Is there a release date?

[ti'esar]

This feels like a stupid question, but I can't seem to find any indication (even in general terms) of when exactly 5e is scheduled to come out. Anyone? Anything?

[Lokiare]

This feels like a stupid question, but I can't seem to find any indication (even in general terms) of when exactly 5e is scheduled to come out. Anyone? Anything?

There is no set in stone date, but there is this leak http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132589-Dungeons-Dragons-Next-Release-Date-New-Product-Leak-Update

[ti'esar]

There is no set in stone date, but there is this leak http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132589-Dungeons-Dragons-Next-Release-Date-New-Product-Leak-Update

Huh. I wonder why Wizards is being so secretive about it.

[Lokiare]

Huh. I wonder why Wizards is being so secretive about it.

Having a set in stone release date means they are making a commitment, and we all know what happens when WotC makes a commitment right? They usually fail to keep it. So in this case if they have to push it back a month or two they are keeping that option open.

[Felhammer]

I'd expect it to be officially some time around GenCon. A bit before if WotC wants to push gaming with the system, at the Con if WotC wants to make it huge deal or a bit after if WotC wants to generate more buzz. Either way, expect the game to drop around Gen Con.

[momogila]

I'd expect it to be officially some time around GenCon. A bit before if WotC wants to push gaming with the system, at the Con if WotC wants to make it huge deal or a bit after if WotC wants to generate more buzz. Either way, expect the game to drop around Gen Con.

thanks for info


http://watchfree.me/114/w.png

[Person_Man]

Even though it was the most profitable tabletop roleplaying game in the industry at the time, Hasbro considered shelving D&D at the tail end of 3.5 because it wasn't making enough money for their corporate bottom line. WotC (a division of Hasbro) staff convinced their corporate bosses that it could be a $100,000,000 a year brand by relaunching as 4E, not having an OGL, expanding into an online subscription service, etc. 4E made plenty of money, but nowhere close to $100,000,000 a year; Thier online en devours flopped, they botched the rollout and marketing, without an OGL 3rd party publishers gave it almost no support and instead created a host of new competitors, their customer base was fractured, etc. Lots of people lost their jobs. Current WotC staff know this, and do not want to screw up the same ways again. So it's understandable that they're taking a long time to do this, and don't want to commit to any dates until they physically have books printed and in Amazon warehouses.

[Felhammer]

Even though it was the most profitable tabletop roleplaying game in the industry at the time, Hasbro considered shelving D&D at the tail end of 3.5 because it wasn't making enough money for their corporate bottom line. WotC (a division of Hasbro) staff convinced their corporate bosses that it could be a $100,000,000 a year brand by relaunching as 4E, not having an OGL, expanding into an online subscription service, etc. 4E made plenty of money, but nowhere close to $100,000,000 a year; Thier online en devours flopped, they botched the rollout and marketing, without an OGL 3rd party publishers gave it almost no support and instead created a host of new competitors, their customer base was fractured, etc. Lots of people lost their jobs. Current WotC staff know this, and do not want to screw up the same ways again. So it's understandable that they're taking a long time to do this, and don't want to commit to any dates until they physically have books printed and in Amazon warehouses.

I've always heard it was 50 million a year, not 100 million.

Even in the heyday of 3.5, D&D was only a 30 million dollar a year brand. Getting to 50 million is reasonable (especially when WotC can rake in 6 million a year from D&DI two years after 4E was abandoned) but 100 million? Nope, no way no how. There just isn't that kind of money in the RPG business (unless all the peripheral products (board games, novels, video games, etc.) are counted. Then it is doable but unlikely).

Of course, if the virtual table was ready at launch (or soon after), 4E could have been much more successful as easy-to-use third party programs were rare back in 2008. Just look at how popular Roll20 has become. It filled a niche that desperately needed to be filled. The Virtual Table could have been the cornerstone of both 4E and that particular niche.

Regardless, between the flop of Gleemax and less-than-expected revenues from 4E, a lot of people really did lose their jobs. I'm sure everyone left in the D&D department is, as you say, highly cautious and motivated for success.

[Kurald Galain]

Even though it was the most profitable tabletop roleplaying game in the industry at the time, Hasbro considered shelving D&D at the tail end of 3.5 because it wasn't making enough money for their corporate bottom line. WotC (a division of Hasbro) staff convinced their corporate bosses that it could be a $100,000,000 a year brand by relaunching as 4E, not having an OGL, expanding into an online subscription service, etc. 4E made plenty of money, but nowhere close to $100,000,000 a year; Thier online en devours flopped, they botched the rollout and marketing, without an OGL 3rd party publishers gave it almost no support and instead created a host of new competitors, their customer base was fractured, etc. Lots of people lost their jobs. Current WotC staff know this, and do not want to screw up the same ways again. So it's understandable that they're taking a long time to do this, and don't want to commit to any dates until they physically have books printed and in Amazon warehouses.

As I recall, WOTC has consistenly fired-and-replaced the head of the D&D division every year for the past five years at least...

[Lokiare]

As I recall, WOTC has consistenly fired-and-replaced the head of the D&D division every year for the past five years at least...

Except for Mearls. He's there to stay somehow. Personally, based on his performance, I think maybe he's black mailing the guy that can fire him.

[Person_Man]

I've always heard it was 50 million a year, not 100 million.

Here's my source (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9293-The-State-of-D-D-Present):


But as result of Hasbro's desire to turn D&D into a $100 million business, and the success of fantasy MMO videogames like World of Warcraft, the release of the 4th edition in 2008 changed more of the game than many fans were comfortable with and despoiled the goodwill Wizards of the Coast had built over the last decade.

I remember seeing similar numbers thrown around other articles at the time, though for all I know they were just quoting Escapist. But honestly, whether it was $50 million or $100 million is meaningless. But were impossible. (Though I guess eventually inflation and population growth will increase to a rate where they might occur). Hasbro wanted D&D to be a massively profitable brand like World of Warcraft, not understanding the fact that tabletop games are not as profitable as computer games.

[Warskull]

I remember seeing similar numbers thrown around other articles at the time, though for all I know they were just quoting Escapist. But honestly, whether it was $50 million or $100 million is meaningless. But were impossible. (Though I guess eventually inflation and population growth will increase to a rate where they might occur). Hasbro wanted D&D to be a massively profitable brand like World of Warcraft, not understanding the fact that tabletop games are not as profitable as computer games.

It is a massive problem with games in general. The people running things are clueless when it comes to games. They have this attitude that "if we can't make huge amounts of money, we don't want any money." Even in computer games it leads to failed MMO after failed MMO.

They look at an entrenched brand and ask "why aren't we making WoW money?" and proceed to run themselves into the ground chasing a fantasy.

[Stray]

Here's my source (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9293-The-State-of-D-D-Present):

I remember seeing similar numbers thrown around other articles at the time, though for all I know they were just quoting Escapist. But honestly, whether it was $50 million or $100 million is meaningless. But were impossible. (Though I guess eventually inflation and population growth will increase to a rate where they might occur). Hasbro wanted D&D to be a massively profitable brand like World of Warcraft, not understanding the fact that tabletop games are not as profitable as computer games.

Directly from Ryan Dancey (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?315800-4-Hours-w-RSD-Escapist-Bonus-Column/page21&p=5765766#post5765766) it was "$50 million in annual sales, and had a growth path towards $100 million annual sales". Demanding $100 million right away was unreasonable, but $50 million with DDI and Virtual Tabletop was doable. It's just that Virtual Tabletop didn't work out...
Now that WotC has video game rights back it should be easier for them to reach the goal. The thing about looking at D&D as a brand is that it counts everything with a D&D logo attached, not just how big tabletop market is.

[Felhammer]

Directly from Ryan Dancey (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?315800-4-Hours-w-RSD-Escapist-Bonus-Column/page21&p=5765766#post5765766) it was "$50 million in annual sales, and had a growth path towards $100 million annual sales". Demanding $100 million right away was unreasonable, but $50 million with DDI and Virtual Tabletop was doable. It's just that Virtual Tabletop didn't work out...
Now that WotC has video game rights back it should be easier for them to reach the goal. The thing about looking at D&D as a brand is that it counts everything with a D&D logo attached, not just how big tabletop market is.

That was it! 50 to start, 100 to end. :smallsmile:

Do these numbers include the novels, or is that a separate department? It seems to me when you produce New York Times Best Selling titles, you should be making more money than what D&D is (unless novels are unprofitable).

Regardless, the numbers could (and probably will) eventually even out to near 100 million. WotC just needs to make this edition of D&D not be a royal stinker.

[Lokiare]

That was it! 50 to start, 100 to end. :smallsmile:

Do these numbers include the novels, or is that a separate department? It seems to me when you produce New York Times Best Selling titles, you should be making more money than what D&D is (unless novels are unprofitable).

Regardless, the numbers could (and probably will) eventually even out to near 100 million. WotC just needs to make this edition of D&D not be a royal stinker.

It didn't count movies, books, or Atari video games. It was just the table top game, board games, and possibly electronic tools.

[Kurald Galain]

It seems to me when you produce New York Times Best Selling titles, you should be making more money than what D&D is

I doubt that any D&D novels come anywhere near the NYT Best Selling list :smallamused:

[Person_Man]

I doubt that any D&D novels come anywhere near the NYT Best Selling list :smallamused:

Wikipedia disagrees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden):



All 18 novels featuring Drizzt by Salvatore have made the New York Times Best Seller list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Best_Seller_list), starting with The Crystal Shard.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden#cite_note-Pirate-21)[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden#cite_note-Orc-23) The Orc King, which marked the 20th anniversary of the character, made it to #7 on the list, as well as #9 on the Wall Street Journal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Journal) list, #6 on the Publishers Weekly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publishers_Weekly) bestseller list, and #36 on the USA Today (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_Today) list of top sellers. The Two Swords peaked at #4 on the New York Times Best Seller list in 2004.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden#cite_note-Orc-23) It reached the top of the Wall Street Journal's hardcover bestseller list after only two weeks, a record for its publisher Wizards of the Coast. It also debuted at #4 on The New York Times's bestseller list and #2 on Publisher's Weekly bestseller list.


The Lone Drow debuted at #7 on the New York Times Best Seller list in October 2003.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden#cite_note-TS_Debut-2) Publishers Weekly felt that The Lone Drow was clichéd, but that some of the characters did achieve "some complexity". They singled out two characters for praise: Innovindel, an elf who talks "pensively" of her long life in contrast to the short lived humans, and Obould the orc king.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden#cite_note-PW-6)



I'm not sure what the split is between Salvatore and Hasbro, but as of 2012 WotC is still publishing Drizzt novels.


I think that if WotC actually didn't license stuff out and instead did a good job of managing all the different aspects of a potential D&D brand; tabletop game + books + video games + cartoon + movies + toys + comics + miniatures + board game + etc, it could get to the $50-100 million range. Marvel Comics was able to pull it off, and they don't even own the movie rights to some of their most popular characters (Spider Man, X-Men, etc).

But WotC is not a multimedia company. It's a bunch of tabletop gamers who made their hobby into their life's work (and gods bless them for living the dream), who are forced to desperately try to expand their core market of tabletop gamers (which is clearly less then $50 million a year for any one game) into other things by their corporate overlords.

[Kurald Galain]

Wikipedia disagrees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drizzt_Do%27Urden):
Interesting. Very well, books are an important part of WOTC's revenue, then.


tabletop game + books + video games + cartoon + movies + toys + comics + miniatures + board game + etc
I'm curious about the rest of these. As far as I know, D&D Online is doing fine. I'm not aware of any recent D&D video games other than that, nor recent cartoons or toys. Several other types of merchandise, including comics, a CD, and those 4E collectible cards have apparently been canceled or quietly dropped. That indicates profit wasn't good; I recall that miniatures lines have been dropped in the past for similar reasons. There have been several board games, which I've heard very little about but they may be doing well. And, of course, there's films The first two D&D films have atrocious ratings and probably didn't make a profit; I just now realized there was a 2012 movie which I've never heard of, but I somehow doubt it was any better.

So I'd think WOTC's bottom line for D&D consists of game books, DDI and DDO subscriptions, and novels, then.

[Felhammer]

Comics are not very profitable compared to books. Most of the licensed properties sell around 5-15 thousand issues a month (compared with Batman & Spiderman who both sell 150-90 thousand a month*). It is a sustainable business model for the companies that licenses the rights to the properties but no one makes hand over fist.

The Miniature line was dropped because WotC could not satisfy the two camps that were buying their products. RPGers wanted to buy a box of kobolds, wargamers wanted the best minis. Its hard to sell boosters to game stores when the contents are known (because, invariably, some models will be incredibly less popular than others and retailers do not like being stuck with stock they cannot sell). So the line was shelved. WotC has revived the line via a license with WizKids (who also make Heroclix and the Pathfinder minis).

The first D&D movie was horrible. The second one was a made-for-TV quality and was not bad. The third one was of the same quality but was less enjoyable. One of the issues is that all of the movies generally do not take place in known worlds and instead are set in worlds entirely designed for the movie. I would much prefer to see a Forgotten Realms or Eberron movie, even if its budget was at the made-for-tv level. The first movie list around 10 million dollars. The second one (which was made 5 years later) had a budget of 12 million and was successful enough to justify a sequel.

D&D has several video games currently beyond DDO but they tend to be release and forget. Neverwinter is still ongoing though.

D&D board games are immensely popular.

Considering Hasbro owns The Hub network, I am surprised we haven't seen them leverage the D&D or Magic brands more fully (in the way they leveraged the flagging My Little Pony property).

*Numbers are derived from the estimates that Diamond releases, which only include direct sales (i.e. comic shops) and not mass market retailers (like B&N, Amazon) or digital purchases (via ComiXology, Amazon, etc.). The numbers also do not include Trade Paperback sales, which are much longer lived in terms of sales. Regardless, D&D (and Pathfinder) comics are not very popular.

[DSmaster21]

Anyone have any new information on the release date?

[Lokiare]

Anyone have any new information on the release date?

Nope, sure don't.