Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is DnD being mothballed?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9167570" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>That's presumptive, but even if it's true, I'm not sure what the relevance is. Because the issue of how well 3.5 was doing was largely brought up strictly with regard to "the execs saw how explosive WoW was, and wanted D&D to get a piece of that." There's nothing to suggest that the bottom was dropping out of 3.5, and that it was no longer earning more than it took in.</p><p></p><p>I'm not familiar with the idea that 3E was "cut short because sales were flagging." Quite the contrary, my understanding was that 3.5 was part of the strategy from day one of 3E's life (as per <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20040623125754/http://www.montecook.com/arch_review26.html" target="_blank">an old article</a> from Monte Cook wherein he says "See, I'm going to let you in on a little secret, which might make you mad: 3.5 was planned from the beginning.") How it eventually came out wasn't <em>quite</em> the same as it was originally planned to be, granted, and Cook grants that it was a few years earlier than planned presumably due to an expected slump in sales happening slightly earlier than anticipated, but the idea for a revision midway seems to have always been the case.</p><p></p><p>That said, "not selling as much" isn't proof-positive of "it wasn't sustainable and/or profitable." Which has kind of been my point all along.</p><p></p><p>You'll also note that, in addition to saying that his research was preliminary, Riggs noted that 3.X PHB sales were roughly equal to those of 2E, and were accomplished in a shorter time. Likewise, I disagree with your presumption that those numbers aren't "stable," where stable means reliably taking in enough income to keep operating. Nothing Riggs says suggests that WotC was in danger of not being able to keep the lights on (at least as far as D&D went; M:tG would have kept them going regardless), whereas he outright states that the executives were seeing a larger phenomenon and wanted a piece of it. That broadly tracks with what Ryan Dancey said, regarding D&D being a $25M-$30M business, versus the $50M-$100M Hasbro wanted it to be.</p><p></p><p>To summarize, the idea that 3.5's sales were bottoming out, and that they weren't profitable (in terms of taking in more money than was spent) seems to be entirely based around the idea of drawing inferences based around extending the idea that sales slow down over time. Now, sales <em>do</em> slow down over time, but that doesn't mean that at the time 3.5 ended, there was anything to suggest that there was (or was imminently approaching) negative profitability, especially when we're actively being told that the switch to 4E was in search of more money for reasons of seeing (presumed) greater opportunity, rather than fleeing insolvency for the brand.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 9167570, member: 8461"] That's presumptive, but even if it's true, I'm not sure what the relevance is. Because the issue of how well 3.5 was doing was largely brought up strictly with regard to "the execs saw how explosive WoW was, and wanted D&D to get a piece of that." There's nothing to suggest that the bottom was dropping out of 3.5, and that it was no longer earning more than it took in. I'm not familiar with the idea that 3E was "cut short because sales were flagging." Quite the contrary, my understanding was that 3.5 was part of the strategy from day one of 3E's life (as per [URL='https://web.archive.org/web/20040623125754/http://www.montecook.com/arch_review26.html']an old article[/URL] from Monte Cook wherein he says "See, I'm going to let you in on a little secret, which might make you mad: 3.5 was planned from the beginning.") How it eventually came out wasn't [I]quite[/I] the same as it was originally planned to be, granted, and Cook grants that it was a few years earlier than planned presumably due to an expected slump in sales happening slightly earlier than anticipated, but the idea for a revision midway seems to have always been the case. That said, "not selling as much" isn't proof-positive of "it wasn't sustainable and/or profitable." Which has kind of been my point all along. You'll also note that, in addition to saying that his research was preliminary, Riggs noted that 3.X PHB sales were roughly equal to those of 2E, and were accomplished in a shorter time. Likewise, I disagree with your presumption that those numbers aren't "stable," where stable means reliably taking in enough income to keep operating. Nothing Riggs says suggests that WotC was in danger of not being able to keep the lights on (at least as far as D&D went; M:tG would have kept them going regardless), whereas he outright states that the executives were seeing a larger phenomenon and wanted a piece of it. That broadly tracks with what Ryan Dancey said, regarding D&D being a $25M-$30M business, versus the $50M-$100M Hasbro wanted it to be. To summarize, the idea that 3.5's sales were bottoming out, and that they weren't profitable (in terms of taking in more money than was spent) seems to be entirely based around the idea of drawing inferences based around extending the idea that sales slow down over time. Now, sales [I]do[/I] slow down over time, but that doesn't mean that at the time 3.5 ended, there was anything to suggest that there was (or was imminently approaching) negative profitability, especially when we're actively being told that the switch to 4E was in search of more money for reasons of seeing (presumed) greater opportunity, rather than fleeing insolvency for the brand. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is DnD being mothballed?
Top