4.33 Years in: What Now for 5E? (and have we reached "Peak Edition?")

Parmandur said:

Mearls has used the word evergreen on multiple occasions, actually. Doesn't mean there will never be a new edition, but they don't use 5E in any marketing for a reason. If there is a 6E, they want it to be backwards compatible and painless for existing players, that is, backwards compatible. Newer editions are probably as bad a bellweather as the older ones.

For a new edition, I would forsee the main change being in the specific exceptions to the general rules, such as Classes and Spells, but no essential change to the superstructure of the game. So we might get a new Ranger built from the ground up, but not new rules on stealth or something. And a 5E Ranger would be able to come in and play next to a 6E Ranger. A tenth anniversary set with new art and refurbished options that is a sixth edition seems possible.

A 5.5 is probably not going to happen. Another book of options like XGtE, or two, might happen, but no overhaul. Mearls has said as recently as last Tuesday that the PHB has sold so well, and is continuing to sell so well, that they will not do anything to remotely appear to invalidate any of those purchases.

Click to expand...

I don't put much stock in the "evergreen" label. D&D Essentials was advertised as evergreen too. When is the next print run of that.

Nothing is forever except editions that are no longer actively supported.

I believe that 5e is nearing the point (perhaps a year and a half away) when it will reach peak popularity.

Furthermore, I think that we will see a fairly dramatic drop in sales after that point. Thereafter, the edition will (I believe) sell at a steadily (but slowly) declining rate until the release of a new edition.

Currently, 5e is doing very well. I suspect that any future losses of profit will be caused by dropping numbers of new players.

My guesses could be completely inaccurate, but I am glad to be able to share them.

Mercurius said:

1E: c. 1981-82. Hard to pinpoint an exact date, as the 1e Monster Manual was published in 1977 and the PHB in '78. But 1981 saw the publication of FIend Folio; 1982 was a light year, but then 1983 saw 1E hit its peak - with MM2, the new covers, Dragonlance, and probably the start of decline shortly thereafter

Click to expand...

1982 was the peak of 1e. It was doing very well, but not as well as they had forecasted. And 1983 was the beginning of the decline.

I don’t know about 5e. The current books seem to be doing well on Amazon and sales seem sustained. But growth cannot last forever, so it has to plateau eventually. But even then, when new player acquisition slows down, we’ll have a few years of declining but still good sales. 5e probably has quite a few good years left.

But, I think we’re closer to the middle. I do think we’ve almost hit saturation where we have “enough”

ExploderWizard said:

I don't put much stock in the "evergreen" label. D&D Essentials was advertised as evergreen too. When is the next print run of that.

Nothing is forever except editions that are no longer actively supported.

Click to expand...

It is an indicator of intention. With any product, whether it will be evergreen is dictated by sales. A product can sell well without being intended to be evergreen, but being successful with the intention to be evergreen makes long-term viability more likely.

A lot depends on the movie. If it's a huge success, then 5E sales will spike. If it bombs, then sales will probably decline.

Prakriti said:

A lot depends on the movie. If it's a huge success, then 5E sales will spike. If it bombs, then sales will probably decline.

Click to expand...

I agree. If the film is a commercial success, then the influx of new players will likely rise. If the film is awful, I doubt that it will affect the number of players.

ExploderWizard said:

I don't put much stock in the "evergreen" label. D&D Essentials was advertised as evergreen too. When is the next print run of that.

Nothing is forever except editions that are no longer actively supported.

Click to expand...

Ha, true.

I'd say any edition hits its peak when its filled out the obvious roster of mechanical supplements, and has moved onto to various more experimental or esoteric supplements.

I'm not qualified to speak on 1e, but from 2e onwards:

2e: 1994. The last of the PHB class books had come out, and the last of the DMG reference guides before they started getting weirdly specific. (Complete Book of Necromancers?) 1995 saw the revised core books come out, and the start of the Player's Option trio, which really made for a "2.5e". Plus, Planescape came out in 1994, and there's no setting that's more evocative of 2e than Planescape.

3e/3.5e: Mid 2005. The first grouping of "Complete X" books had been released, as well as the "Races of X" books for all the PHB races. Later in 2005 was when we started to see some of the more experimental titles for 3.5, like Heroes of Horror and Magic of Incarnum, and then the slew of game-changing material from 2006, like the two Tome books, the PHB2, and the second group of Completes.

4e: End of 2009. 2009 was the single best year of 4e releases, with the PHB2 as the best of the PHBX series, and Divine, Arcane, and Primal Power all being excellent supplements. 2010 saw the release of the PHB3 and MM3, which were both moving in more experimental directions, and then the release of Essentials, which was a line reboot as well as a deep revision.

5e: Who knows? I'd say Xanathar's Guide fills out the gaps in 5e quite nicely, with new spells, feats, and subclasses. But did it fill in all the obvious gaps? I'd say yes, and the next crunch supplement will be more experimental, but it's really an open question.

Inchoroi said:

I think the game is doing fine; there are some holes, but for the most part its doing well. The latest two adventures, Dragon Heist and Dungeon of the Mad Mage, probably won't do as well as previous offerings, I would guess. I hope that they realize its because of the content, rather than the length--that is, Mad Mage isn't that good of an "adventure," as most megadungeons aren't (this is coming from a guy who worked on several in the last year), because of what it is, not that we don't want adventures that go all the way to higher levels, like 17-20.

Click to expand...

Yeah I'm still skimming through DotMM, but so far I've been pretty disappointed in the lack of story. I was excited for an official product that went all the way to level 20 because I was looking forward to an actual campaign arc, not just a bunch of dungeon levels with enough XP to get there.

Prakriti said:

A lot depends on the movie. If it's a huge success, then 5E sales will spike. If it bombs, then sales will probably decline.

Click to expand...

Even if it is only a moderate success of mediocre quality, the effect will likely be positive for the game: a giant neon reminder "hey, D&D, that's a thing still?" won't hurt unless it is teeeeeerrrible.