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

[hawkeyefan]

First, more frequent than what? The nothing put out so far? Yes. More than 1 book a year? No. Second, I have not said that I would not be enticed back by one source book. I said it would depend on how much longer they make me wait, and how much is in the book.

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 is a place in the Forgotten Realms, so it's very clearly setting specific. Volo's is also setting specific, but probably more easily used elsewhere since it consists of monsters. It really depends on how much setting content is in it.

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.

No. 1 book a year is not a hefty expectation. They were putting out 30 books a year during 3e. Adding 1 book a year to 5e raises the number to about 7-8 annually.

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.

 

[MoonSong]

You're still not even trying. Instead of dilly dallying with people on the forums who you will
A: never get to agree with you
And
B: you will never agree with.

Identify one thing that's missing from you're game.
Make it.
Play test it while you play.
Address issues.
Done.
Seriously, add the minutes you spend thinking about, writing, reading, responding here. Along with the time spent thinking about posts when you're not on the forums... you have time to make one thing you want. It's a start.

But as a player, this stuff is not your call. I have like half a dozen sorcerer subclasses in my hard drive. My chances of playing any of them are nihil regardless.

3.x was, in my experience, fixed by the changes in 5E. I would sooner pick up some used 1E books than try the retrograde rules of Pathfinder. Now, what we have here is two anecdotes; what the market is interested in is another thing entirely.

Pathfinder is not my cup of tea either, there is some good stuff and some ideas simplified gameplay. Yet I don't like a lot of their design choices, for example with bards, and a few of the new mechanics bring out complications that aren't worth it, like with traits. Some of them are flavorful, but they are too specific and choosing them is too much effort for a situational +1. And lets not get into mythic stuff.... Still my first choice would be 3.5 for all its flaws it just doesn't break with the way I play it.

 

[Willie the Duck]

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.

Point of order--increasing from 3 releases a year to 4 is a 33% increase in production.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[BryonD]

3.x was, in my experience, fixed by the changes in 5E. I would sooner pick up some used 1E books than try the retrograde rules of Pathfinder. Now, what we have here is two anecdotes; what the market is interested in is another thing entirely.

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.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Point of order--increasing from 3 releases a year to 4 is a 33% increase in production.

Whooops my bad. Thanks for correcting that. Math am confused.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

But as a player, this stuff is not your call. I have like half a dozen sorcerer subclasses in my hard drive. My chances of playing any of them are nihil regardless.

Hey, there's always:

(1) Solo play; or
(2) Quid pro quo with another DM. Take turns DMing the game the other guy wants to play in.

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.

 

[ccs]

It's not a book I can get in a store.



I'm looking for a book. Stuff I have to print out looks crappy and gets ruined very easily, and a tablet is not a easy to use, so PDFs do me no good during a game.



Volo is Forgotten Realms specific. Elemental Evil is not a book as far as I've seen on the shelves.

You can get a Print version of EE (or at least you could). They were offering several different print options. It's WHY I ordered it through Drive Through last year. I have a full color, soft cover, version on my 5e shelf.

 

[Azzy]

Hey, you're right. What's the point of discussing anything here! This place should be shut down! Or........we can have a discussion about this without Mears & Crawford.

Wow, did offering a constructive suggestion offend you?

 

[Willie the Duck]

Whooops my bad. Thanks for correcting that. Math am confused.

You wouldn't be the first.