D&D General Did 5e 2024 Not meet the economic goals set, and if not, why not?
- Thread starter GreyLord
- Start date
Benjamin Olson
Hero
They shouldn't replace options with completely different options. Leave the option out, don't confuse everything by declaring up to be down.
And, even were we to imagine that a 2014 monster making 5d8 hit points of creatures fall asleep for a minute in a 2024 game would be such a catastrophe that it is worth the confusion to someone grappling with the new rule set, your logic of it only works in a world where the old system magically disappears when the new is introduced, or people play strictly out of physical books. But they didn't even give it a clear separate edition name and google exists. Not only does original sauce 5e Sleep come up first when I google "5e Sleep" it's also the first couple hits when I search "D&D Sleep". All they have done is sow confusion.
Adding to anecdotes and vibes … from 4 groups I’m involved with - DM of the first 3.
1) 5 players in 3.5e on email, 1 is a game producer (including console RPG credits). 3 have played 5e or BG3, 2 have even mentioned 5e24 exists, 0 interested in it.
2) 5 players in 3.5e on email, 1 has done a corporate job in gaming. 4 have played 5e or BG3, 0 have even mentioned 5e24 exists, 0 interested in it.
3) 7 players in 3.5e in person for one-shot on July 5th. Game was my adaption of the “Fast-Play Game”, a variant of 2e in 1998. 1 is also a player in #2 (who has played BG3), 1 (his 21 yo son) has DM’d 5e2014 but had never been a player, 1 played AD&D in the 1980’s, and the other 4 had never played. The two youngest (17 and 19) had never played but were aware of the game from YouTube actual play. The 19 year old has seen many videos from different groups, but this was the first time anyone asked her to play. Only the 21 yo - who just graduated from college and is working on an indie computer game - talked about 5e2024 with me (we talked a lot of gaming), and unsurprisingly no one suggested playing it.
4) I’m one of 5 players in an online 5e2014 game that converted to 5e2024. We switched because the DM wanted to. So far as I know, none of us has bought the physical books. The DM required us to buy the 5e2024 PHB on D&D Beyond and convert our characters there. I think most of the players including me don’t really know/care what the difference is, except for the tax form like “fun” of having to redo their own 9th level PC with the command to make it as close as possible.
So what’s my point …in my gaming world, only 1 person - the DM in #4 - cares about 5e2024.
But here on ENworld, yeah, the online enthusiasts care.
1) 5 players in 3.5e on email, 1 is a game producer (including console RPG credits). 3 have played 5e or BG3, 2 have even mentioned 5e24 exists, 0 interested in it.
2) 5 players in 3.5e on email, 1 has done a corporate job in gaming. 4 have played 5e or BG3, 0 have even mentioned 5e24 exists, 0 interested in it.
3) 7 players in 3.5e in person for one-shot on July 5th. Game was my adaption of the “Fast-Play Game”, a variant of 2e in 1998. 1 is also a player in #2 (who has played BG3), 1 (his 21 yo son) has DM’d 5e2014 but had never been a player, 1 played AD&D in the 1980’s, and the other 4 had never played. The two youngest (17 and 19) had never played but were aware of the game from YouTube actual play. The 19 year old has seen many videos from different groups, but this was the first time anyone asked her to play. Only the 21 yo - who just graduated from college and is working on an indie computer game - talked about 5e2024 with me (we talked a lot of gaming), and unsurprisingly no one suggested playing it.
4) I’m one of 5 players in an online 5e2014 game that converted to 5e2024. We switched because the DM wanted to. So far as I know, none of us has bought the physical books. The DM required us to buy the 5e2024 PHB on D&D Beyond and convert our characters there. I think most of the players including me don’t really know/care what the difference is, except for the tax form like “fun” of having to redo their own 9th level PC with the command to make it as close as possible.
So what’s my point …in my gaming world, only 1 person - the DM in #4 - cares about 5e2024.
But here on ENworld, yeah, the online enthusiasts care.
IIRC @mearls said that he (they? I'm sure it was a few people that made the case) had to make a strong case that there should be a 5th edition of DnD. I forget where he said as such, I'd have liked to have seen the ?presentation? they'd made for it
Honestly the biggest surprise to me here is that someone is basing their investments off of DnD's performance, with regards to Hasbro's value. WotC is its lions' share of value, yeah, but MtG is what makes WotC's money. I'm sure hoping to get more value out of the DnD brand is a factor, but funny enough I don't think new rulebooks are what determines that... it's probably things like WotC's new "franchise-model" that'll determine the value of DnD to the company.
bedir than
Full Moon Storyteller
They could have shared their books with you and saved you money
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Yeah. That actually seems kinda harsh to me.
Mercurius
Legend
I paused when I read the weird "checking political orientation before taking video maker seriously" aside - as if any take on D&D has to automatically be filtered through cultural or political ideology. But, moving on...
My purely speculative take: D&D was already on a bit of a(n inevitable) downturn after the crazy peak of 2021-23ish. That, coupled with the distinct possibility that the new younger base just doesn't care as much about new editions or books (see below), and for older players the OGL kerfuffle and ongoing stories about corporate BS was a turn-off. Plus there are so many other options now. I think also the fact that it wasn't actually a new edition made the event less exciting. So it didn't quite grab the newbies as "must have" and old-timers have been there, done that with new editions, and this wasn't even a new edition.
Now I'm not saying it is like the 1991 X-Men #1, which was the largest print run in comics history and while it was a few more years before the market crashed, it represented a high peak after which everything went down hill (as far as sales are concerned). But I wouldn't be surprised if they printed a lot more than they sold, and that sales are at least somewhat disappointing to the bigwigs at Hasbro.
The "see below" anecdote: I work with teenagers, quite a few of whom play D&D. The ones I spoke with didn't know about the new books and didn't seem anxious to go out and buy them when I told them about it. My takeaway is that a lot of the "new D&D boomers" who started up over the last decade are pretty casual and approach the game quite differently than 35-60ish year olds who have been playing for decades. They just like to play D&D and most don't care about other stuff. For them, it is one activity among many, so the days of new waves of RPG diehards might be over. Not saying that no new players will become diehards, but it might be a generational difference. Under 25s live in a very complex tech, media, and entertainment environment. Older folks do too, but the older you get, the more time you had in the good old boring days of "There's nothing on TV, nothing to do, so I might as well do something imaginative/creative."
Meaning, the percentage of new players that form a deep bond with D&D is probably a lot smaller than it is with at least those of us who stuck around over the past several decades. I mean, lots of people peeled off from D&D after the 80s boom, so I'm not sure why now won't be different. It is the way of things. The best WotC can hope for, in my opinion, is to create a vibrant core game that keeps the "birds in hand" as much as possible, and is easy enough to get into to keep a influx of new players. But turning the supposed 50 million players of a few years ago into a new base was a pipe-dream.
My purely speculative take: D&D was already on a bit of a(n inevitable) downturn after the crazy peak of 2021-23ish. That, coupled with the distinct possibility that the new younger base just doesn't care as much about new editions or books (see below), and for older players the OGL kerfuffle and ongoing stories about corporate BS was a turn-off. Plus there are so many other options now. I think also the fact that it wasn't actually a new edition made the event less exciting. So it didn't quite grab the newbies as "must have" and old-timers have been there, done that with new editions, and this wasn't even a new edition.
Now I'm not saying it is like the 1991 X-Men #1, which was the largest print run in comics history and while it was a few more years before the market crashed, it represented a high peak after which everything went down hill (as far as sales are concerned). But I wouldn't be surprised if they printed a lot more than they sold, and that sales are at least somewhat disappointing to the bigwigs at Hasbro.
The "see below" anecdote: I work with teenagers, quite a few of whom play D&D. The ones I spoke with didn't know about the new books and didn't seem anxious to go out and buy them when I told them about it. My takeaway is that a lot of the "new D&D boomers" who started up over the last decade are pretty casual and approach the game quite differently than 35-60ish year olds who have been playing for decades. They just like to play D&D and most don't care about other stuff. For them, it is one activity among many, so the days of new waves of RPG diehards might be over. Not saying that no new players will become diehards, but it might be a generational difference. Under 25s live in a very complex tech, media, and entertainment environment. Older folks do too, but the older you get, the more time you had in the good old boring days of "There's nothing on TV, nothing to do, so I might as well do something imaginative/creative."
Meaning, the percentage of new players that form a deep bond with D&D is probably a lot smaller than it is with at least those of us who stuck around over the past several decades. I mean, lots of people peeled off from D&D after the 80s boom, so I'm not sure why now won't be different. It is the way of things. The best WotC can hope for, in my opinion, is to create a vibrant core game that keeps the "birds in hand" as much as possible, and is easy enough to get into to keep a influx of new players. But turning the supposed 50 million players of a few years ago into a new base was a pipe-dream.
Last edited:
Cordwainer Fish
Imp. Int. Scout Svc. (Dishon. Ret.)
Amphytrion
Explorer
I dislike most of the changes, and therefore my groups are not converting. Anecdotally, no one in any of the 3 games I DM has inquired about converting, and as far as I can tell, they don’t care. Of course, my groups are just a few data points. Some speculation about larger trends below:
I think one factor behind the seemingly unimpressive rollout is that 2014 5e was a very, very large umbrella, the kind brands are lucky to have. Between the original core books, the pre-Tasha’s books, the post-Tasha’s modifications, the third party settings, and everything else, the game supported a lot of different styles. The new 2024 books really embrace the the post-Tasha’s design philosophy, which they probably have to, but in this sense putting out a new PHB was always going to be an ungrateful task.
Then, there is the issue that new Core Books don’t add much for the DM—probably the one player who could push the rest of the group towards adopting the 2024 rules. The whole revision was extremely player focused even in the UAs.
Lastly, I think there is a dissonance with how the core books’ game design developed (with an almost exclusive focus on more powerful and complex combat options) vs the shift towards a more narrative and story-based game in streams, adventures, etc. WotC spent a lot of time getting feedback on d4 extra damage when more narrative play is supplanting combat-heavy adventures in the core demographic—or at least that’s my impression.
I think one factor behind the seemingly unimpressive rollout is that 2014 5e was a very, very large umbrella, the kind brands are lucky to have. Between the original core books, the pre-Tasha’s books, the post-Tasha’s modifications, the third party settings, and everything else, the game supported a lot of different styles. The new 2024 books really embrace the the post-Tasha’s design philosophy, which they probably have to, but in this sense putting out a new PHB was always going to be an ungrateful task.
Then, there is the issue that new Core Books don’t add much for the DM—probably the one player who could push the rest of the group towards adopting the 2024 rules. The whole revision was extremely player focused even in the UAs.
Lastly, I think there is a dissonance with how the core books’ game design developed (with an almost exclusive focus on more powerful and complex combat options) vs the shift towards a more narrative and story-based game in streams, adventures, etc. WotC spent a lot of time getting feedback on d4 extra damage when more narrative play is supplanting combat-heavy adventures in the core demographic—or at least that’s my impression.
Similar Threads
D&D 5E (2024)
Why No Monster Creation Rules in D&D 2024?
