D&D 5E Is 5E "big enough" for a Basic/Advanced split?

[darjr]

That's a solid booklet: 20% more Class options than the Basic PDF, too!

I’ve often wondered why someone hasn’t made an Expert set or an Essentials Expert set.

 

[Parmandur]

I’ve often wondered why someone hasn’t made an Expert set or an Essentials Expert set.

Based on some survey questions from QotC over the years, I think they've thought about it. I qouldnbe surprised if Target sought a third box set, based on how I see the current two move at my local Targets. Maybe something like a combo of the Expert Set, with the FR Grey Box from 1E would be cool.

 

[GreyLord]

I’ve often wondered why someone hasn’t made an Expert set or an Essentials Expert set.

Well, the Essentials set really does set up a good enough start and introduction that one needs to get the Players Handbook.

I think you'd be stretching to add on more than what's already there without cutting into PHB sales.

If they were to bring in another box the maximum level I'd think would be plausible (or that I'd probably support without straight up saying they should just rely on the PHB sales) is 10th level and perhaps one new class (Monk? or maybe Ranger or Warlock or Sorcerer?).

Overall, I think the Essentials Kit does what it was intended already without the need for more.

 

[CleverNickName]

If they actually wanted people to use it they would print it.

Meh. Printing is so twentieth century...

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, that's just not a good publishing strategy: that was TSR shooting themselves in the foot.

Not really. Both lines were very successful until Willaims decided to run the company into the ground with her vanity Buck Rogers game (as well as getting absolutely destroyed in the Card Wars). TSR published a lot of games over the years, some successful and some not, but was undeniably a successful game company for a long time. There's a reason why people still play B/X and BECMI, and it isn't because it/they was some shallow, lesser version of AD&D.

 

[Parmandur]

Not really. Both lines were very successful until Willaims decided to run the company into the ground with her vanity Buck Rogers game (as well as getting absolutely destroyed in the Card Wars). TSR published a lot of games over the years, some successful and some not, but was undeniably a successful game company for a long time. There's a reason why people still play B/X and BECMI, and it isn't because it/they was some shallow, lesser version of AD&D.

D&D was successful in spite of the Basic/Advanced silliness, not because of it.

 

[Reynard]

D&D was successful in spite of the Basic/Advanced silliness, not because of it.

Do you have a source for that? Nothing I have ever read on the subject has suggested BECMI vs AD&D was key to the downfall of TSR. The most often cited issues were the ones I mentioned: Williams and CCGs (with a side of AD&D 2E setting and supplement bloat).

 

[Parmandur]

Do you have a source for that? Nothing I have ever read on the subject has suggested BECMI vs AD&D was key to the downfall of TSR. The most often cited issues were the ones I mentioned: Williams and CCGs (with a side of AD&D 2E setting and supplement bloat).

I didn't say that it was key to anything, but that it limited D&D's potential y dividing and confusing the audience is clear from the fact that nobody wants to repeat the error, which WotC says is because the "Basic/Advanced" split was found to confuse and turn people off when they tested it.

 

[Parmandur]

A bit of a wild round table, but IIRC Mearls went into the history of how they planned to try "Basic/Advanced" for 5E before discovering it was a terrible idea after agreeing with Matt Coleville that B/X could have been an Evergreen forever product if TSR didn't drop the ball:

 

[S'mon]

You can get a print copy of 5e Basic here - Lulu

I'd add in the SRD magic items and maybe more monsters, otherwise it has everything you need for a full campaign.