D&D General Is DnD being mothballed?

This, also, Colville's comments would suggest that 4e or 3e marketing and production strategy were better than the current one. Did the Beastheart book sell in numbers comparable to similar WoTC books?
This is just something I've heard say online and never experienced in person since I was not exposed to US marketing at that time, but I was told that 4E marketing was absolutely terrible back in the day. My understanding was that the attempts at hyping the system was really hostile to old school fans of D&D.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

IIRC the sales numbers Ben Riggs showed from the TSR era shows that there was a brief "fad" period of D&D sales during the early part of the Basic/AD&D lines. Once the fad ended, sales began a slow and steady decline. When combined with the massive release schedule of AD&D 2e, this helps explain why TSR went bust (although there are other reasons, of course).

Moving on, I'm led to understand (if memory serves) that in a recent seminar where he discusses the fate of 4e, Riggs describes the slow and steady decline in aggregate sales of D&D as actually continuing across the WotC era up until 5e came out: 3e/3.5 sold a bit less than AD&D 2e, and 4e sold a bit less than 3e/3.X. (Not enough, I should note, to meet any reasonable standard of "failure", preposterous absurdities still espoused by edition warriors notwithstanding.) Of course, the release schedule of both 3.X and 4e was quite a bit less aggressive, so each individual product did better in terms of sales.

I'm inclined to say that 5e has come the closest to matching the kind of D&D that gamers actually want to play, which is why it has sold so well and for a whole decade, to boot (as opposed to the Basic/AD&D "fad") - Basic and AD&D were too restrictive, and 3.X/4e were too fiddly. 5e has hit a sweet spot. I daresay the developers don't want to mess with that too much.

So it's IMO not accurate to say that the release strategy is D&D withering on the vine. At the same time, the game always seems to me to be a bit "underdeveloped", as it were - (edit to add) as if it hasn't had enough time for really rigorous playtesting and development - that is to say, not enough money is being spent on developing the game (end edit). A more aggressive publication schedule would result in content being even more "half-baked" than it already is.

I would think that Colville isn't quite right, but he isn't exactly wrong, either.

Also edit to add: Apropos specifically of adventures, I believe Perkins or Crawford stated that those are timed for release such that a table playing circa four hours of D&D a week that stays reasonably "on task" to some extent can play through an entire adventure and then start the next one more or less right when it comes out. To my mind that's a very sensible publication schedule!
 
Last edited:

There are so many things that lead to 5E's success that I don't think anyone has a good breakdown. It's everything from an approachable game that doesn't focus on "crunch" to streaming to people wanting real person-to-person interaction to VTT to COVID to a general acceptance of geek culture that simply wasn't there before.

But without a solid foundation that works to get people in the door and keep them it wouldn't matter. I'm just happy I can find players.
A point I often make about game adaptation, ie, wishing people would try games other than D&D, is asking what each of us are doing to evangelize our hobby. When was the last time you spoke with enthusiasm to a non-gamer about our hobby? when was the last time you brought a totally new player to your table?

The hobby and all of us engaging with love in it need to show that love and draw more people in. Actively. Thoughtfully. RPGs are amazing. Most everyone should play.
 

I was not really arguing with that, it seems to be working. I was trying to explain their perspective.

Also, I do believe they are leaving some money on the table with the limited class / subclass releases, Matt knows this, he and others are filling that gap.

Personally I have no issue with that, I do not really care about the player facing side as much, and if 3pps get some crumbs, even better
Leaving money on the table.is a flawed concept, however, just because one person will buy something doesn't mean it is profitable in the long or even short term.
 

As there is discussion of the release pace of 3rd/3.5, as someone who was there and buying a great deal of it, I still didn't get more than 50-60% of the overall D&D print materials. 2nd ed was similar. I must have bought near a dozen boxed sets for multiple settings. No regrets except that I wasnt able to hang onto it all. Space limitations. :( I am of the camp that the release cadence could still use improvement, but we dont want 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th ed levels of product bloat.
Which is the position the majority of us here that want an increased rate have taken. Middle ground.
 

THey why dont they make more of that, even of a slow release schedule if that is the demand, why dont they make more books like that is my question, people say its "because they are good stewards who want wants best for the game" I dont think thats reality, their is a demand for more options and stuff, they do not release stuff like that, why are they opting to make less money.
Mr. FallenRX,
Do you listen to what people are saying to you. This question has been answered to the best of our knowledge several times. You can either chose to believe it or not. There is 40 years of history of doing what you suggest that has lead to diminishing sales as an edition goes one vs 10 (almost) years of history of doing it the 5e way that has produce the best sales (and most profit) ever. So, can you at least understand on a macro level (it has been incredibly successful) why they are continuing to do what has worked?
 
Last edited:

I would be curious to see how the 5e release cadence stacks up against the 1st ed of AD&D.
That’s an interesting question. Do it?
I think someone here did a breakdown years ago, IIRC it is pretty on par: a lot more books in that wra, but a lot of them were tiny modules, and if you collected those into batches similar in size to the far Advebture hardcovers...pretty similar pagecoubt?
 


I wish I could find it now, but there was a chart showing 5E sales and the upward trend wasn't significantly increased by Stranger Things or CR.
Or else a game that would have plateaued kept rising because of them. ;)

Like anything else, statistics often shows what the person wants it to show, not what is.
 

Which is the position the majority of us here that want an increased rate have taken. Middle ground.
If I had to have a number on it, I'd say I would be happy with 3-5 releases per year, with the admission that all I really want are core books (rules, monsters, ect) and Setting books that have rules potential. Adventures are usually not my bag unless they also have some rules supplementation.
 

Remove ads

Top