D&D 5E D&D article on Polygon re: direction of the brand

[Uchawi]

It boils down to what does ahead of projections mean and how does that define success. From WOTC perspective, anything that exceeds projections based on whatever metrics they established is a good thing. So congratulations. When you take that in comparison to the RPG industry as a whole, when considering a game like Pathfinder, then it may take on a different meaning.

I believe the decision to release 5E as a basic rule set for free was a smart choice. That will result in more PHB sales, etc. when someone wants to take the next step because the experience is fun. What is hard to predict is how the experience may change over time when a game like Pathfinder or the company Paizo has so much more to offer, above and beyond the rule set. I expect some of the new 5E players will migrate to Pathfinder. They also have a free rule set. I also think there are a portion of Pathfinder players or similar D&D hybrids fan base that will buy 5E just to have a copy for a casual game.

Where I would define true success for 5E is when their budget gets ramped up to release more product, or games like Pathfinder adapt, e.g. Pathfinder 2.0, based on the success of 5E. Currently WOTC appears to be in a holding pattern.

In regards to social media, it is an interesting phenomenon. The early editions of D&D could not take advantage of it. Today, you have the old mom and pop basement game projected directly to the internet. Whether that means more success versus just more visibility is anyone's guess. But because of social media and the rapid media cycle, there tends to be a shorter shelf life for anything as something new and improved is bound to replace it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

They have never really claimed each edition is selling better.

They certainly sound like they do, but, no, the comments they make are generally pretty vague or weak or incomplete. So they might say 'selling even better than we had hoped' - sounds very positive, but we don't know what they were hoping for. They might say 'selling to a younger audience,' but compared to what, if they weren't collecting the same data, before? An informed guess?

I can't take that sort of stuff too seriously - but, can I take comfort in the general positive attitude both of WotC and of most of the fans commenting in public. That alone is a good sign.

It boils down to what does ahead of projections mean and how does that define success. From WOTC perspective, anything that exceeds projections based on whatever metrics they established is a good thing.

Sure. Barring another leak of goals for the line, we're not going to know what those projections may have been. We can guess based on the slow pace of releases and small staff that they may not have been that high, but you never know, corporations will cut staff and cut costs even on a very successful product.

So congratulations. When you take that in comparison to the RPG industry as a whole, when considering a game like Pathfinder, then it may take on a different meaning.

D&D usually does pretty darn well compared to the rest of the industry.

What is hard to predict is how the experience may change over time when a game like Pathfinder or the company Paizo has so much more to offer, above and beyond the rule set. I expect some of the new 5E players will migrate to Pathfinder.

I doubt it. Pathfinder is late in it's life cycle, very late, if you consider it as one with 3.5, making adopting it an intimidating prospect if you weren't already familiar with 3.5 (even then, a bit of a stretch), and the general zietgiest surrounding it is very different, since it is a continuation of a prior edition, rather than the newest thing.

Where I would define true success for 5E is when their budget gets ramped up to release more product, or games like Pathfinder adapt, e.g. Pathfinder 2.0, based on the success of 5E. Currently WOTC appears to be in a holding pattern.

A ramp up would be a sure sign not just of success, but of an expectation that said success is sustainable, and growth a possibility. I don't think Paizo will be a barometer of that success, though, they have a solid, loyal fanbase that they support very well, they're goal has to be stability - also a 'holding pattern,' in essence, though one that, as a much smaller company, they're probably very happy with.

 

[Zardnaar]

They certainly sound like they do, but, no, the comments they make are generally pretty vague or weak or incomplete. So they might say 'selling even better than we had hoped' - sounds very positive, but we don't know what they were hoping for. They might say 'selling to a younger audience,' but compared to what, if they weren't collecting the same data, before? An informed guess?

I can't take that sort of stuff too seriously - but, can I take comfort in the general positive attitude both of WotC and of most of the fans commenting in public. That alone is a good sign.

Sure. Barring another leak of goals for the line, we're not going to know what those projections may have been. We can guess based on the slow pace of releases and small staff that they may not have been that high, but you never know, corporations will cut staff and cut costs even on a very successful product.
D&D usually does pretty darn well compared to the rest of the industry.

I doubt it. Pathfinder is late in it's life cycle, very late, if you consider it as one with 3.5, making adopting it an intimidating prospect if you weren't already familiar with 3.5 (even then, a bit of a stretch), and the general zietgiest surrounding it is very different, since it is a continuation of a prior edition, rather than the newest thing.

A ramp up would be a sure sign not just of success, but of an expectation that said success is sustainable, and growth a possibility. I don't think Paizo will be a barometer of that success, though, they have a solid, loyal fanbase that they support very well, they're goal has to be stability - also a 'holding pattern,' in essence, though one that, as a much smaller company, they're probably very happy with.

Well they are not lying about 5E doing reasonably well. At least 10 million perhaps 15 being generous. Its not equalt to the glory days of 3.x in sales or even 2Es 1st year it seems. They need to rebuild and seem to be doing well at that. They have not outsold Pathfinder but are selling faster than Pathfinder did and even assuming it slows down a bit they will be selling around 5 years of Pathfinder core books in 2-3 year depending onhw high they can sustain sales. Unless they reach saturation point in the near future basically everyone who wants a PHB has bought one.

So yah overall doing well and probably better than expected.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well they are not lying about 5E doing reasonably well. At least 10 million perhaps 15 being generous.

You can infer what you want from the limited data publically available. Infering 15 million of D&D for a 10mil increase in the whole industry is a bit much, but, whatever, we have so little to go on, you could even be right with that guess. Keep positive, right?

Its not equalt to the glory days of 3.x in sales or even 2Es 1st year it seems.

It might well be beating both. '89 was post-fad, and it's not like we have hard data. WotC has kept implying that each new ed beat the one before, so it could very well have beat 3.x, since WotC would have solid numbers on that.

They need to rebuild and seem to be doing well at that. They have not outsold Pathfinder

It seems they have: back to number one for the whole year D&D has been out. I don't doubt that 5e opened bigger than Pathfinder. Pathfinder, at release, didn't beat out D&D a year in (though release is always strongest), while 5e presumably beat out the prior ed at release, putting it well ahead of Pathfinder in that sense, as well as in the sense of beating it for the number 1 spot for the last year.

Maybe, with only 3 books out for 1 year, they haven't moved more books than Pathfinder has at a book a month and more for six years, if that's what you mean. Paizo has some very loyal fans, even sells on a subscription basis - that has to move a lot of units over time. But, then, if you're going to compare whole runs, might as well compare Pathfinder's whole run to D&D's whole run. ;P

 

[Dire Bare]

It boils down to what does ahead of projections mean and how does that define success. From WOTC perspective, anything that exceeds projections based on whatever metrics they established is a good thing. So congratulations. When you take that in comparison to the RPG industry as a whole, when considering a game like Pathfinder, then it may take on a different meaning.

I believe the decision to release 5E as a basic rule set for free was a smart choice. That will result in more PHB sales, etc. when someone wants to take the next step because the experience is fun. What is hard to predict is how the experience may change over time when a game like Pathfinder or the company Paizo has so much more to offer, above and beyond the rule set. I expect some of the new 5E players will migrate to Pathfinder. They also have a free rule set. I also think there are a portion of Pathfinder players or similar D&D hybrids fan base that will buy 5E just to have a copy for a casual game.

Where I would define true success for 5E is when their budget gets ramped up to release more product, or games like Pathfinder adapt, e.g. Pathfinder 2.0, based on the success of 5E. Currently WOTC appears to be in a holding pattern.

In regards to social media, it is an interesting phenomenon. The early editions of D&D could not take advantage of it. Today, you have the old mom and pop basement game projected directly to the internet. Whether that means more success versus just more visibility is anyone's guess. But because of social media and the rapid media cycle, there tends to be a shorter shelf life for anything as something new and improved is bound to replace it.

I don't think WotC is worried about Pathfinder at all for several reasons. And I don't think we'll see mass movement from 5E to Pathfinder. In my totally anecdotal opinion, while there is of course overlap, D&D and Pathfinder target different folks. Pathfinder targets the lifestyle D&D hobbyist who does want tons of supplements, preferably more than one per month. D&D used to cater to this crowd also, but obviously made the conscious decision not to with 5E. D&D now targets the MUCH larger casual gaming market that is booming today with the surge in board, card, & dice games. Pathfinder doesn't have the brand capital to do that effectively, but D&D certainly does.

D&D 5E, by any reasonable metric, has been very successful. That doesn't take away from the success of other rpgs out there, Pathfinder included, but I laugh everytime somebody tries to claim that Pathfinder is somehow more successful than D&D.

 

[aramis erak]

Just found out - daughter's group at school IS a teacher-sponsored club. And is up to 21.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I'm perfectly happy with how they've handled 5E so far, and it certainly seems to be successful by what I can see, which is admittedly almost entirely anecdotal.

I'm fine with their approach. I think what they are doing appeals to a variety of folks...they seem to have both the casual players and veteran players alike.

I hope that if they do broaden their approach that they focus on setting material and adventures more so than new classes and the like.