D&D General The Sales of D&D vs. AD&D vs. AD&D 2nd Edition

The 2nd edition of AD&D sold well when it was released. Combined, the Dungeon Master’s Guide and Player’s Handbook sold over 400,000 copies in their first year. That’s a lot of books. Not the most ever sold by TSR, but a lot. To give some historical comparison, the 1981 D&D Basic Rules Set sold over 650,000 copies in its first year. To compare to previous editions of AD&D, the 1st edition DMG and PHB together sold over 146,000 copies in 1979. Putting those numbers together makes AD&D 2nd edition look like a solid hit. But it hides a deeper problem.

---

Benjamin Riggs shares some D&D history! This was posted on Facebook and shared with permission.

---

AD&D 2nd edition didn’t have the legs that AD&D 1st edition did. Combined sales of the 1st edition DMG and PHB actually went up at first, selling over 390,000 in 1980, over 577,000 in 1981, over 452,000 in 1982, and 533,000 in 1983 before finally sliding to just over 234,000 in 1984, at the time when TSR began its first crisis. Meanwhile, the 2nd edition DMG and PHB would never sell more than 200,000 copies in a single year after 1989. In short, 2nd edition wasn’t selling like its predecessor.

But if AD&D 2nd edition looks small in comparison to1st edition, both shrink before the altar of Dungeons & Dragons. Including 1st, 2nd edition, revised 2nd edition, and introductory sets, AD&D sold a total of 4,624,111 corebooks between 1979 and 1998. Meanwhile, D&D sold 5,454,859 units in that same period, the vast bulk of those purchases coming between 1979 and 1983.

TSR could no longer put up the sales numbers it once did. Even D&D, which sold better than AD&D in either iteration, didn’t sell in the 90’s like it did in the 80’s. What had changed? Something changed, but what was it? Was it that Gary Gygax was gone? Had something gone wrong with 2nd edition? Was a rule changed that shouldn’t have been? Was it too complex? Not complex enough? Had RPGs been a fad that faded? Should the AD&D lines be canceled entirely to focus on the historically better-selling D&D?

These numbers should have been an occasion for self-reflection and correction all over TSR.

But they weren’t.

These numbers were left in the offices of upper management. Zeb Cook himself said he never saw any concrete sales numbers for 2nd edition. The decision by management under Lorraine Williams to keep sales numbers like those above restricted to the top of the company must be seen as a mistake. The inability of the game designers to know how their product was selling cut them off from economic feedback on their product. I see those numbers, and what I read is that TSR’s audience bought the 2nd edition books, read them, and just weren’t crazy about them. (Although I myself am quite partial to the rules, as they are what I grew up playing.) But Zeb Cook didn’t know that, so how could he make changes to improve his craft in the future?

Benjamin went on to note his source: "I have a source who sent me a few pages of sales data from TSR. It's primary source material. I don't have everything, but I do have the data contained in the post above." He is currently writing a book on the sale of TSR to Wizards of the Coast.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

I wonder which edition has sold the most per year during its main production run of dmgs and phbs scaled to total population of ttrpg'rs (including all ttrpg'rs even the non d&d people)

 

[Mistwell]

cf.

" So, there were people that just played B/X (or BECMI, or "D&D") ... Instead, a lot of those massive sales came down to two categories: "

¯\(ツ)/¯

EDIT- to be clear, if you go by sales figures alone, you would think that everyone and their mom was playing B/X, which wasn't the case. This isn't about the quality of the rule set; I'm personally quite fond of the Moldvay/Cook B/X.

Your evidence for this is...reasons?

The internet is full of anecdotal evidence that massive numbers of people played the heck out of those B/X editions. And support adventures for those editions sold well too (so clearly someone was playing them and not just letting them sit in their closets). Now anecdotal evidence isn't good evidence, even in these large quantities, except when compared to...total speculation based on the anecdotal evidence of the few guys you know?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Salthorae]

I am also continually astounded of how WotC has chucked its Known World (Mystara) IP into the dustbin. Mystara wasn't even listed in the recent survey! This Known World was the world which ~5 million D&D customers were raised on. The hex map images of Threshold and the D&D Continent are iconic.

A few years back (at the start of 5E), Bruce Heard, former TSR D&D Brand Manager, and chief designer of the Known World, begged WotC to let him revive Mystara as a setting for 5E. He offered every means: to consult for WotC, to buy a license himself, etc. He was totally snubbed. And he vowed to never work with WotC corporatists again.

Probably because an entire generation of people have been born on the planet since the last officially published Mystara content, and doing that would probably pull away $ and focus from the projects they already have in the works.

"Snubbed" and "WotC corporatists" make it sound like an evil conspiracy to never let Mystara see official print again and are very evocative language.

The real scenario is likely much more banal and involves a bunch of calls and emails that say "we should do this", and WotC saying "no thanks, we already have a roadmap that is 5 years out and it doesn't include Mystara"

 

[Tony Vargas]

TSR could no longer put up the sales numbers it once did. Even D&D, which sold better than AD&D in either iteration, didn’t sell in the 90’s like it did in the 80’s. What had changed? Something changed, but what was it? Was it that Gary Gygax was gone? Had something gone wrong with 2nd edition? Was a rule changed that shouldn’t have been? Was it too complex? Not complex enough? Had RPGs been a fad that faded?

Yes, D&D had enjoyed a fad period, fueled by the usual effervescent, ephemeral, confluence of pop culture factors that make a property hot for a while, seem unstoppable, then flop - quite possibly retaining a cult following that never gives up on it, maybe to stage a come back some day.

I mean, that's just like "in 1492 Columbus sailed from Europe to America. How did he do it? Was it witchcraft? Divine providence? Did Aliens transport him to the Bermuda Triangle? Or could the world have been round?"

Yeah, the world was round.

Now, the broader RPG hobby, never really rose to the level of fad, and it's questionable if the broader hobby has ever remotely mainstreamed, at least in TT. LARPs got some mainstream exposure for a while, especially with Vampire in the 90s, and LARPers stuck their heads up in pop culture more in the oughts than TTRPGers did. And, of course, CRPGS, and, especially MMOs are well known to the mainstream.

So, a few things-

1. Of course the first year sales of 2e were the highest, never to be replicated. Most people playing AD&D at the time they came out purchased the new books! It was a big deal!

Also, the demise of 2e was largely on TSR business missteps, not any sort of fan dislike of the system. And, there were other things crowding D&D in the 90s. Storyteller pulled in new players (older, and less exclusively male than the traditional D&D audience of junior-high boys) from the LARP side, and waged an early version of edition warring against AD&D on UseNet: the infamous ROLE vs ROLL 'debate,' with 2e (mostly wrongly, really) defamed as "ROLL-playing." And, of course, CCGs exploded on the scene with a fad of their own, sucking away time, $$s, buzz, table space (and even floor space!) at conventions, and, of course, the afore-mentioned usual target audience.

2. B/X, on the other hand. So, there were people that just played B/X (or BECMI, or "D&D"), but they were not that common, ESPECIALLY in the U.S.

I think it's important to remember that the Basic set was the on-ramp to 0D&D, AD&D, and X/ECMI, and that the sales figure sited for "D&D" is presumably picking up & double-counting everyone who took the Basic Set->AD&D path.

Instead, a lot of those massive sales came down to two categories:
a. Well-meaning parents, grandparents, or friends who got the Red Box at JC Penny or B. Dalton or KB Toys and gifted it to someone, only for it to end up in a closet somewhere.

I'm sure some of those gifts were appreciated, and played, too, but:
a.i: Appreciated and played it but lost interest.
a.ii: Played then 'graduated' to 0D&D
a.iii: Played then graduated to AD&D
a.iv: Played then graduated to the next box in the series.

b. People who purchased the basic set to start with, or in addition to, the AD&D core rulebooks.

b.i. People who played AD&D, but eventually picked up copies of 0D&D, either boxed sets or individual supplements, out of historical-perspective curiosity or collector impulse,
b.ii: People who played AD&D, and, because there were so few AD&D books, at most 1/year, at the height of the fad, also bought other D&D supplements, either hoping to glean something, or because the trade-dress didn't heavily differentiate them.

I think you are missing
c. People who did play B/X, but casually like a board game a couple times a year. Like in a cabin for vacation, or over holiday breaks.
And
d. People who played B/X a whole lot, without playing AD&D, because it was a different style game they really liked.

d.i: and never played AD&D
d.ii: and tried AD&D but rejected it.
d.iii: and also played AD&D a whole lot
d.iv: but eventually moved on to AD&D


There's a lot of ways to explain the comparison of total books for 0D&D, B/X, BECMI, and the Rules Cyclopaedia, as 'D&D' and 1e & 2e as 'AD&D.' But, I think, what's interesting is that choice of statistics.

AD&D sold a total of 4,624,111 corebooks between 1979 and 1998. Meanwhile, D&D sold 5,454,859 units in that same period, the vast bulk of those purchases coming between 1979 and 1983.

Core Books, which excludes modules and supplements, and, maybe even MM, going by the opening cite of Players Handbook & DMG figures, to 'units' (of course, Core books were an AD&D thing, there was no 0D&D or BECMI PH or DMG)
That is, not comparing, say, AD&D Player's Handbooks sales to Expert Set Sales (which'd be very comparable products, in that both are meant to follow the Basic Set). Or simply 'units' (all books, sets, modules &c) to 'units' (likewise)... Or compare OD&D core (3-book box) to AD&D core to B/X...

...or, compare 0D&D to AD&D to Red Box to 2e... which, I expect, would have very clearly illustrated that fad cycle.

 

[Doug McCrae]

D&D was in the pop culture in the early 80s in a way I don't think it has been at any other time. D&D cartoon, brief appearance in ET The Extraterrestrial, the "Satanic Panic", ads in Marvel comics. And you could buy it in department stores.

 

[Sunsword]

D&D was in the pop culture in the early 80s in a way I don't think it has been at any other time. D&D cartoon, brief appearance in ET The Extraterrestrial, the "Satanic Panic", cartoon ads in Marvel comics. And you could buy it in department stores.

And it had a line of action figures.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Haffrung]

It's worth noting that before character gen and optimization became a core part of the player expectations, you could happily run D&D for 20 years using the same core books.

 

[Von Ether]

TSR could no longer put up the sales numbers it once did. Even D&D, which sold better than AD&D in either iteration, didn’t sell in the 90’s like it did in the 80’s.

I thought Basic D&D was discontinued because its sales had withered away to nothing.

Or is this another example of TSR leadership making a series of bad calls in the 90s. (I recently saw a Bruce Cordell interview on Cypher Unlimited where he recounts that he was hired by TSR to do code for a D&D game, but then told the Interwebs was a fad and then transferred to the main writing team.)