Parmandur
Book-Friend
And you base this on your extensive market research...?
D&D 5E Xanathar’s Guide to Everything is the fastest-selling Dungeons & Dragons book of all time
Hussar
Legend
Ok, a couple of points to keep this in perspective. The worst selling 5e book is still selling considerably better than the best selling Pathfinder book. EVERYTHING that WotC has published for 5e is selling better than every other company's books. It's not a case of a couple of books doing well, it's a case of EVERY book doing better than anyone else, full stop.
Let's not forget that while the PHB is selling in unbelievable numbers, the DMG and the Monster Manual aren't actually all that far behind. As I write this, the DMG is sitting at 244 in all books and the Monster Manual is 277.
Think about that for a second. Three years in, the "DM books", those books that have never really sold all that well previously because, as the common wisdom held, there are a lot more players than DMs, are actually selling fantastic numbers. That means that the number of DM out there has to be skyrocketing. We're on a NINTH printing for the Monster Manual and a fifth printing for the DMG.
Why on earth would they even consider a new edition? The reason we got 3.5 and then 4e so quickly is because sales had died. By this point in 3e, 3.5 and in 4e, the editions were done. Three years into each of those editions, they were either announcing or had already released a new edition. To the tune of millions and millions of dollars sunk into each new edition.
Good grief, they're licensed to print money right now. This is probably the most solvent, most successful D&D has ever been.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Hussar makes a great point. At this point in the edition cycle, both 3.0e and 4e were being scrapped and a new edition (or semi-edition) was being produced.
At this point in the 5e cycle, 5e just had the best year for D&D sales in the history of WOTC running the company, and possibly in the history of D&D (1e and 2e financial records being a tad sketchy to ever truly know the answer to that part of the question).
When your prior attempts were being scrapped at this point due to lagging sales, and your current attempt is having your best year ever at this point, you're doing something right with your current attempt.
At this point in the 5e cycle, 5e just had the best year for D&D sales in the history of WOTC running the company, and possibly in the history of D&D (1e and 2e financial records being a tad sketchy to ever truly know the answer to that part of the question).
When your prior attempts were being scrapped at this point due to lagging sales, and your current attempt is having your best year ever at this point, you're doing something right with your current attempt.
You're missing the up-front costs. Each book requires a writing staff, editors, art commissions, layout, playtest coordinators, distribution arrangements, marketing programs...
For the PHB, that was all done three years ago. So the "multiplier" grows over time as more PHBs sell without incurring new up-front costs. Maybe it was 0.75x last year, 1x this year, 1.2x next year -- as the up-front-cost gets amortized over time the overall return on investment increases.
Supplement sales are generally much more short term. You spend all the up-front costs, then it sells super well for a few months, then it goes back on the shelf and winds up selling a very small fraction of ongoing PHB sales for the rest of time. The only reason to even make supplements is to keep the current player base engaged so that they bring in new players.
Now, obviously there is an equilibrium here. I suspect you're right that Wizards could put out more rules supplements to please their existing player base, without alienating new players. But how many more? Go from 1 a year to 2 a year? 3 a year? At what point does it turn into a 3E/4E/PF book treadmill? I can't answer that, because I don't have Hasbro's marketing research arm to consult with. But based on how D&D is making money hand over fist, I'm guessing Wizards has done the math on it, and taken into account more factors than just Xanathar's strong sales.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
Not to mention the constant fluctuations in employment in the D&D team pre-5E: every prior strategy has been a financial failure that wasn't sustainable.
I don't know, I think it depends on the campaign. We have a Great Old One Warlock that is fun as hell. He's using his awakened mind, high charisma, Actor's feat, disguise, and craftiness to be one of the main drivers of the campaign. Those Invocations give so much raw role playing and constant low-level capability that zigs where everyone else zags. It makes for a really interesting contrast to the martials and the 'gotta watch my spell slots' casters.
The main points I was trying to make:
I accept that D&D is doing better now than ever before.
I am skeptical that this can be attributed to a limited release schedule and WotC putting out less books.
I think that 5e's success can be attributed to a combination of much more likely factors: 5e's rules are generally written better and more accessible to new players because they learned from the previous editions, old players that skipped 4e and maybe even 3e/3.5e were hungry for a good product, many more people were being exposed to the game through streaming media and YouTube videos, plus the growing popularity of virtual table-tops.
I just don't buy the correlation between producing less books equalling higher sales. 5e is set up better than previous editions, so would not have the same issues as 3.5e or PF.
3.5e and PF rules were based on the assumption that players would continue to find ways to stack powers and bonuses, a This Plus That approach. 3.5e and PF lost sales because it overwhelmed players with options and required optimization and a high level of system mastery.
5e is built around the concept of Bounded Accuracy, so it is more about This Or That. Things don't stack the same way, so options become choices instead of requirements. Players do not need all of the books to remain competitive and only requires a basic level of system mastery.
In my opinion, WotC could produce more options books for players and generate even more sales. This would not hurt the hobby or slow the growth. If anything, it would increase D&D's shelf-presence at hobby store's and generate more excitement for the game.
WotC is leaving money on the table by not meeting the demand for their products, and the strong sales of XGtE appear to support that view.
I accept that D&D is doing better now than ever before.
I am skeptical that this can be attributed to a limited release schedule and WotC putting out less books.
I think that 5e's success can be attributed to a combination of much more likely factors: 5e's rules are generally written better and more accessible to new players because they learned from the previous editions, old players that skipped 4e and maybe even 3e/3.5e were hungry for a good product, many more people were being exposed to the game through streaming media and YouTube videos, plus the growing popularity of virtual table-tops.
I just don't buy the correlation between producing less books equalling higher sales. 5e is set up better than previous editions, so would not have the same issues as 3.5e or PF.
3.5e and PF rules were based on the assumption that players would continue to find ways to stack powers and bonuses, a This Plus That approach. 3.5e and PF lost sales because it overwhelmed players with options and required optimization and a high level of system mastery.
5e is built around the concept of Bounded Accuracy, so it is more about This Or That. Things don't stack the same way, so options become choices instead of requirements. Players do not need all of the books to remain competitive and only requires a basic level of system mastery.
In my opinion, WotC could produce more options books for players and generate even more sales. This would not hurt the hobby or slow the growth. If anything, it would increase D&D's shelf-presence at hobby store's and generate more excitement for the game.
WotC is leaving money on the table by not meeting the demand for their products, and the strong sales of XGtE appear to support that view.
ad_hoc
(they/them)
A lot of evidence has been presented to you already.
What would it take to convince you otherwise?
BookBarbarian
Expert Long Rester
I wanted two maybe three sub-classes in this book, even though the likelihood of me ever actually getting to play and not DM is pretty low right now. That was enough for me.
I was surprised at how much else I liked in it. The core rules section is a really good summary of things players should know but might not. I want to print them out and laminate them and leave a copy on my game table during our sessions.
The Tables for character options were pretty neat too. useful for both players wanting to add some detail to a character or a DM wanting to add color to an NPC.
All in all I think it's easy to see why it has succeeded beyond say the SCAG.
I was surprised at how much else I liked in it. The core rules section is a really good summary of things players should know but might not. I want to print them out and laminate them and leave a copy on my game table during our sessions.
The Tables for character options were pretty neat too. useful for both players wanting to add some detail to a character or a DM wanting to add color to an NPC.
All in all I think it's easy to see why it has succeeded beyond say the SCAG.
I have seen a lot of people claim that because D&D is doing well right now it must be due to the slow release schedule. What evidence has been presented that supports that correlation?
I have seen people claim that producing more books would reduce sales, because 3.5e, instead of acknowledging what the root cause of the problems with 3.5e were. What evidence has been presented to support that claim?
I haven't asked you to convince me to change my mind. I have only shared my opinion. You are welcome to disagree. I am open to changing my opinion if I read something more convincing than "5e D&D is doing better than previous editions, so they could not possibly do better than they are right now." If the leadership of the D&D team was infallible then 90% of the discussions on this forum would be pointless.
It doesn't really matter if I have a different opinion than most, or if either of us change our minds, WotC is doing it their way, and all we can do is make the best of what they release. I am just disappointed that they keep producing things that I have no interest in, like adventure paths, instead of material that I believe that most players find more interesting.
Similar Threads
