Dungeons & Dragons has 15 Million Players in NA Alone; Storyline Is "The Da Vinci Code meets Gangs o

Interesting. The following tidbit has me excited about the new storyline: “The Stream of Many Eyes” ... story — which will be revealed on June 1 — was described by one D&D staffer as 'The Da Vinci Code meets Gangs of New York.'”

Interesting. The following tidbit has me excited about the new storyline:

“The Stream of Many Eyes” ... story — which will be revealed on June 1 — was described by one D&D staffer as 'The Da Vinci Code meets Gangs of New York.'”
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Vicente

Explorer
1. Previous year is 2 years after release, one would assume sales were plateauing.
2. We don't know what the previous year sales were.
3. There have been deep Amazon discounts, PHB was lower and it shot up high again.

The article says the DnD Brand, so in my opinion assumption 1 is wrong. There are more players than ever, more content available than ever, and more places to buy that content than ever. All of those seem to be indicators that sales are going up, not plateauing at all.

How long they can keep going up no idea, but they seem to be doing a great job on marketing the game and producing DnD stuff people buy.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

silentdante

Explorer
i agree happyhermit, to suggest being a cheerleader for a hobby you are passionate about as a negative is kind of ass backwards to me. if you sink time into a hobby, man i hope you are enjoying it and want to see it enjoyed and broadened. yes you should criticize and strive to make it better, dont be a blind cheerleader, but no matter how much money i spend, my time in this life is the most important, and being happy and excited for how i choose to use it should be celebrated, to think otherwise, well thats not even the cup half full, thats the cup empty and spilled all over the floor...
 

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
But, yes: 5e doesn't have to sell that many books to turn a profit, and even if it did sell that many, it wouldn't be a whole lot of money, not compared to getting people to go see a D&D movie the way they go to Marvel movies, or whatever they're hoping for.

This is the key thing to note: it's not enough for D&D to make money. It has to make enough money.

Last Gen Con, I was at the Candlekeep seminar when James Lowder stopped in, and the conversation he had with everyone there got into the inner workings of how the D&D brand is managed. He mentioned (as an example) that it wasn't enough that the D&D novel division was making back more money than it spent; it wasn't making sufficient money to justify itself to Hasbro, who eventually had it shuttered (though he mentioned at the time there was talk of it being outsourced, and that seems to be what's happening now based on recent reports). "Return on investment" isn't just about ending up with more than you spent to a huge company, it's about making so much money that it's worth their time to bother with it at all.

According to Lowder, this is part of the reason why D&D made an aggressive push to get the movie rights back, for instance, and why we won't see campaign setting logos for things like the Forgotten Realms anymore. Branding and multimedia pushes are where D&D is going to make its money, rather than books, and brand dilution via multiple logos hurts that. It's why we're seeing so much emphasis on Critical Role and cameos in Stranger Things. D&D the brand is much more valuable, in terms of revenue generation, than D&D the game.
 

Warpiglet

Adventurer
Mind blowing, really, considering the level of investment compared to something like watching TV. To think that the number of D&D players could rival the number of people watching the most popular and influential shows! :) This hobby is dying in the most peculiar way.

And many like me end up thinking and creating for much of their free time...for some it's like a lifestyle....those are huge numbers...
 

silentdante

Explorer
This is the key thing to note: it's not enough for D&D to make money. It has to make enough money.

Last Gen Con, I was at the Candlekeep seminar when James Lowder stopped in, and the conversation he had with everyone there got into the inner workings of how the D&D brand is managed. He mentioned (as an example) that it wasn't enough that the D&D novel division was making back more money than it spent; it wasn't making sufficient money to justify itself to Hasbro, who eventually had it shuttered (though he mentioned at the time there was talk of it being outsourced, and that seems to be what's happening now based on recent reports). "Return on investment" isn't just about ending up with more than you spent to a huge company, it's about making so much money that it's worth their time to bother with it at all.

According to Lowder, this is part of the reason why D&D made an aggressive push to get the movie rights back, for instance, and why we won't see campaign setting logos for things like the Forgotten Realms anymore. Branding and multimedia pushes are where D&D is going to make its money, rather than books, and brand dilution via multiple logos hurts that. It's why we're seeing so much emphasis on Critical Role and cameos in Stranger Things. D&D the brand is much more valuable, in terms of revenue generation, than D&D the game.

if i knew how to give XP this would get all of it, great post
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Yep, it's right between half & two thirds, and I was waffling, changed it a couple of times, and left out the 'two.'

....just doesn't do to make a careless error like that when correcting someone else's careless error!

Sorry I didn't notice that was Morrus, I've edited my post, above...

Yeah: "“It’s a special time, and I have a big belief that people are really craving face-to-face connections,” he said. “Gaming is the perfect construct.”
As a result, 2017 was “the biggest” in D&D’s 44-year history, Stewart said."

IDK about the Scare Quotes, there, but the difficulty-to-parse bits about growth & numbers came right after that. Maybe "the biggest" is in terms of number playing, or maybe it's sales (before or after inflation?), or maybe it was the fastest growth, even, "biggest" in business speak can mean a lot of different things.

But I'd have to guess the raw numbers playing. 12-15 million just seems unprecedentedly huge to me. In the past, people trying to puff up the hobby have cagily said 'millions of players' a lot, which, y'know, typically means "we're pretty sure we can round it up to 2 million." ;)

But when you've got 10 million or 12 or 15 million, you say it! :)


It just feels off that people are playing, but, not, IDK playing 'deeply' enough to want a book... a group of 7 friends where one DMs and he's the only one who buys books, sure, it happens, but the disconnect between selling 750k books, and having 15 million players, that's more like 20:1.

But, yes: 5e doesn't have to sell that many books to turn a profit, and even if it did sell that many, it wouldn't be a whole lot of money, not compared to getting people to go see a D&D movie the way they go to Marvel movies, or whatever they're hoping for.
The 'freeloaders' still generate buzz for the /brand/, even if not revenues for the game, but, wow, there seem to be a lot of 'em.
Well, we don't know the ratio because they have been mum on book sale numbers, but I am beginning to suspect that they have been modest and they have sold more than we might have suspected.
 

ehenning

Explorer
Seems to be going well but once again they decline to provide sales numbers. They can claim anything they want I suppose how they get 15 million players IDK.

Personally I think D&D is doing great, I'm not claiming its failing or anything like that. They don't provide any evidence, sales figures or how they arrived at the 15 million conclusion, there is no data, primary sources or anything like that provided. Its basically PR.

12 to 15 million is also 25% growth not 44% in the OPs post lol. Wife watches some zombie show (I Zombie?)and they were playing D&D in that which I thought was funny.

Agree that they don’t give all the details you mention, but are you surprised? Like you said, this is pure PR. This is marketing, so they will focus on what makes them look the best.

As for 44% growth, that is sales growth, not user base, which is a good sign as it shows that existing users are buy more products.

I live overseas (Japan) and I see growth here as well. D&D seems to be healthy and growing all around the world.
 

Once again they don't provide any context, 44% growth over the previous year looks great but.

1. Previous year is 2 years after release, one would assume sales were plateauing.
Jesus wept.

How have you forgotten the dozen Amazon threads that have continually been on the forums the past few years? The ICv2 reports? The shareholder reports from the Hasbro CEO?
You could assume that sales were plateuing... and you would be wrong.
The PHB did very well in 2014, and 2015. It did *better* in 2016 and now has done 44% better than that.

But, hey, don't believe me. Check out this growth on the Amazon chart:
View attachment 97176

You'll notice the steady growth in an upward spike that looks nothing like a plateau.

Meanwhile, the other books have steady sales and Xanathar's Guide was the fastest selling D&D book ever.

2. We don't know what the previous year sales were.
No. But from the article we know:
"As a result, 2017 was “the biggest” in D&D’s 44-year history, Stewart said."

We don't need to know what the previous year's sales were. We don't even need to know what they previous 44 years were.

3. There have been deep Amazon discounts, PHB was lower and it shot up high again.
Amazon's sales cut into their profits, not WotC's. They make the same amount if the PHB sells at 100%, 75%, or 50%.

Its still basically PR spin, translation D&D is doing great is all you can really state assuming they are not outright lying, which they do not seem to be doing.
Since when did "D&D is doing great" become the pessimistic response?

Its a weekly thing here and the usual suspects all pop out to pat themselves on the back lol.

I mean are some peoples lives that great that a weekly thread on how great 5E is doing is the highlight of their week or something? I don't recall threads like this when 3.0 was on top and doing well. Does Morrus need to contact WotC to get some poms poms with Mearls face on it for the weekly cheer leading squad to lead chants about it.
Something I love... something that has defined half my life... something that has introduced me to all my closest friends... something that gave me my first paid writing and editing credits—something that is my Asperger's obsession—is doing well and more people than ever are enjoying it as well. This makes me happy.
Why is that a problem?

Why should I feel bad that I'm excited the game is doing well and is healthy? Why should I feel ashamed that it is no longer in danger of being cancelled or withering away? That D&D is not some greying hobby like model trains that will eventually fade away. That it might finally break out of the shadow of shame and propaganda cast in the 1980s.

No.
The question isn't any of the above.
The question is: why are you NOT more excited? Why doesn't this thrill you?
We live in exciting times.
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
This is the key thing to note: it's not enough for D&D to make money. It has to make enough money.

Last Gen Con, I was at the Candlekeep seminar when James Lowder stopped in, and the conversation he had with everyone there got into the inner workings of how the D&D brand is managed. He mentioned (as an example) that it wasn't enough that the D&D novel division was making back more money than it spent; it wasn't making sufficient money to justify itself to Hasbro, who eventually had it shuttered (though he mentioned at the time there was talk of it being outsourced, and that seems to be what's happening now based on recent reports). "Return on investment" isn't just about ending up with more than you spent to a huge company, it's about making so much money that it's worth their time to bother with it at all.

According to Lowder, this is part of the reason why D&D made an aggressive push to get the movie rights back, for instance, and why we won't see campaign setting logos for things like the Forgotten Realms anymore. Branding and multimedia pushes are where D&D is going to make its money, rather than books, and brand dilution via multiple logos hurts that. It's why we're seeing so much emphasis on Critical Role and cameos in Stranger Things. D&D the brand is much more valuable, in terms of revenue generation, than D&D the game.

This bothers me a bit. For me the only reason I care if D&D is popular is

1: ease of finding players
2: more material being published (ie the game not "dying")

Too much emphasis on branding vs *content* would be troubling.
 

Dahak

Explorer
Are they still counting computer game D&D players to inflate their numbers? Does the Treasure of Tarmin game for Mattel Aquarius count? If not, I haven't played D&D in a couple of years.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top