D&D 5E Wanting more content doesn't always equate to wanting tons of splat options so please stop.

[Zhern]

You said that folks would not come back for one book if they did not also have the expectation that more would be forthcoming.

More frequent meaning in addition to their approach so far. In 2016, the put out Curse of Strahd and Storm King's Thunder as adventure paths, and Volo's Guide is coming up in a few days. Two adventure paths and then a general release book (not to your definition, but this is kind of the point) in November. Last year we saw the SCAG in November.

The game is using FR as the default setting. It's baked in. You won't see a product that doesn't reference the Realms unless and until they introduce another setting. Therefore, SCAG and Volo's are the general release books that WotC has produced. You just deny that they fit that category because of your personal preference.

Hence, your desires are more specific and more demanding than the average customer. You want them to redefine what they consider a general release, and you want them to go from 3 books a year to 4. You say "it's only one book" but would you say "it's only an increase in production of 25%"? Asking anyone to do 25% more is significant.



The Sword Coast doesn't exist. It can be anything I want it to be, or anything you want it to be. There is plenty of material to be found in that book that can be used in a general way, for a game in just about any setting. Yes, the material assumes a specific setting by default, but so what? Almost all RPG books have some default setting, or implied setting.



I don't know if those numbers are accurate or are even meant to be accurate. But what they put out in the prior edition has no bearing on what they are doing now, except that it has influenced your expectation. Their business model has clearly changed. You don't like that, and that is of course fine.

What I find odd is that you see the idea of you adjusting your expectations on what to expect from WotC based on current evidence is the less sensible option when compared to WotC altering their publishing schedule to try and earn your business.

I can still find useful material in a setting specific general release book like SCAG and Volo's - and I freakin' HATE the Forgotten Realms (at least from 3E - present realms). It isn't hard to strip out setting specific stuff and adapt it to another setting. That kind of thing is happening for years. I get it, people are strapped for time, I am too. I work full time, I'm in graduate school, I have a family and responsibilities and I would love for my specific ideas of the ideal TRPG crunch book to be created by someone else and made available for purchase but I also realize that what I want and what I get are two different things. If I think the book has some usable information in it after perusing it at my FLGS, I'll throw them my support and buy it. If it doesn't have anything useful, then I vote with my wallet and don't give the publisher my support.

Having this debate is good and it definitely demonstrates that there are some very ingrained and rigid ideals among the TTRPG community (as there always have been - think back to the edition wars on the late 2000s - many goblins died to bring us Pathfinder during the bleak 4E years). I will say that in my 41 years of life and 31 years of TTRPG gaming, I've learned that most of the time if I want something very specific, I have to create it myself, usually from pieces parts from other resources. It isn't ideal but sometimes the only way to get what I want.

 

[Shasarak]

Solo play has a bad rep in some circles, but then you look closer at Internet forums and realize that many of the DPR/char-opt threads are a poor man's substitute for solo play. Instead of just throwing around numbers, those poor folks would have a better time actually fighting monsters with the characters they've designed, but instead they're reduced to talking about their stats on the Internet.

Let me tell you about my character!

 

[Parmandur]

Obviously.



At the end of the day we should simply acknowledge that there are games that taken in total appeal to a lot of people. And those games need not overlap very much.

As long as the game meets the "big appeal" it is good.

Well, sure?

I mean, if Pathfinder had a slower release schedule, I probably still wouldn't want it; while of 5E significantly ramped up production, I would likely buy less product (absolutely, not just relatively): just only so much to go around, and if I have six options rather than two, I will likely get none rather than one.

So, companies gotta make the decisions that make sense for them; and complaining about it on a forum the company ignores where most people are cool with the release schedule? Not gonna change anything.

 

[BryonD]

OK I'm not sure what your point really is or what I've said that you are disputing.

For what its worth, I'm still convinced that WotC's choice to produce so little content has absolutely nothing to do with the reasoning you presented. It has been demonstrated that you can sell a very steady supply of product to the marketplace overall. And if that is what you want then the "overall" is what matters, not the exceptions.

But the reality is that the core books may sell huge numbers, but compared to other things that WotC can invest resources into, core books don't make a great return. (And don't tell me it is sell four slots behind The Red Pony on Amazon's top sellers list. That misses the point.) Non-core books make even less return on the investment.
WotC wants to make money on D&D being recognized as the name in Fantasy gaming. They are investing in 5E the smallest amount they figure will maintain *that* brand position. Any revenue they generate from the tiny pool of us geeks over in the corner is great. But the money isn't worth it, it is the being #1 that is worth it.

 

[Parmandur]

OK I'm not sure what your point really is or what I've said that you are disputing.

For what its worth, I'm still convinced that WotC's choice to produce so little content has absolutely nothing to do with the reasoning you presented. It has been demonstrated that you can sell a very steady supply of product to the marketplace overall. And if that is what you want then the "overall" is what matters, not the exceptions.

But the reality is that the core books may sell huge numbers, but compared to other things that WotC can invest resources into, core books don't make a great return. (And don't tell me it is sell four slots behind The Red Pony on Amazon's top sellers list. That misses the point.) Non-core books make even less return on the investment.
WotC wants to make money on D&D being recognized as the name in Fantasy gaming. They are investing in 5E the smallest amount they figure will maintain *that* brand position. Any revenue they generate from the tiny pool of us geeks over in the corner is great. But the money isn't worth it, it is the being #1 that is worth it.

Sure,for movies and toys and the like. I'm looking forwards to those. As it is, though, they are releasing products faster than I keep up with, and most of the people I play with, who are smart people, need serious help with the complexities of the character creation process after playing for two years.

I maintain that it is a myth that the release is slow (they are releasing a new book every four months!), or that this is a simple game: it is very complex. Some might prefer loads more product pr more complex...but hardly the majority.

 

[Shasarak]

Yep. As long as the PHB continues to fly high in the Amazon charts (and, one assumes, continues to sell elsewhere in large numbers), 5e will continue. Once it starts to slip, we'll start to see either 6e gearing up or a cancellation.

However...

What's less clear is how the production of supplements affects PHB sales. It appears (again from Dancey's analysis) that at least some supplements help to drive PHB sales, and so are a net good for the line. But, equally, I suspect @Hussar is right that too many supplements has the opposite effect - that they serve to drive people away from the PHB rather than helping.

Where I think I disagree with Hussar, though, is that I think it's probably not the simple number of supplements that is key, but more likely the rate at which they are produced. (And it also matters a great deal which books are produced, as well as the simple numbers.)

But that's just a best guess. Nobody knows exactly what the answer is - even WotC, who have the best available data, only know that some specific approaches don't work for them and that some other specific approaches are working... for now.

Personally I think that if too many supplements was actually a thing then games like Pathfinder and Rifts would be dead and gone a long time ago. But that does not seem to have happened.

It would be more accurate to say something like not selling enough supplements at the right price and that is a completely different story. Obviously there is a lot of factors to take into account but you can see that price inflation has already been built into the numbers so at least they are not going down the road of selling their products for less then the cost to make them.

 

[Zhern]

Sure,for movies and toys and the like. I'm looking forwards to those. As it is, though, they are releasing products faster than I keep up with, and most of the people I play with, who are smart people, need serious help with the complexities of the character creation process after playing for two years.

I maintain that it is a myth that the release is slow (they are releasing a new book every four months!), or that this is a simple game: it is very complex. Some might prefer loads more product pr more complex...but hardly the majority.

What part of the character creation process are the struggling with? I'm asking because I'm curious - not trying to poke fun at them at all.

 

[Shasarak]

So, companies gotta make the decisions that make sense for them; and complaining about it on a forum the company ignores where most people are cool with the release schedule? Not gonna change anything.

Of course, that is why you need to use a multi pronged strategy to achieve real change.

 

[Maxperson]

So… you’ll only be satisfied with a hardcover book? I mean, I can’t help you if your printer makes everything look crappy, but I’d almost guarantee printing out the entire 30 page Elemental Evil and buying page protectors and a binder is going to cost you less than the $40 to get the information from Princes of the Apocalypse.
You must be very rough on your papers too, I printed out pages from Elemental Evil almost 2 years ago and they aren’t in the best shape, but they are far from ruined.

I've tried printing out stuff. It's harder to go through, less durable and just an all around pain in the ass. I'm not doing it again. If I can't get a professionally done physical product, I;m not going to buy it no matter how good it is.

 

[Maxperson]

The game is using FR as the default setting. It's baked in. You won't see a product that doesn't reference the Realms unless and until they introduce another setting. Therefore, SCAG and Volo's are the general release books that WotC has produced. You just deny that they fit that category because of your personal preference.

FR is default 5e like GH was default 3e. Pretty much not in anything but name. The general release products had between very little and no references to GH in them in 3e. Now, I've looked at the recent Volo excerpts, and if the rest of that book is like those excerpts, then the only thing FR about it is the name Volo. That would still be general release in my eyes. For something to be setting, it has to have setting fluff in it like the Sword Coast release.

The Sword Coast doesn't exist. It can be anything I want it to be, or anything you want it to be. There is plenty of material to be found in that book that can be used in a general way, for a game in just about any setting. Yes, the material assumes a specific setting by default, but so what? Almost all RPG books have some default setting, or implied setting.

It exists in the FR and is well known.