still make money off of it.
Maybe include a warning or something that said content is as is and that no longer ruled upon / questions answered / updated etc. Use at own risk.
Nobody thought the MCU was going to be excessively profitable until Avengers.
And the only way Lord of the Rings got made was by filming all three movies at once.
Finally, none of the previous Dungeons & Dragons media projects have tied in to any pre-existing stories or lore, much less book series that make the NY Times Bestsellers lists, like Dragonlance and Drizz't.
IIRC, people were iffy about multi-movie saga 'in same universe' yet self-contained from comic books aside from X-men and Harry Potter. From what I remember, people were not liking Fox execution of X-men movies. There was also dispute for many years about Mutants and their use in other franchises. If ever played Avengers Alliance on facebook, discussion on some boards about 'unofficial mutant ban'.
Lord of the Rings, source material also had to be cut / worked around like Silmarion (sp?) and such since they were not able to be used legally in the movies.
Previous DND media projects. I thought the DND show and Movies and what not were supposed to be independant to an extent from stories and lore to not be tied down by them so much. Not like taking an established character and swapping out EVERYTHING about said character except for name. Rather say 2 movies, say could be same continent, 2 rival organizations or something), but don't mention year or anything so to avoid the 'EHMERGERD!'
Finally, none of the previous Dungeons & Dragons media projects have tied in to any pre-existing stories or lore, much less book series that make the NY Times Bestsellers lists, like Dragonlance and Drizz't.
Book-to-film adaptations are messy business, though, and generally rely on the series themselves being popular/well-known enough that everyone rushes to the theaters before they hear how poorly adapted the story was, and still tend to flounder after the first movie. Harry Potter is the exception, not the rule. And the threshold for being labeled a "bestseller" series for books seems to be much lower than the threshold to be successful as a major motion-picture production, so that alone is not a great metric for if there's enough interest to be worth the investment to make a movie out of the story.
I ... at the risk of sounding arrogant, I have to say I feel most people have trouble differentiating between the penny and dime stuff, and the big picture.
WoTC have a real potential to do with DND what Marvel did with their comic books: Go from a million dollar business doing one thing, to a multi billion business doing something entirely different.
Do it right, and there is no limit to the potential of fantasy movies - and fantasy heroes (like, I dunno, Kelemvor) could potentially sell as much merch as Wolverine.
And going from printing books to SaaS is the other big thing. A bajillion times faster and better distribution, with none of the associated boring cost of printing and transporting physical product. Get everyone on board with a subscription, with a nice engagement ladder from 'just character sheets' over 'sheets and books' to 'sheets, books, adventures and e-gimmicks', and you've got a nice, stable and secure cash flow. It'll be like WoW - just better, and without the expiration date.
This is the big stuff.
And people go on and on about 3rd party this and that and the other thing. And let me simply be plain: Hasbro/WoTC couldn't care less - except in a positive way, as free marketing. All they're worried about is that the intellectual property rights of their multi billion dollar future business is threatened by license language that simply isn't strong enough.
And when they try to make it strong enough, the internet explodes in their faces. And it's difficult, because nothing is more suspicious than a corporation saying 'oh no no - our intentions are entirely benign!' And then they smile. And the cold, hard dollar signs in their eyes just kills all trust.
But I'm not Hasbro/WoTC. Me, you can trust. And I promise you, they don't care about your 3rd party penny ante stuff. They've got their eyes set on being the new Marvel. And if your Wolverine fan fic helps promote that, they're just fine with it.
I hope I don't sound dismissive of fan creations. That's really not the point. The point is that fan creations help, rather than hinder, becoming the new Marvel. But without proper licenses, someone else could become the new Marvel, using WoTC's stuff to do it. Without proper licenses, I could make 'Kelemvor: The Movie'. I can understand why WoTC don't want that possibility out there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Slight clarification for some of us. SaaS is Software as a Service. An actual own technical term thing as opposed to autocorrect or typing so fast that a word or two is mispelled or mis-phrased (I am guilty of this one).
The amusing bit is if they (Wizard/D&D Execs) looked at how D&D Beyond had grown they would realise that creating a decent product does help its growth besides the competition. Sure many alternatives got closed down when D&D Beyond was started but it didn't take users and those curious to see the potential of it. Thusly it grew into a huge customer base, as was only getting bigger with more and more features even to the point of becoming integrated into things like Twitch and VTTs.
A new VTT of a similar quality could have done much the same thing (if the pricing was right as well).
The thing I find really weird is for Chris Cao having roots in computer games that they went for a minis-style VTT when full action animations (much like many digital board games and even battle chess from way back used) could have added heaps of flashyness that otherwise hasnt been provided in the market. Cao also seems oblivious to the limitations of current AI being basically unable to handle a normal deviating conversation (or atleast not super well). How they expect it to actually DM (outside of automated battle) is confusing, given a DM's role is in its very essence a long form conversation with their players.
I ... at the risk of sounding arrogant, I have to say I feel most people have trouble differentiating between the penny and dime stuff, and the big picture.
WoTC have a real potential to do with DND what Marvel did with their comic books: Go from a million dollar business doing one thing, to a multi billion business doing something entirely different.
Do it right, and there is no limit to the potential of fantasy movies - and fantasy heroes (like, I dunno, Kelemvor) could potentially sell as much merch as Wolverine.
And going from printing books to SaaS is the other big thing. A bajillion times faster and better distribution, with none of the associated boring cost of printing and transporting physical product. Get everyone on board with a subscription, with a nice engagement ladder from 'just character sheets' over 'sheets and books' to 'sheets, books, adventures and e-gimmicks', and you've got a nice, stable and secure cash flow. It'll be like WoW - just better, and without the expiration date.
This is the big stuff.
And people go on and on about 3rd party this and that and the other thing. And let me simply be plain: Hasbro/WoTC couldn't care less - except in a positive way, as free marketing. All they're worried about is that the intellectual property rights of their multi billion dollar future business is threatened by license language that simply isn't strong enough.
And when they try to make it strong enough, the internet explodes in their faces. And it's difficult, because nothing is more suspicious than a corporation saying 'oh no no - our intentions are entirely benign!' And then they smile. And the cold, hard dollar signs in their eyes just kills all trust.
But I'm not Hasbro/WoTC. Me, you can trust. And I promise you, they don't care about your 3rd party penny ante stuff. They've got their eyes set on being the new Marvel. And if your Wolverine fan fic helps promote that, they're just fine with it.
I hope I don't sound dismissive of fan creations. That's really not the point. The point is that fan creations help, rather than hinder, becoming the new Marvel. But without proper licenses, someone else could become the new Marvel, using WoTC's stuff to do it. Without proper licenses, I could make 'Kelemvor: The Movie'. I can understand why WoTC don't want that possibility out there.
Actually, all of Wizards' IP was already covered and protected by OGL 1.0 already. It's the Product Identification clause. And all place names, proper names, dialogue, and certain other identifiers are protected for Wizards by it. That's why, for example, Bigby's Hand in 3.0 became Mage Hand in Pathfinder. It's why Pathfinder can't use Beholders or Ilithids/Mind Flayers. So, 'protecting characters/Intellectual Property' is a straw man argument. Nobody was ever given the rights to Wizards' Product Identification, just the free rights to use the game's mechanics, which don't qualify for copyright protection, anyways. Charts and tables are copyrightable, but not pure mechanics like 'roll a 20 sided die, add modifiers, and compare to a target number to determine success or failure'. That was a big problem with TSR back in the 80's as they tried to legally shut down 3rd Party Publishers like Judge's Guild making supplements and adventures compatible with AD&D. In the end, TSR couldn't stop them from printing compatible material, but could prevent them from advertising compatibility with the trademarked 'Advanced Dungeons & Dragons'. OGL was Wizards' assurance that we weren't going to go on that ride again. Hasbro broke that assurance.
The other problem is that there's no way to force GaaS in TTRPGs. You cannot force someone to stop playing what they have because they don't buy your latest & greatest edition. I know plenty of gamers who, to this day, refuse to play anything but 1st Edition AD&D. Just like there are Star Trek Fans that refuse to watch the new shows. Video game companies like EA can get away with GaaS because each new year, there are different players and players have different stats in sports games. Or, it's for a persistent online world like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. The very nature of TTRPGs make it highly difficult to monetize as GaaS.
Slight clarification for some of us. SaaS is Software as a Service. An actual own technical term thing as opposed to autocorrect or typing so fast that a word or two is mispelled or mis-phrased (I am guilty of this one).
Oh - yea, sorry about that. I'm a native danish speaker, so it doesn't even occur to me to explain an english abbreviation to native english speakers. I could have just called it 'a subscription based platform', which would have gotten the point across.
2. maybe but that is pretty niche as far as market goes
3. they are trying to. However, they have to it right, otherwise you get less of a Marvel, more if a DC
Well, yea. TSR did very poorly at ... most things. But it's all about not telling DND stories, and instead telling fantasy stories. And there are absolutely fantastic stories in the DND universe, so long as you tell them right. Just as there are great stories in the Marvel universe.
What's niche? The SaaS thing? Hell no. If you get a bajillion players to pay a regular subscription each month, rather than occasionally shelling out for new books, the multiply your earnings by ... near-infinite amounts.
I think more people play DND than read comic books. I have no real data on that, I'm just guessing. But if I'm right, that does show pretty clearly why the market is undermoneytized.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You'll note that there's precious few high fantasy stories on the big screen. The fact that there are several do prove it's not impossible, but the fact that I can only think of one or two names that I don't know for certain are some form of adaptation/retelling of another story suggests the market just isn't there for them, relative to the capital required.
I disagree. Lorraine Williams deliberately sabotaged TSR by things like...
-Shutting down game testing in the office. Playtesting under her regime was done completely off company time
-An endless search for the next 'Magic The Gathering'. Lots of money poured into developing games like Spellfire and Dragon Dice that went absolutely no-where
-Cancelling Star Frontiers in order to create a sci-fi RPG based on Buck Rogers to create royalties for her family (related to the Dille Family Trust, which owns the rights to Buck Rogers).
TSR in the 80's wasn't just controlled by apathetic corporate greed; Lorraine was pretty openly contemptuous of gamers themselves and didn't care about crashing the company so long as she and her brother made some bank along the way. And they certainly did.
You'll note that there's precious few high fantasy stories on the big screen. The fact that there are several do prove it's not impossible, but the fact that I can only think of one or two names that I don't know for certain are some form of adaptation/retelling of another story suggests the market just isn't there for them, relative to the capital required.
Lord of the Rings
Pirates of the Caribbean
That whole Game of Thrones thing (which, true, isn't big screen)
And a ton of other, lesser titles. And in exactly the same vein, until Marvel was the biggest thing in movies - it wasn't.
Arguably, Avatar and Starwars are also entirely fantasy productions, just not placed in a quasi european past, but a space wizards future. Avatar, less so, but still clearly magical.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
4) Purchase HeroForge or some other 3D miniature design tool and incorporate it into D&D Beyond. People make their characters, why not design a mini and/or VTT token for your character as a finishing step? [...]
I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here. What could HF do under DDB management that it doesn't already do or couldn't do?
I made this point when a lot of posters tried to claim that nothing would change for DDB when it was bought by WotC, we're seeing how it's being changed to suit purposes that DDB.being independent wouldn't have been able to serve. Companies are expensive, and buying one takes a lot of capital out of the purchaser. Capital that could be used to expand the purchasing business - more books, adventures, more merchandising, films, etc. If you keep the purchased company the same, you're just buying another source of income in return for significant risk and loss of capital. You generally don't do it unless you can get a bargain or you think you can run it in a way that the current owners can't.
So what purpose would HF serve under the WotC umbrella that it doesn't now? It already does VTT tokens. it could be revamped to animate the digital minis for their super VTT theyre producing, but to my, admittedly amateur, eyes, that would take redoing practically all of it anyway. I'm not sure what shelling tens or hundreds of millions on purchasing HF would do for WotC that they couldn't get just by building a closer relationship, franchising with them or just paying them to create the program for them. Sure, in the long run it might be cheaper to buy them...but that's a lot of capital that could be better spent on your other points. I think if they used that money to fill out Eberron and other settings with adventures etc, that would lead to better over growth.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
You'll note that there's precious few high fantasy stories on the big screen. The fact that there are several do prove it's not impossible, but the fact that I can only think of one or two names that I don't know for certain are some form of adaptation/retelling of another story suggests the market just isn't there for them, relative to the capital required.
TV's been really hit or miss too -- House of the Dragon and Rings of Power have both been big, and the Witcher's done well for Netflix (but I suspect it's probably done after the next season without Cavill), but Shannara was a flop, Wheel of Time is on shaky ground and there were even rumblings Amazon wasn't actually all that thrilled with the returns of Rings of Power relative to what they spent on it
On the other hand, Vox Machina's killing it... maybe an adult animated series is the way to go
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You'll note that there's precious few high fantasy stories on the big screen. The fact that there are several do prove it's not impossible, but the fact that I can only think of one or two names that I don't know for certain are some form of adaptation/retelling of another story suggests the market just isn't there for them, relative to the capital required.
Lord of the Rings
Pirates of the Caribbean
That whole Game of Thrones thing (which, true, isn't big screen)
And a ton of other, lesser titles. And in exactly the same vein, until Marvel was the biggest thing in movies - it wasn't.
Arguably, Avatar and Starwars are also entirely fantasy productions, just not placed in a quasi european past, but a space wizards future. Avatar, less so, but still clearly magical.
I specifically said “high fantasy” for a reason. There’s a great many movies with fantasy/magic elements, but precious few that play into the core D&D theme/setting. And, as noted above, a good portion of the ones that do exist are obscure B-movies that went straight to TV/DVD. Not exactly big earners, those. It’s not objectively impossible for D&D to break into the big screen, but sure looks like long odds.
I specifically said “high fantasy” for a reason. There’s a great many movies with fantasy/magic elements, but precious few that play into the core D&D theme/setting. And, as noted above, a good portion of the ones that do exist are obscure B-movies that went straight to TV/DVD. Not exactly big earners, those. It’s not objectively impossible for D&D to break into the big screen, but sure looks like long odds.
But that doesn't necessarily mean I have to agree. High seas fantasy is perfectly fine for DND. Blue mountain jungle aliens would be perfectly fine for DND without the rifles and copters and dreadnaught-like walkers. Space fantasy doesn't exactly translate flawlessly into DND - but jedi knights could totally work without the spaceships and droids.
It looked like exceedingly long odds that Marvel could break into the big screen - until they did, and became the biggest thing in movie production.
And anyways, whether it's long odds or not is completely irrelevant: It's what WoTC/Hasbro are playing for. Not the penny and dime VTT market - but the billions and billions worth of big screen high fantasy movies and associated merch and video games.
And for good reason too, because the potential number of fans to build on is bigger than what Marvel had, pre-whatever-movie-came-first, X Men maybe.
Edit: Where the heck did I get 'mountain' from. My mind needs spring cleaning I think.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello
I'm specifically addressing this towards Hasbro, since IMO, most of the recent controversies/issues are coming from that corporate side, rather than the Wizards creative side.
Again, hi.
I've been playing Dungeons and Dragons since 1982. I started GM'ing in 1984 with Star Frontiers (side note: I'm completely on your side in the NuTSR/Star Frontiers New Genesis idiocy). So, needles to say, I've been around for a long time, seen most of the trends of the industry, and have hundreds of books (not to mention at least $1000's in D&D product alone. And this patronage doesn't extend to Wizards of the Coast and D&D alone; Hasbro was just as much of my childhood, teen and adult years with G.I. Joe (I had some off all 3 Joe lines, the 12" classic, the 9" Action Joe, and of course, the 3.5" Real American Hero) along with Transformers. So, I am deeply physically, financially, and emotionally invested in the success of both companies.
Now, all this distress in the hobby sphere started because "Dungeons & Dragons is 'undermonetized'", as I believe Mrs. Williams commented some months before the OGL news broke.
And you know what? I agree with that. To an extent.
And so, I wanted to share ideas and views I've had on how to monetize D&D far better than changing the OGL will.
1) Do more In-House development and conversion. Seriously, this is the easiest fix. There's no reason why a 3rd Party publisher like Goodman Games should have gotten a license to convert Into the Unknown, Keep On The Boarderlands, Isle of Dread and more. Even though I love the conversion job GG did, this should have been in-house. Also, while I was impressed with the initial rate of Adventures (several of which were created by some of the very same 3rd Party publishers now looking to create an alternative system, I might add) that seems to have slowed down considerably in the past few years. It's not like you don't have 30+ years of TSR published adventures that could be converted and released. The same goes for Settings. While as a fan of the Forgotten Realms, I've been mostly pleased at the amount of 5e content Faerun has gotten, there's still mountains more material that can be converted and released. But beyond the Realms...what else has gotten more than a single adventure or sourcebook? Despite the big announcement about Spelljammer last April...what else has been released? Is the same 'one and done' approach going to be the same for Dragonlance? The recently announced Planescape? By your very approach, you're pushing newer members of the community towards 3rd Party supplements and adventures. Lastly, on this point, Dungeons & Dragons has almost a dozen campaign settings that can be converted to 5e that have been mentioned in the DMG, but never touched or one & done adventures like Curse of Strahd. Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, & Birthright all have active communities on social media. Even Kara-Tur, Al Qadim, Mazteca, and Council of Wyrms has fanbases that would justify at least a sourcebook release.
2) More merchandise/toys. Seriously, I shouldn't have to point this out to HASBRO. You're one of the largest toy manufacturers in the world. This should be second nature to you. But, I've barely seen any toys/action figures beyond Drizz't and his companions, along with the upcoming movie tie-ins and the animated series characters. You literally have hundreds of characters in the D&D IP to establish a toy line off of. The Heroes of the Lance. Elminster. The Circle of Eight. The Knights of Myth Drannor. And, even the Selfie series.
3) Partnership with Paramount on movies and TV. Yes, You're dipping your toe into the waters here in a few months. The question is: what took you so long? A follow-up question: Why isn't this movie Dragons of Autumn Twilight? Seriously. You've had the IP for well over a decade by now. Why haven't you even started on the main IP you have that could rival the Lord of the Rings (in terms of box office dollars)? Why haven't you and Paramount developed a Drizz't series for Paramount+ that could be a competitor with House of the Dragon or The Witcher? The fact that you, Hasbro, are complaining about undermonetization but haven't even started any one of a half-dozen projects, even hinted at any of them, is serious neglect.
Now, on the first 3 points. there could be valid reasons why these steps haven't been taken; most likely due to rights issues. But not pursuing those sorts of projects because it would involve rights and royalty payments is pretty much textbook 'penny-wise & pound-foolish'
Next, a couple of points more involved, but also aligned with a digital monetization of D&D...
4) Purchase HeroForge or some other 3D miniature design tool and incorporate it into D&D Beyond. People make their characters, why not design a mini and/or VTT token for your character as a finishing step?
5) Purchase one of the existing VTTs (I would recommend Foundary, since it's pretty much tailor made to be a D&D VTT) or commission one of your own to incorporate into Beyond. Again, a natural fit for the digital play that you are angling towards.
Again, maybe you're already in talks about this and can't discuss it. Fair enough, that's how the business world works. The points here aren't ones that you aren't currently pursuing; just steps to monetize D&D without touching the OGL that I think the community at large, veteran and new player alike, would be more comfortable with.
Lastly, some personal thoughts...
6) You will not be able to 'lay low until this all blows over', as some reports have been suggesting the overall strategy is going to be. You're talking about a community with a sizeable and vocal population that's still salty about what Gary Gygax did to Dave Arneson almost 50 years down the line. This is not simply all going to blow over quickly; it isn't in the nature of this community.
7) Similarly, expecting royalty payments on streamers and their merchandise is never going to fly. It's a pipe dream. The live streams are the best advertising and ambassadors you have. If you were to try and get royalty payments from the #1 By A Solar System live play/podcast/stream/animated series *cough*youknowwho*cough* that particular DM will simply switch to another system by one of your competitors. Quite simply, whatever effect you feel live play streaming has done for D&D, it can also easily be done for your competitors. Just drop this and enjoy the free advertising.
8) Get Your Big Name Creatives Involved. Ed Greenwood aside, you've missed out majorly by not having your other Big Name Talent involved in your announcements. Announcing Spelljammer and Dragonlance for 5e and having Jeff Grub and Margaret Weiss both respond 'news to us' on social media was a missed opportunity. D&D is pretty unique in that the fans and players are as eager to meet and interact with the creators as play the game itself.To put it another way: nobody in the general public knows who invented Monopoly; you ask 100 people on the street 'who invented Dungeons & Dragons?' and you have at least even odds they'll answer 'Gary Gygax', at least.
9) Don't try to PR spin mistakes. Two big issues this year that were made worse by the initial PR 'spin': OGL and the Hadozee. We're a community that argues rules for fun and have extensive memories for trivia and lore. The issue regarding the Hadozee when Spelljammer was released was compounded by the fact that it was 'spun' on 'legacy lore and legacy art that was missed.' To which I, and lots of other grodnards, called out 'BS!'. Because it was. Running Star Frontiers means that I am very familiar with all the legacy lore surrounding the Yazirians and later Hadozee, and there was never any of that sore of 'engineered race' lore in either Star Frontiers or 2e Spelljammer. The same for the minstrel art. In short, don't try to spin us; we know more about the history and lore and will call you out every time, compounding the issue.
And finally, to end on a positive note. What I think Wizards of the Coast is doing right
10) Increased diversity. I'm a 50 year old, white male, with an upper middle class background. I've never felt D&D or roleplaying failed to represent me. But as my life went on and I moved to more diverse areas and met more diverse people, I realized how much some felt left out of D&D. I had Tanis, for example, as an iconic hero. Where did my new friends who were minorities or LGBTQ+ find their iconic heroes in the lore and products? To your credit, you've taken a product with some problematic issues and done a good job at giving others a chance to see themselves in the various world of Dungeons & Dragons. You've also worked towards deemphasizing Alignment as a biological imperative in mortal races and showing it as more of a cultural issue to free up more characters like Drizz't and Estriss (mind flayer character from the Spelljammer novels that was quite decent and non-manipulative, dietary restrictions aside).
A sincere thank-you for making it to the end.
my two cents on this topic
Create and license official tokens, npc’s with stats and other info, adventures, etc. for use on all VTTs. Work with all VTTs to license and sell non-SRD content for use in the VTTs.
I think most of these are good points I would love to see Hasbro explore. A couple already appear to be in the works—a VTT in development for Beyond, likely for release with the next edition, and the investor briefing hinted heavily at new toys and similar products being released.
I take some issue with the film analysis. Films look like super big money makers, but they are incredibly risky ventures. They require an up front drop of tens of millions, if not over a hundred million, in cash just to make the thing, and, once done, another set of tens of millions to market it.
That is a lot to ask for an IP with a track record of spotty movies, in a world where not having Marvel on the title card puts you at a competitive disadvantage. It isn’t like this is Transformers—a Hasbro property that was a safe gamble due to having decades of popular television shows and a premise with international appeal (specifically to the massive Chinese market, which tends not to like Western Fantasy films). Recall, until Stranger Things and the pandemic, D&D was also still pretty niche—it is mainstream now, but the time was not really ripe for a movie until now.
So, I am quite looking forward to seeing what they do in film—and hope they succeed. But not sure it is fair to fault them (or another studio they could have licensed to) for not wanting to take such a higher financial risk on a franchise with bad movie history, a niche audience, limited Chinese market appeal, and in a generally adverse movie environment for new movie franchises. I also think it makes sense for them to be conservative with announcements of what comes next—at least until they have a success under their belt (hopefully).
Still, overall, I’m looking forward to what comes next for D&D - and I’m glad they are looking to expand their line of products rather than just try to squeeze more out of us DMs.
Can monetize old editions and content if done right and work with community.
3.5e archive? 1 dollar a month for access to it.
3.0 books 2.0 books and what not. 1 dollar a month.
Work with community to 're-find' and re-upload everything possible from older editions. Not all of it will be workable into VTT format but you can certainly still make money off of it.
Maybe include a warning or something that said content is as is and that no longer ruled upon / questions answered / updated etc. Use at own risk.
I agree with counter-argument, with one caveat...
Nobody thought the MCU was going to be excessively profitable until Avengers.
And the only way Lord of the Rings got made was by filming all three movies at once.
Finally, none of the previous Dungeons & Dragons media projects have tied in to any pre-existing stories or lore, much less book series that make the NY Times Bestsellers lists, like Dragonlance and Drizz't.
IIRC, people were iffy about multi-movie saga 'in same universe' yet self-contained from comic books aside from X-men and Harry Potter. From what I remember, people were not liking Fox execution of X-men movies. There was also dispute for many years about Mutants and their use in other franchises. If ever played Avengers Alliance on facebook, discussion on some boards about 'unofficial mutant ban'.
Lord of the Rings, source material also had to be cut / worked around like Silmarion (sp?) and such since they were not able to be used legally in the movies.
Previous DND media projects. I thought the DND show and Movies and what not were supposed to be independant to an extent from stories and lore to not be tied down by them so much. Not like taking an established character and swapping out EVERYTHING about said character except for name. Rather say 2 movies, say could be same continent, 2 rival organizations or something), but don't mention year or anything so to avoid the 'EHMERGERD!'
Book-to-film adaptations are messy business, though, and generally rely on the series themselves being popular/well-known enough that everyone rushes to the theaters before they hear how poorly adapted the story was, and still tend to flounder after the first movie. Harry Potter is the exception, not the rule. And the threshold for being labeled a "bestseller" series for books seems to be much lower than the threshold to be successful as a major motion-picture production, so that alone is not a great metric for if there's enough interest to be worth the investment to make a movie out of the story.
I ... at the risk of sounding arrogant, I have to say I feel most people have trouble differentiating between the penny and dime stuff, and the big picture.
WoTC have a real potential to do with DND what Marvel did with their comic books: Go from a million dollar business doing one thing, to a multi billion business doing something entirely different.
Do it right, and there is no limit to the potential of fantasy movies - and fantasy heroes (like, I dunno, Kelemvor) could potentially sell as much merch as Wolverine.
And going from printing books to SaaS is the other big thing. A bajillion times faster and better distribution, with none of the associated boring cost of printing and transporting physical product. Get everyone on board with a subscription, with a nice engagement ladder from 'just character sheets' over 'sheets and books' to 'sheets, books, adventures and e-gimmicks', and you've got a nice, stable and secure cash flow. It'll be like WoW - just better, and without the expiration date.
This is the big stuff.
And people go on and on about 3rd party this and that and the other thing. And let me simply be plain: Hasbro/WoTC couldn't care less - except in a positive way, as free marketing. All they're worried about is that the intellectual property rights of their multi billion dollar future business is threatened by license language that simply isn't strong enough.
And when they try to make it strong enough, the internet explodes in their faces. And it's difficult, because nothing is more suspicious than a corporation saying 'oh no no - our intentions are entirely benign!' And then they smile. And the cold, hard dollar signs in their eyes just kills all trust.
But I'm not Hasbro/WoTC. Me, you can trust. And I promise you, they don't care about your 3rd party penny ante stuff. They've got their eyes set on being the new Marvel. And if your Wolverine fan fic helps promote that, they're just fine with it.
I hope I don't sound dismissive of fan creations. That's really not the point. The point is that fan creations help, rather than hinder, becoming the new Marvel. But without proper licenses, someone else could become the new Marvel, using WoTC's stuff to do it. Without proper licenses, I could make 'Kelemvor: The Movie'. I can understand why WoTC don't want that possibility out there.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Slight clarification for some of us. SaaS is Software as a Service. An actual own technical term thing as opposed to autocorrect or typing so fast that a word or two is mispelled or mis-phrased (I am guilty of this one).
1. Bad idea. That’s what killed TSR
2. maybe but that is pretty niche as far as market goes
3. they are trying to. However, they have to it right, otherwise you get less of a Marvel, more if a DC
The amusing bit is if they (Wizard/D&D Execs) looked at how D&D Beyond had grown they would realise that creating a decent product does help its growth besides the competition.
Sure many alternatives got closed down when D&D Beyond was started but it didn't take users and those curious to see the potential of it. Thusly it grew into a huge customer base, as was only getting bigger with more and more features even to the point of becoming integrated into things like Twitch and VTTs.
A new VTT of a similar quality could have done much the same thing (if the pricing was right as well).
The thing I find really weird is for Chris Cao having roots in computer games that they went for a minis-style VTT when full action animations (much like many digital board games and even battle chess from way back used) could have added heaps of flashyness that otherwise hasnt been provided in the market.
Cao also seems oblivious to the limitations of current AI being basically unable to handle a normal deviating conversation (or atleast not super well). How they expect it to actually DM (outside of automated battle) is confusing, given a DM's role is in its very essence a long form conversation with their players.
- Loswaith
Actually, all of Wizards' IP was already covered and protected by OGL 1.0 already. It's the Product Identification clause. And all place names, proper names, dialogue, and certain other identifiers are protected for Wizards by it. That's why, for example, Bigby's Hand in 3.0 became Mage Hand in Pathfinder. It's why Pathfinder can't use Beholders or Ilithids/Mind Flayers. So, 'protecting characters/Intellectual Property' is a straw man argument. Nobody was ever given the rights to Wizards' Product Identification, just the free rights to use the game's mechanics, which don't qualify for copyright protection, anyways. Charts and tables are copyrightable, but not pure mechanics like 'roll a 20 sided die, add modifiers, and compare to a target number to determine success or failure'. That was a big problem with TSR back in the 80's as they tried to legally shut down 3rd Party Publishers like Judge's Guild making supplements and adventures compatible with AD&D. In the end, TSR couldn't stop them from printing compatible material, but could prevent them from advertising compatibility with the trademarked 'Advanced Dungeons & Dragons'. OGL was Wizards' assurance that we weren't going to go on that ride again. Hasbro broke that assurance.
The other problem is that there's no way to force GaaS in TTRPGs. You cannot force someone to stop playing what they have because they don't buy your latest & greatest edition. I know plenty of gamers who, to this day, refuse to play anything but 1st Edition AD&D. Just like there are Star Trek Fans that refuse to watch the new shows. Video game companies like EA can get away with GaaS because each new year, there are different players and players have different stats in sports games. Or, it's for a persistent online world like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. The very nature of TTRPGs make it highly difficult to monetize as GaaS.
Oh - yea, sorry about that. I'm a native danish speaker, so it doesn't even occur to me to explain an english abbreviation to native english speakers. I could have just called it 'a subscription based platform', which would have gotten the point across.
Well, yea. TSR did very poorly at ... most things. But it's all about not telling DND stories, and instead telling fantasy stories. And there are absolutely fantastic stories in the DND universe, so long as you tell them right. Just as there are great stories in the Marvel universe.
What's niche? The SaaS thing? Hell no. If you get a bajillion players to pay a regular subscription each month, rather than occasionally shelling out for new books, the multiply your earnings by ... near-infinite amounts.
I think more people play DND than read comic books. I have no real data on that, I'm just guessing. But if I'm right, that does show pretty clearly why the market is undermoneytized.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You'll note that there's precious few high fantasy stories on the big screen. The fact that there are several do prove it's not impossible, but the fact that I can only think of one or two names that I don't know for certain are some form of adaptation/retelling of another story suggests the market just isn't there for them, relative to the capital required.
I disagree. Lorraine Williams deliberately sabotaged TSR by things like...
-Shutting down game testing in the office. Playtesting under her regime was done completely off company time
-An endless search for the next 'Magic The Gathering'. Lots of money poured into developing games like Spellfire and Dragon Dice that went absolutely no-where
-Cancelling Star Frontiers in order to create a sci-fi RPG based on Buck Rogers to create royalties for her family (related to the Dille Family Trust, which owns the rights to Buck Rogers).
TSR in the 80's wasn't just controlled by apathetic corporate greed; Lorraine was pretty openly contemptuous of gamers themselves and didn't care about crashing the company so long as she and her brother made some bank along the way. And they certainly did.
Lord of the Rings
Pirates of the Caribbean
That whole Game of Thrones thing (which, true, isn't big screen)
And a ton of other, lesser titles. And in exactly the same vein, until Marvel was the biggest thing in movies - it wasn't.
Arguably, Avatar and Starwars are also entirely fantasy productions, just not placed in a quasi european past, but a space wizards future. Avatar, less so, but still clearly magical.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I agree with most points (or at least, not bothered, in some cases). However, I do query this:
I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve here. What could HF do under DDB management that it doesn't already do or couldn't do?
I made this point when a lot of posters tried to claim that nothing would change for DDB when it was bought by WotC, we're seeing how it's being changed to suit purposes that DDB.being independent wouldn't have been able to serve. Companies are expensive, and buying one takes a lot of capital out of the purchaser. Capital that could be used to expand the purchasing business - more books, adventures, more merchandising, films, etc. If you keep the purchased company the same, you're just buying another source of income in return for significant risk and loss of capital. You generally don't do it unless you can get a bargain or you think you can run it in a way that the current owners can't.
So what purpose would HF serve under the WotC umbrella that it doesn't now? It already does VTT tokens. it could be revamped to animate the digital minis for their super VTT theyre producing, but to my, admittedly amateur, eyes, that would take redoing practically all of it anyway. I'm not sure what shelling tens or hundreds of millions on purchasing HF would do for WotC that they couldn't get just by building a closer relationship, franchising with them or just paying them to create the program for them. Sure, in the long run it might be cheaper to buy them...but that's a lot of capital that could be better spent on your other points. I think if they used that money to fill out Eberron and other settings with adventures etc, that would lead to better over growth.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
TV's been really hit or miss too -- House of the Dragon and Rings of Power have both been big, and the Witcher's done well for Netflix (but I suspect it's probably done after the next season without Cavill), but Shannara was a flop, Wheel of Time is on shaky ground and there were even rumblings Amazon wasn't actually all that thrilled with the returns of Rings of Power relative to what they spent on it
On the other hand, Vox Machina's killing it... maybe an adult animated series is the way to go
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I specifically said “high fantasy” for a reason. There’s a great many movies with fantasy/magic elements, but precious few that play into the core D&D theme/setting. And, as noted above, a good portion of the ones that do exist are obscure B-movies that went straight to TV/DVD. Not exactly big earners, those. It’s not objectively impossible for D&D to break into the big screen, but sure looks like long odds.
But that doesn't necessarily mean I have to agree. High seas fantasy is perfectly fine for DND. Blue
mountainjungle aliens would be perfectly fine for DND without the rifles and copters and dreadnaught-like walkers. Space fantasy doesn't exactly translate flawlessly into DND - but jedi knights could totally work without the spaceships and droids.It looked like exceedingly long odds that Marvel could break into the big screen - until they did, and became the biggest thing in movie production.
And anyways, whether it's long odds or not is completely irrelevant: It's what WoTC/Hasbro are playing for. Not the penny and dime VTT market - but the billions and billions worth of big screen high fantasy movies and associated merch and video games.
And for good reason too, because the potential number of fans to build on is bigger than what Marvel had, pre-whatever-movie-came-first, X Men maybe.
Edit: Where the heck did I get 'mountain' from. My mind needs spring cleaning I think.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.