4.33 Years in: What Now for 5E? (and have we reached "Peak Edition?")

[Parmandur]

I personally find this difficult to believe. The idea that there will not be any major changes to D&D in the future just because it is presently riding high in popularity seems somewhat short-sighted. It's inevitable. Popularity and tastes of the game will change. Many of the edition changes in D&D often represent these changes of tastes and game design philosophies.

Personally, I know from my own track record in this hobby that I would and will lose prolonged interest in D&D without those rule upheavals. It undeniably kept my interest fresh and renewed my sense of experiencing the game anew. It's why I jumped from 3 to 3.5e. It's why I jumped from 3.5e to both Pathfinder and 4e. It's why I jumped from PF/4e to 5e. I don't think that I would likely come back if it's just "LotR D&D." I will need more than lipstick on a pig. In contrast, I can pick up Catan. I don't need an update. I can play it for a quick game one day. Put it back on my shelf. And then I will return to it later when enough people want to play it. D&D doesn't really work the same way for me. Sure, it will sit on my shelf, and I may play a few other TTRP games before returning back to it, but the sort of issues that I have when engaging the play experience of D&D is different than my expectations when I engage Catan for play purposes.

However, this willingness to switch editions is apparently not the norm among those who play D&D, which is what WotC found out the hard way. Now they have determined that evergreen is what makes them more money in the short term and long term, while we certainly cannot predict the future, it is safe to say that they will follow the money.

 

[Dausuul]

Monopoly is a reptile, D&D is a mammal. Their strategies and their needs are quite different.

Once you've got a Monopoly set, you're unlikely to buy another one unless the first one gets lost or damaged; any given Monopoly customer is going to buy maybe one copy in ten years. Monopoly has built its business model around this reality. They keep their overhead low and cast their net as widely as possible. There isn't much to gain by changing--casual players don't care, and in fact may be put off by changes--so the game changes slowly.

D&D is built around a much higher level of engagement. What we consider a "casual player" in D&D-land is somebody who devotes an evening every couple of weeks to the game. Somebody who devotes an evening every couple of weeks to Monopoly is a pretty dedicated Monopoly player! D&D's business model requires selling product over and over to a smaller group of fans. That was true even at the peak of the 1980s craze. And to keep selling product to the same person, you have to keep making new products to sell.

Now, I don't believe changes on the scale of 3E -> 4E are necessary. Even for D&D, that was too much. But 1E -> 2E? Sure, I can see that. 5E has plenty of rough edges that could be smoothed over by such a shift.

 

[Azzy]

However, this willingness to switch editions is apparently not the norm among those who play D&D, which is what WotC found out the hard way. Now they have determined that evergreen is what makes them more money in the short term and long term, while we certainly cannot predict the future, it is safe to say that they will follow the money.

We should also note that most other TTRPGs don't go through drastic rule changes between editions—this is not the norm in the industry, and many players (like you said) are not a fan of the throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater method of edition upheavel.

 

[darjr]

Nope, no. Thanks but no thanks. WotC please don’t edition tread. I think they have finally gotten to the Catan of rpgs. And it’s wonderful!

What’s more WotC, and even better Hasbro, seems to know this. It’ll take a catastrophe to change their strategy now. And that’s just fine with me.

 

[Parmandur]

Monopoly is a reptile, D&D is a mammal. Their strategies and their needs are quite different.

Once you've got a Monopoly set, you're unlikely to buy another one unless the first one gets lost or damaged; any given Monopoly customer is going to buy maybe one copy in ten years. Monopoly has built its business model around this reality. They keep their overhead low and cast their net as widely as possible. There isn't much to gain by changing--casual players don't care, and in fact may be put off by changes--so the game changes slowly.

D&D is built around a much higher level of engagement. What we consider a "casual player" in D&D-land is somebody who devotes an evening every couple of weeks to the game. Somebody who devotes an evening every couple of weeks to Monopoly is a pretty dedicated Monopoly player! D&D's business model requires selling product over and over to a smaller group of fans. That was true even at the peak of the 1980s craze. And to keep selling product to the same person, you have to keep making new products to sell.

Now, I don't believe changes on the scale of 3E -> 4E are necessary. Even for D&D, that was too much. But 1E -> 2E? Sure, I can see that. 5E has plenty of rough edges that could be smoothed over by such a shift.

What WotC has been saying is that the D&D player base is more like the Monopoly player base than you might think: and for WotC, that broad base is where the money is in the form of licensing to other companies, not chasing a book boom-bust.

 

[Mercurius]

To follow-up on some of the previous comments and sum up my thoughts, I think the question is if and when the current wave of success eventually (inevitably?) slows and/or crashes, what will WotC do? We just don't know.

It isn't daring to speculate that chances are we will see continued growth and success...for awhile. And then at some point there will be a dip, which is what I was referring to as "peak edition." Maybe it is in a year or two, maybe three or four, maybe longer. But at some point the continued growth will slow. The question is where on the spectrum of "plateau to crash" it will land, and that will determine WotC's course of action.

If it plateaus, they can follow the "evergreen" model of Catan and Monopoly and just manage the ship, so to speak, with only minor tweaks, re-skins, explansions, more story arcs, etc. Maybe a trial balloon once in awhile (e.g. something like Gamma World or maybe an Advanced D&D for more tactical play), to see if the market will accommodate a second line, but for the most part it will continue as is for as long as Western civilization holds up (well, you know what I mean).

If it crashes, we might see another edition or some other more drastic approach. Either way, I wouldn't expect anything drastic for some years to come. In other words, even if WotC starts seeing the ship slow down in 2019, I don't think they'll scramble to come out with a new edition in 2021, and this is mostly because I think they've stumbled upon a formula for success that will allow for sustained success, so that a slowing down doesn't necessarily imply crashing, simply re-calibrating to a lower plateau. Which is probably to be expected.

Another thing to note: My guess is that the current success is beyond the wildest expectations of Mearls & Co, and they're having to re-write their plans. I know they hoped for an evergreen approach, or at least something like a ten-year edition cycle, but I don't think they expected this level of success. On one hand, this sounds great; on the other, it has probably increased corporate expectations, so that when things do inevitably slow down, we don't know how Hasbro will handle it.

But we can really only look to the next 5-10 years, as technological changes could completely shift everything. AI, in particular, might make just about everything as we know it a moot point. Virtual reality. Not to mention dire possibilities such as drastic climate change, economic collapse, etc.

So for now and the foreseeable future, we can enjoy a thriving D&D game.

 

[MoonSong]

A bit more on my "4 Products Per Year Theory"...

So far we've seen 19 products (including Starter Set) in five years (2014-18), or 18 hardcovers.

2014 saw the starter set, three core rulebooks, and two-part first story arc - so six products in all.
2015-17 saw the same pattern each year: two story arc books, one supplement.
2018 was the same as 2015-17, but added a fourth product - a setting.

I suspect 2019 will follow 2018, with four products: two adventures, a rule supplement of some kind, and another setting book. So it really isn't much different than the established pattern fo 2015-17, it just adds a setting book.

I would say that maybe one less adventure every year.

5e: Who knows? I'd say Xanathar's Guide fills out the gaps in 5e quite nicely, with new spells, feats, and subclasses. But did it fill in all the obvious gaps? I'd say yes, and the next crunch supplement will be more experimental, but it's really an open question.

I'm more of the opinion that this isn't the case. I think there's way more room for sorcerer magic origins and cleric domains. Now fighter, rogue and wizard, these look more complete so far.

I suppose we also don't know the counterfactual. Would 3e with no update have continued to do even half the numbers? Could 4e even have been designed prior to Book of Nine Swords... in 2006?!

I thought the Book of Nine Swords was the salvaging of the first scrapped attempt at fourth edition?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Parmandur]

To follow-up on some of the previous comments and sum up my thoughts, I think the question is if and when the current wave of success eventually (inevitably?) slows and/or crashes, what will WotC do? We just don't know.

It isn't daring to speculate that chances are we will see continued growth and success...for awhile. And then at some point there will be a dip, which is what I was referring to as "peak edition." Maybe it is in a year or two, maybe three or four, maybe longer. But at some point the continued growth will slow. The question is where on the spectrum of "plateau to crash" it will land, and that will determine WotC's course of action.

If it plateaus, they can follow the "evergreen" model of Catan and Monopoly and just manage the ship, so to speak, with only minor tweaks, re-skins, explansions, more story arcs, etc. Maybe a trial balloon once in awhile (e.g. something like Gamma World or maybe an Advanced D&D for more tactical play), to see if the market will accommodate a second line, but for the most part it will continue as is for as long as Western civilization holds up (well, you know what I mean).

If it crashes, we might see another edition or some other more drastic approach. Either way, I wouldn't expect anything drastic for some years to come. In other words, even if WotC starts seeing the ship slow down in 2019, I don't think they'll scramble to come out with a new edition in 2021, and this is mostly because I think they've stumbled upon a formula for success that will allow for sustained success, so that a slowing down doesn't necessarily imply crashing, simply re-calibrating to a lower plateau. Which is probably to be expected.

Another thing to note: My guess is that the current success is beyond the wildest expectations of Mearls & Co, and they're having to re-write their plans. I know they hoped for an evergreen approach, or at least something like a ten-year edition cycle, but I don't think they expected this level of success. On one hand, this sounds great; on the other, it has probably increased corporate expectations, so that when things do inevitably slow down, we don't know how Hasbro will handle it.

But we can really only look to the next 5-10 years, as technological changes could completely shift everything. AI, in particular, might make just about everything as we know it a moot point. Virtual reality. Not to mention dire possibilities such as drastic climate change, economic collapse, etc.

So for now and the foreseeable future, we can enjoy a thriving D&D game.

They seem to have decoupled their revenue model from books per se...which is funny, since the books are selling like hotcakes. I think business wise, their hope is to have something like a hot movie, so Hasbro can happily go play with toys and such: a wholly owned IP that supplies a basically bottemless barrel of toy concepts is a gold mine for the parent corporation. I think they would be fine with a sedate plateue.

 

[Parmandur]

A new D&D cartoon, in the style of the She-Ra reboot.

I'm on board.

That She-Ra cartoon is fantastic: if the new toys sell well for Mattel, Hasbro might get ideas.