D&D 5E I think the era of 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons had it right. (not talking about the rules).

[Tony Vargas]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Depending on how you count, we've had 3-5 D&D PHB's released in the last 15 years or so. A new core set every three years? That's a ridiculous business model. It's a huge risk. It's not like a new edition is guaranteed to succeed is it?

It kinda is. Ever since the close of the D&D fad in the 80s, the pattern had been consistent: a new set of core books would sell really well compared to the trailing edge of the prior ed, and sales of subsequent supplements would trend down from there. It's even held.

The difference is that 5e is putting out a lot less in the way of subsequent supplements to sell less well.

How many hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, did they sink into each new edition?

Depends on how much design effort goes into into it. Publishing isn't the hugely expensive undertaking it used to be. Probably 5e, which is - quickly hits the thesaurus for things that sound better than 'derivative' - an homage to the classic game, did not take undue development/writing effort compared to the other modern eds. Still, gaming books of similar page count to a D&D core book get kick-started all the time, so it can't be that crazy.

Instead of trying to sell us, yet again, the same bloody book, they're actually doing new, original material

The best thing to come out for 5e since the core books is probably CoS. It's not exactly new or original. It is, OTOH, good. ;P

Good grief, I have or had, on my shelf, a 2e Complete Fighter, a 3e Sword and Fist, a 3.5 Complete Warrior, and there was also a 4e fighter book whose name I forget.

Martial Power (and Martial Power 2).

Do we really need a 5th fighter book? Seriously?

YES.

Thousands and thousands of pages of material for given settings, but, apparently, we need to churn out more and more?

Not so much, really. Setting material is easily adapted from one ed to another, it's the crunch that needs to be updated.

What blows my mind here is how anyone can look at the history of the hobby, where every single edition that had higher release rates failed after three years, and think that a higher release rate is a good idea. Let's not forget that 2e, with the highest release rate, nearly shut the doors for good.

No question it's good business. Doesn't stop players from wanting more.

I dunno about you folks, but, I'm perfectly happy with a sustainable release rate that is hugely successful.

As long as we do get /something/ crunchy each year, I agree.

 

[delericho]

You said that the higher system mastery player gains access to more powerful classes that aren't suited to the new player. you listed that as a direct consequence of classes that are more complex being rewarded.

No, you have it backwards.

If more complex classes are more powerful than less complex ones then players with greater system mastery get a double benefit over new players - firstly simply because they have greater system mastery, and secondly because they can use the more complex classes.

 

[delericho]

1E outsold 2E, which outsold 3E which outsold 3.5 ed which outsold Pathfinder and PF outsold 4E.

Do you have a source for the statement that 2nd Ed outsold 3.0e? I was of the impression that it was the other way around (and that despite the latter having only a 3-year lifespan).

Eric Mona did give figures for PF in 2014. 250k sold of the PF RPG book. That was lower than 3.5 figures he gave and Dancey figures he gave were a bit higher than Mona but not stupidly higher.

Of course, that was two years ago. It's possible that PF has overtaken 3.5e by now.

(I should probably add: none of that is to dispute that 5e is doing exceptionally well, nor that it's outselling PF. I'm happy to accept both those as being true. )

 

[Zardnaar]

Do you have a source for the statement that 2nd Ed outsold 3.0e? I was of the impression that it was the other way around (and that despite the latter having only a 3-year lifespan).



Of course, that was two years ago. It's possible that PF has overtaken 3.5e by now.

(I should probably add: none of that is to dispute that 5e is doing exceptionally well, nor that it's outselling PF. I'm happy to accept both those as being true. )

I do actually, Dancey over on the GitP forums. I will have to do some digging but he posted figures there that IIRC were this.

1E 1.5 Million
Red Box 1 million + (no one actually knows, I have seen 1-3 million thrown around but but most estimates are 1-1.5 million)
3E 1 million+ (includes 3.0 and 3.5)
2E 750k

Now 3E is an interesting one as once again how do you count it? Mona also provided some figures apparently and did break them down.

3.0 500k+
3.5 250-350k
PF 250

So how much 500k+ actually is or where on the 250k-350k range 3.5 sits IDK. So Dancey's figure is a bit higher but not drastically so (ball park figures sort of thing).

The 3.x family (3.0, 3.5, Pathfinder) has outsold everything that is not from the golden age, individually it is a bit harder to say but it would seem the 2E PHB has outsold 3.0 if Mona is correct and Dancey did not break 3.0/3.5 into separate numbers.

There are also other sources which however do broadly match up with some of Danceys statements as the Arceum has put up print numbers for OSR material and they do look similar to Danceys numbers and in a 1999 interview Gary Gygax said 1E outsold 2E 2-1 which is what Dancey provided and the OSR sources also support his 1 million+ red box and PHB claims. In the Red boxes cases no one is 100% certain though of exact numbers as TSR record keeping was actually that bad. TSR being the same company who did not know they were selling the Planescape boxed set at a loss.

2E sales were also something like 280k in the 1st year (3.0 300k 1st month), that is according to Dancey in one of his I am so great interviews from around a decade ago but 2E did last for 11 years in print and WoTC also reprinted the core books+ things like Tome of Magic and the players option books. It was more the novels, settings (sold at loss+splintering the fanbase) and Dragon Dice that killed TSR not 2E itself as such.

 

[delericho]

I do actually...

... snip lots of stuff...

Thanks for that. I had seen most of those numbers over the various places, but had always seen the 3.0e/3.5e figure combined, hence my question. So, good to see I hadn't missed anything.

 

[Zardnaar]

Thanks for that. I had seen most of those numbers over the various places, but had always seen the 3.0e/3.5e figure combined, hence my question. So, good to see I hadn't missed anything.

I'm not sure how reliable these numbers are for 3.0/3.5 as it was at a presentation at Pax East IIRC or one of those other shows in March/April 2014 right before 3E landed. Monas figures less than Danceys and some other numbers floating around. Sharon Appelcines book IIRC also deals with some of the TSR era details.

What we do know though is the revenue for Paizo, the size of the D&D market pre and post 4E and even if some of those figures are ball park figures they actually kind of support the numbers as well which is why I am inclined to think the numbers are somewhat accurate.

For example if 5E has outsold 3.0 bit not 3.0 and 3.5 which Mearls clarified Dancey did say D&D was a 25-30 million a year business. Recent figures from ICV2 indicates the RPG market went from 13 million in 2013 to 30+ million in 2015.

We also know what Paizos revenue was on in 2009-2012 and when Pathfinder outsold 4th ed. Paizo at their peak (2012) was around half of what D&D is likely on in 2016 and PF sold around half of what 3.0 sold (by 2014). If Mearls is telling the truth (and it seems he is with the size of the RPG market growing like that and the reasonable explanation is its D&D 5E) and if the primary 5E seller is the PHB which Amazon indicates (PHB vs everything else 5E) it is half a million PHB being sold over 2 years with very little 5E product being available Mearls statement is believable IMHO.

If D&D is very close to its historical average Dancey provided and the RPG market size bears out + other evidence available (6 print runs, ICV2 rankings, amazon rankings, gamer rankings, a lack of edition wars, gamestores anecdotes, player anecdotes etc, OP).

If it had beaten 2E or 1E I am sure Mearls would have mentioned that and he clarified it had beaten 3.0 and 3.5 individually not collectively (5 editions beat 3.5 though its not hard).

So yeah I think Mistwell is essentially correct, no one can really say exactly how much 5E has sold but 300k minimum would be one answer and if Mona's number is correct+ RPG market growth 500k+ is more than believable since 5E has done something like $40+ million in sales.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No, you have it backwards.

If more complex classes are more powerful than less complex ones then players with greater system mastery get a double benefit over new players - firstly simply because they have greater system mastery, and secondly because they can use the more complex classes.

lol ok. You meant to say that. I can buy that. But you didn't. You said the other thing. What you said assumed that what I was as asking for was for more complex classes to be more powerful, which was not the case.

And with that that we have reached the point where this isn't anything but nitpicking on a tangent, and I've run out of cares. They're all gone.
Have fun!

 

[delericho]

lol ok. You meant to say that. I can buy that. But you didn't. You said the other thing. What you said assumed that what I was as asking for was for more complex classes to be more powerful, which was not the case.

Except for where you said "And if it were, needing higher system mastery to make the thing should mean that doing so is rewarded, not punished."?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Except for where you said "And if it were, needing higher system mastery to make the thing should mean that doing so is rewarded, not punished."?

Look, if you didn't read the whole post, that's on you. I was super clear in that post that the reward I was talking about was not a higher power level. If you only read part of a thing, and then respond to it with false assumptions, that is entirely and exclusively on you.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do actually, Dancey over on the GitP forums. I will have to do some digging but he posted figures there that IIRC were this.

1E 1.5 Million
Red Box 1 million + (no one actually knows, I have seen 1-3 million thrown around but but most estimates are 1-1.5 million)

With a product at the peak of it's fad, being sold to all sorts of retailers, the publisher knows what it sold to wholesalers, but who knows how many copies languished in warehouses or on retailer shelves after the fad...

Now 3E is an interesting one as once again how do you count it?

Sure, 3e includes a early mid-edition re-boot and a lot of supplements. 2e also had a mid-edition re-boot, it just didn't change a lot beyond the cover, and tons and tons of supplements. They're really pretty comparable, that way. If you want to break down 3e and selectively look at part of it, you'd have to find a comparable breakdown of 2e to compare it to.

So if you have 2e (full run) and 3e (full run, broken down), the valid comparison is full run to full run - even if it's not entirely a fair comparison, since 2e had the longer run.

3E 1 million+ (includes 3.0 and 3.5)
2E 750k

So, clearly, 3e outsold 2e, as WotC was claiming at the time. Thanks for that.