D&D 5E Asking for a bit of recent D&D history

[Guest 6948803]

I gave up on D&D and switched to playing other rpgs right before 3.5. I gave 4th ed hard pass (not my jam, like at all) and I came back to D&D in 2018 (after learning about Critical Role). So, I missed whole Pathfinder and first 4 (or so) years of 5e. Can anyone tell me how it started? Was there much enthusiasm in the fanbase? Did it took off quickly, or there was slow reception? If you've been there and then, did it progressed as expected, or were you surprised about direction WotC was taking?

 

[Charlaquin]

I gave up on D&D and switched to playing other rpgs right before 3.5. I gave 4th ed hard pass (not my jam, like at all) and I came back to D&D in 2018 (after learning about Critical Role). So, I missed whole Pathfinder and first 4 (or so) years of 5e. Can anyone tell me how it started? Was there much enthusiasm in the fanbase? Did it took off quickly, or there was slow reception? If you've been there and then, did it progressed as expected, or were you surprised about direction WotC was taking?

5e started with a massive public playtest. The divide between the 3e/Pathfinder fans and the 4e fans (often referred to as the edition war) was so stark, it was seriously hurting the brand, and the OSR also sprang up around that time. So, the 5e open playtest was something of a publicity stunt, and also a way to try and reassure a fractured player base that their voices would be heard in the creation of the new edition. The playtest was met with cautious optimism by fans from all sides of the edition war, and by the end of the open playtest process, it seemed a wide variety of players were quite satisfied with the results. The game was quite successful upon its final release, though not nearly as successful as it would eventually become thanks to the explosion of streaming games, especially Critical Role.

 

[Oofta]

My version?

With 4E not selling well (IMHO it was pushed out before it was ready), they tried to fix it with the Essentials books in 2010 but it was too little too late.

In 2012 they announced a new version and launched one of the biggest playtests for a TTRPG which lasted for a little over a year. The initial playtest was a fairly small subset of people but it was soon opened to the public. They gathered feedback from he playtest and adjusted the rules accordingly.

In the summer of 2014, they release the basic rules PDF followed shortly thereafter by the starter kit. The MM was released in September and the DMG in December of 2014.

From the beginning it sold quite well and quickly regained it's top sales spot from Pathfinder, which had become the best selling TTRPG for a short period of time. They continue to do playtests and surveys of new rules with their UA series.

Release of new rule books has been a relative trickle, but most continue to sell quite well on Amazon. Each year since it's release has had double digit growth. Streaming shows like Critical Role have certainly helped with the growth, but most people I play with think it's simply a better version (I used to organize a couple of game days in a major metro area).

 

[Reynard]

In 2012 they announced a new version and launched one of the biggest playtests for a TTRPG which lasted for a little over a year. The initial playtest was a fairly small subset of people but it was soon opened to the public. They gathered feedback from he playtest and adjusted the rules accordingly.

Not disputing, just curious: do we know the relative sizes of the Pathfinder and 5E playtests? Like, do we know how many participants each had?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Ok Pathfinder kicked off as soon as Paizo decided that the $e license was not an acceptable basis for doing business. I can't say that I blame them. WoTC was a bit high handed with regard to OGL players at the time. Not it took what a year or so for Pathfinder to emerge and as I did not like 3.x as that point and loved 4e, took the 4 e road and cannot comment much on Pathfinder.

Now my own personal theory (which does not have a lot of traction around here) was that 4e was not meant to rely on splat book sales as its business model. It was meant to transition the playerbase in to a subscription model based on online tools and Gleemax. This was dead on arrival for diverse reasons but mainly WoTC inexperience/naivety in managing software projects.
So splat books it was and boy did they churn them out.
It was clearly unsustainable, the playerbase was exhausted and the people that really like the splats were gone to Pathfinder anyway. So with a paired to bone staff WoTC announced D&D next the playtest for 5e. This was a massive public beta and is still the heart of how 5e evolves. Most new stuff (aside from settings) get previews on Unearthed Arcana and if it gets enough support it makes it to the light of day.

The thing is that the public playtest had drawn the attention of anyone that was interest from the get go and all could see the way things were heading in terms of mechanics and so forth before final publication.

So while I really liked 4e my players did not and had rejected it before the playtest was announced. I would not switch to Pathfinder, 5e is an excellent compromise and we have stuck to it.
So in my opinion it was a success out of the door but its continuing growth is somewhat astonishing.

 

[Oofta]

Not disputing, just curious: do we know the relative sizes of the Pathfinder and 5E playtests? Like, do we know how many participants each had?

Getting concrete numbers for either is difficult at best, hence my plausible deniability with "one of the biggest".

 

[Skayaq]

Getting concrete numbers for either is difficult at best, hence my plausible deniability with "one of the biggest".

the player's handbook credits 175.000 playtesters, no idea about pathfinder

 

[Charlaquin]

Now my own personal theory (which does not have a lot of traction around here) was that 4e was not meant to rely on splat book sales as its business model. It was meant to transition the playerbase in to a subscription model based on online tools and Gleemax. This was dead on arrival or diverse reasons but mainly WoTC inexperience/naivety in managing software projects.

I’m pretty sure this is explicitly the case. 4e was pitched to Hazbro as being designed to be used with a proprietary virtual tabletop and online tools. The tabletop was never finished though, due to the tragic suicide of the guy who had been building it.

 

[Mannahnin]

Murder/suicide, right?

Yeah, the online tools component was a huge portion. My group at the time was super enthused, and one of our players (who was pretty flush) talked about buying a whole set of laptops for us to use and play together with, so we'd all be able to see from our character's over the shoulder perspective, using all the light tools, etc.

The concept of integrating it fully with a 3D graphical VTT was a good one. Their plan to allow people to play across the country and the world, help people "get the band back together" with old friends and gaming buddies who no longer lived close to each other, etc., was a great one. It's kind of ironic that Covid has brought this more to reality, though without the 3D graphics and obviously not on a proprietary platform. That vision 13+ years ago was ahead of its time.

But we only got a fraction of the online tools we were supposed to. The Character Builder was pretty excellent, and many people preferred using it to the books. The Monster Builder was pretty darn useful for DMs. The online version of Dragon Magazine was fine. Nothing else really came through.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I’m pretty sure this is explicitly the case. 4e was pitched to Hazbro as being designed to be used with a proprietary virtual tabletop and online tools. The tabletop was never finished though, due to the tragic suicide of the guy who had been building it.

I thought that the guy that committed suicide was brought in later. That the online tools were being developed by a local small software house that sold WoTC a pig in a poke and Gleemax was also not fit for purpose.
I think the plan was ok but ambitious but WoTC could not recruit good software people for love or money.