D&D 5E After 2 years the 5E PHB remains one of the best selling books on Amazon

[doctorbadwolf]

WotC gave up the practice of trying to market "Iconics" as of 4E, just using them as art assets. I know of nobody who cared, and the lack of them as features moving forwards suggests that the marketplace is similarly disinterested.

See, now we're talking about the market as a whole, which does seem to appreciate iconic charscters. Again, look at PF, but also 13th Age, most of what c7 makes, etc.
anecdotally, like your "I know no one that cares", many ppl I know have expressed a desire to see iconics in DnD. Most seem to have forgetten or never realized that the people in the 3e books had names. Wotc never did a good job of its iconics. That's probably why they just dropped it.

either way, I've never seen a single person express active dislike of them, to the point where it might decrease their interest in a product, so saying it would be a mistake to include them seems pretty weird.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You keep using arbitrary incorrectly. Arbitrary means based on personal choice or personal whim, that would be choosing to claim one game (named something else, produced by another company, holding none of the IP rights and so on) is, because of your personal choice actually a different game.

It's a fact that Pathfinder is not D&D... Pathfinder is not D&D thus whether it is/has or is not/hasn't been inclusive... does not reflect on whether D&D is or is not inclusive, only on whether Pathfinder is. That should sum it up.

Nope, I'm using arbitrary perfectly correctly, you just keep confusing your opinion for fact.

 

[Imaro]

Nope, I'm using arbitrary perfectly correctly, you just keep confusing your opinion for fact.

And now you've also used opinion and fact wrong...

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I know that being inclusive is a thing nowadays but it has to stop at including Pathfinder as Dungeons & Dragons because it's not. Just because the games share much of the game system and a whole lot of themes doesn't make them the same game.

 

[Mistwell]

Wrong. Pathfinder is not D&D... you can consider it that all you want but the fact is (and it is a fact as opposed to an opinion)... it's not. How about you ask an employee of Paizo publicly if their company publishes D&D... and see what the answer is.

Yeah OK Imaro my "opinion" on an "opinion" topic is wrong because your opinion disagrees with it.

.

The question is, "How do people in general perceive D&D". Therefore if many people in general perceive Pathfinder to be D&D (regardless of whether you or Paizo employees agree) then it's D&D for the purposes of this kind of question. Whether it is technically D&D or not isn't relevant for a question regarding how people perceive it. Perception is inherently a subjective rather than objective question.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So are Kre-O D&D figures D&D too? Are miniatures made by third parties but with a WOTC license D&D too? Was the Kingdoms of Kalamar material made by Kenzer & Co. but with the Dungeons and Dragons label on it under super-special and unusual license also D&D? Where do you draw the line in this?

If, out of 1000 people, 501 consider Pathfinder to be D&D but only 20 consider Kre-O figures to be D&D, do you still draw the line at "branded as D&D" and include Kre-O but exclude Pathfinder despite the obvious problem with usage in common parlance? I mean, the only purpose of this categorization is how people view it, right? There is no purpose to viewing this type of topic in a vacuum without the context, as the entire issue is about context and perceptions.

in this topic? I'd only count official DnD core books if it were up to me. Other topics, it varies. Some, literally the entire hobby "counts".
If the company making DnD made it for DnD, its DnD. Everything else is only DnD depending on context. At your table, maybe PF is unambiguously DnD. That's great for your table. I often refer to it as DnD 3.75. Usually as part of explaining why I don't play it.


But in a discussion about inclusion in DnD, and whether the increased inclusiveness of DnD products, especially since the specific context is a discussion about the 5e phb, has anything to do with the sales of the 5e phb, PF can't ever be any more than tangential.

Whether or not it is dnd in some other context doesn't matter. It has nothing to do with why the 5e phb is selling so well, or whether increased DnD inclusiveness is a part of that, and if so to what degree.

 

[Mistwell]

I know that being inclusive is a thing nowadays but it has to stop at including Pathfinder as Dungeons & Dragons because it's not. Just because the games share much of the game system and a whole lot of themes doesn't make them the same game.

You realize others are arguing Kre-O figures and novels and miniatures and perhaps even branded dice are D&D but not a game made initially entirely based on compatibility with the actual game and perceived as D&D by many to be D&D?

 

[Imaro]

Yeah OK Imaro my "opinion" on an "opinion" topic is wrong because your opinion disagrees with it.

.

No it's wrong because D&D and Pathfinder are two different games, brands, etc... owned by two different companies... or is that opinion as well?

 

[Mistwell]

in this topic? I'd only count official DnD core books if it were up to me. Other topics, it varies. Some, literally the entire hobby "counts".
If the company making DnD made it for DnD, its DnD. Everything else is only DnD depending on context. At your table, maybe PF is unambiguously DnD. That's great for your table. I often refer to it as DnD 3.75. Usually as part of explaining why I don't play it.


But in a discussion about inclusion in DnD, and whether the increased inclusiveness of DnD products, especially since the specific context is a discussion about the 5e phb, has anything to do with the sales of the 5e phb, PF can't ever be any more than tangential.

Whether or not it is dnd in some other context doesn't matter. It has nothing to do with why the 5e phb is selling so well, or whether increased DnD inclusiveness is a part of that, and if so to what degree.

Yes, if the question is purely about the 5e PHB you're correct. But I believe the tangent you were replying to was regarding trends in D&D over time, right? In which case, if people perceive Pathfinder to be part of that D&D trend, then it seems a rather fair topic for this discussion.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, I didn't expect a name. I just wasn't sure if the adventure supplements counted towards what you were going for. I'll have to check out the pregens again, I didn't realize that they might have been based on the artwork. I tend to make my own pregens; it's easier to tie them into an adventure that way.

Yup, each of the 16 pregens is keyed to a piece of art in Core, and they seem to pop up occasionally