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

[Corwin]

Do you understand the difference between setting specific content and general content?

Can I get an example of some kind of "general content" you'd like to see brought to 5e?

 

[Corwin]

Maybe with more content the fan base would triple. You can't prove this is false.

But 3e/PF can!

 

[Maxperson]

Can I get an example of some kind of "general content" you'd like to see brought to 5e?

New classes, sub-classes, races, skills, feats, magic items, equipment, optional rules, monsters, and so on.

 

[Maxperson]

But 3e/PF can!

Not really. What those can prove is that incredible amounts of content kill games. They can't prove that releasing content at a quarter(or less) of the rate of those systems would kill 5e, and adding 1 book of general content per year still leaves 5e at a quarter(or less) of the release rate of those two games.

 

[Azzy]

Not really. What those can prove is that incredible amounts of content kill games. They can't prove that releasing content at a quarter(or less) of the rate of those systems would kill 5e, and adding 1 book of general content per year still leaves 5e at a quarter(or less) of the release rate of those two games.

Well, I assume if WotC finds that it's viable to increase production to include what you define as a "book of general content" per year in addition to the current production scheme, and that doing so will generate enough sustainable profit for the brand, then I'm sure that they'll probably do so at some point.

 

[Azzy]

New classes, sub-classes, races, skills, feats, magic items, equipment, optional rules, monsters, and so on.

So far, that sort of material is being delivered bundled with the adventures and setting material. That's clearly not optimal for those that just want that "general content", but there's likely a reason that WotC is pursuing that strategy. Perhaps it's not viable (for whatever reason) to produce adventures, setting material, and general material each as stand-alone products, and that bundling the material ensures greater sales overall than each released individually.

Unfortunately, not being a member of WotC D&D lead team, we can only speculate wildly as none of us have any factual data to draw from.

 

[pkt77242]

So far, that sort of material is being delivered bundled with the adventures and setting material. That's clearly not optimal for those that just want that "general content", but there's likely a reason that WotC is pursuing that strategy. Perhaps it's not viable (for whatever reason) to produce adventures, setting material, and general material each as stand-alone products, and that bundling the material ensures greater sales overall than each released individually.

Unfortunately, not being a member of WotC D&D lead team, we can only speculate wildly as none of us have any factual data to draw from.

I think it is to make the audience bigger for each release.

If it was a purely mechanical options book, then it is more geared towards players
if it is a purely setting release, it would be geared more towards DMs.
By combining players options and setting in a single book (SCAG) they hope to get both groups to buy.

I believe that WoTC is pursuing their release bundling to try and broaden the market for their products, while tying them to the Realms to build the "brand".

 

[hawkeyefan]

If that's an acceptable excuse to not create general content, it's also an acceptable excuse to not create rules in the first place. Every core rule is made up and we're free to do what we like with it.

The "It's made up. We're free to do what we like with it." doesn't pass the smell test.

Well we're free to do what we like with the rules, too. But my point is more that the FR is a general fantasy setting. It's imminently malleable. It has countries, regions, organizations, and NPCs that can be grabbed and dropped into most other fantasy settings. Very often as is, sometimes with a little tweaking.

So to kind of loop back to my original point...these rather strict requirements you have..."print only, purchased in a store where I can flip through" and "general content that does not have a tie to an established setting" and that such a release must be annual in addition to their other work...

All of that makes you a rather hard customer to please compared to most potential customers, don't you think? I mean, it's a shame that they would lose anyone who's already a gamer...but you've kind of put yourself in a niche situation.

 

[Hussar]

ok

Majority of who?
Maybe with more content the fan base would triple. You can't prove this is false.
It is probably true that the majority of current players are either (a) opposed to more content or (b) completely agnostic on the topic. But simply saying that the majority of people currently doing a thing like that thing the way it is doesn't really add any insight.

Well we do have three editions of rapid release that have all failed to triple the fan base so there is at least some evidence that rapid release does not equate to greater appeal.

 

[Maxperson]

Well we're free to do what we like with the rules, too. But my point is more that the FR is a general fantasy setting. It's imminently malleable. It has countries, regions, organizations, and NPCs that can be grabbed and dropped into most other fantasy settings. Very often as is, sometimes with a little tweaking.

So to kind of loop back to my original point...these rather strict requirements you have..."print only, purchased in a store where I can flip through" and "general content that does not have a tie to an established setting" and that such a release must be annual in addition to their other work...

All of that makes you a rather hard customer to please compared to most potential customers, don't you think? I mean, it's a shame that they would lose anyone who's already a gamer...but you've kind of put yourself in a niche situation.

My God! I want paper money that's green and you can buy things with. The horror! I'm so hard to please! What I am asking for isn't even remotely hard to do, and I am in fact easy to please.

For the last several posts you have repeatedly portrayed my position disingenuously and I'm done.