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.'”

 

[Parmandur]

I don't recall threads like this when 3.0 was on top and doing well.

3.0 was never on top the way 5E is: by this point in 3.0's existence, it was out of print, not having the best sales year in the history of D&D (which Perkins has stated is the case for 5E n 2017).

 

[Parmandur]

Personal observations are the reason for my skepticism. I did not present them as hard data by which to call out WotC for some grand conspiracy. However, companies are infamous for presenting skewed data to improve their image with the public. They would like more female players. What better way to make it appear to be socially acceptable to women than by pointing out how many women already play the game?

I swear by Odin (or insert whatever fictional god you prefer) that people have never even heard of the rights of others to have an opinion (especially when it is different than their own).

People are too damned sensitive these days. Skepticism in moderation is healthy. It means you think for yourself rather than blindly accepting everything that you are told.

There is skepticism, and then there is paranoia. 40% is less than my personal experience of the female percentage of players, too, and women are well represented in streaming shows and the fandoms for those shows, which is where new players are emerging in force.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The existence of all female groups might need to be taken into consideration. Some prefer to play without men around.

Although 40% is exactly the composition of my current group.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well, the goal was admirable, bit they needed better foundations...so they did their homework, built them, and they are solid.

Really, In a sense, Essentials and 5e are the same game with the same strategy. Timing can be everything, and markets, especially those influenced by volatile fans, unpredictable.

Decades of deep academic research might not be able to tease out the real factors, but two big, obvious, ones are the huge growth in interest in boardgames and the climate of the fan community.

One factor I think has been over-credited is the presence of streaming videos of play. Those were around with PF & 4e, too - but, if you were looking into D&D on-line, you'd also encounter a lot of negativity from the divided fanbase....

 

[Tony Vargas]

3.0 was never on top the way 5E is: by this point in 3.0's existence,

3.0/d20 arguably saved the hobby. It certainly regained D&D's dominance. And, yes, there was much crowing - and some naysaying.

The difference is that 3.0 and Essentials and the like kept anticipating and trying to force the come-back ("Back to the Dungeon!" "The Box is back! Respect the Box!") while, now, the come-back is here.

 

[Parmandur]

Really, In a sense, Essentials and 5e are the same game with the same strategy. Timing can be everything, and markets, especially those influenced by volatile fans, unpredictable.

Decades of deep academic research might not be able to tease out the real factors, but two big, obvious, ones are the huge growth in interest in boardgames and the climate of the fan community.

One factor I think has been over-credited is the presence of streaming videos of play. Those were around with PF & 4e, too - but, if you were looking into D&D on-line, you'd also encounter a lot of negativity from the divided fanbase....

Well, streaming as a whole wasn't as developed seven years ago, though it had begun. The infrastructure and institutions have come a looooong way. And if 50% of new players are being brought in by those streams, seems hard to oversell the influence.

 

[Parmandur]

3.0/d20 arguably saved the hobby. It certainly regained D&D's dominance. And, yes, there was much crowing - and some naysaying.

The difference is that 3.0 and Essentials and the like kept anticipating and try to trigger the come-back, while, now, the come-back is here.

Nah, it was successful, certainly, but the reason to be so excited now is the endurance and high level of success being enjoyed by the community.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ouch. Its been a while since you have been this nasty.

Have you checked all the threads he's posted in lately?

This whole website was about 3E self-congratulation. It just ended sooner thanks to 3.5.

It didn't really end, though, because 3.5 was barely different, just a way of getting the same fans to re-buy the same books (yeah, I'm still cynical about that). Really, PF's prettymuch the same game, so the total 3e run /might/ be ending with the introduction of PF2, after 18 years - if no one else swoops in and clones PF or re-clones 3.5, that is.
(Granted, by that standard, 1e & 2e AD&D could be 'pretymuch the same game,' and added together for a 20+ year run.)

But we usual suspects have kept doing this because from the very beginning there were posters saying that 5e success was all some mirage and any day now it would all come crashing down . And they where always wrong. They continue to be wrong. They will post in the future, and still be wrong.

Yeah, it's soo much more important that someone is wrong than that the hobby is growing...

If D&D doing better is a mirage, it's a mirage that led to my current FLGS being spun off from the original comic & shop to a dedicated 'place to play' style game shop, years ago, and, now, moving into bigger digs to have more table space than ever.

Keep walking toward the mirage, I say.

 

[Tony Vargas]

. And if 50% of new players are being brought in by those streams, seems hard to oversell the influence.

Oh, it's not that I deny it, it's that I don't think it's the pivotal difference, since it's not really a difference, the difference is in the community around it, and the timing...

Nah, it was successful, certainly, but the reason to be so excited now is the endurance and high level of success being enjoyed by the community.

Yeah, OK, enjoy the moment, but don't deny the past moments.
TSR went under and it looked like, if RPGs survived at all, they'd be led by WWGS, instead, WotC swooped in, white knighted D&D with 3.0 and made it immortal as d20.

 

[Jester David]

Personal observations are the reason for my skepticism. I did not present them as hard data by which to call out WotC for some grand conspiracy. However, companies are infamous for presenting skewed data to improve their image with the public. They would like more female players. What better way to make it appear to be socially acceptable to women than by pointing out how many women already play the game?

I swear by Odin (or insert whatever fictional god you prefer) that people have never even heard of the rights of others to have an opinion (especially when it is different than their own).

People are too damned sensitive these days. Skepticism in moderation is healthy. It means you think for yourself rather than blindly accepting everything that you are told.

Personal observations are key.
But how many gamers and groups have you seen and observed? Of the fifteen million.

Would you say seen 15,000 gamers, which would be the number needed to make a remotely representative sampling?
Or 1,500? Heck, have you recently observed even 150 different gamers?