WotC 2020 Was The Best Year Ever For Dungeons & Dragons

[darjr]

If the argument is that WotC needs to cater to new players, well that’s obvious. If the argument is that they are abandoning nostalgia and old content for the sake of new players, I’d say your proof isn’t proof.

Especially considering who is making the new WotC content.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The Lost Cavwrns of Tsjocanth (oh, look...Tasha), the Forgotten Temple of Tharizfun, D1-3, Q1, Night Below, City of Skulls...

Night below for sure. Also Gates of Firestorm Peak. And as I mentioned earlier, UK1 and 2.

There are a lot of TSR era adventures that are good they could use still.

 

[Sacrosanct]

When did CR become a phenomenon? Can you give me an exact date?

The CNBC article goes into it: How Critical Role helped spark a Dungeons & Dragons renaissance.

It as this neat infographic

View attachment 137319

By that, it looks like in 2017 DnD is having a very nice spike, but it isn't that far beyond where it was prior until the end of that year. And that was coming of 2016 where the first season of STRANGER THINGS came out and CR started to build steam
But it's not until 2018 that things really spike and keep going up

Both for DnD and CR as the second campaign really boosted the presence, with billboard ads and the extra accessibility of being able to start watching without needing to watch 400 hours of content
That's the year everything changes. That's when they decided to do EXPLORER'S GUIDE TO WILDEMOUNT. And probably move away from nostalgia based products to a product line aimed at the newcomers

I'm not a statistician, but I did stay at a holiday inn once (and got an A in my college stats class)

That's not what a spike is. The only thing that is a spike in that graph is a small spike in 2008. The rest is a pretty smooth upward trend, as far as these types of graphs go.

And there are a million factors that could explain why people are googling DnD more often Access to internet, an edition change, ongoing public playtest, success of 5e in general, the move to digital as technology improves, More players in general, etc.

I'm afraid that doesn't prove what you're arguing.

 

[Mistwell]

Polearms are an old, OLD meme.

Yes, I know.

The AD&D 2e PHB had eighteen varieties of polearm in it, covering a wide array of weights, damage types, speed factors, and damage dice. It including compelling iconic options like the glaive-guisarme, the guisarme-volge, the hook fauchard, the lucern hammer, the partisan, the ranseur, and the spetum.

Yes, I know. It was a 1e thing actually.

No one used any of them.

Yes, they did. People used a lot of them, and enjoyed all the options. Lots of really cool Ral Partha figures (and other companies) came out of those polearm options being in the book.

Swords were cooler, better, and you never found a magic fauchard-fork anyway. But the amount of page space given to a laundry list of polearms in the PHB and supplements like the Arms & Equipment Guide took on legendary status.

It took very little page space. It was mostly just artwork.

I'll ask again, since you completely failed to address the question I asked but instead didactically mansplained about AD&D polearms. What exactly would be so wrong about more polearm options? I really don't see how "sickle" is more important than "pike."

 

[Kurotowa]

I'll ask again, since you completely failed to address the question I asked but instead didactically mansplained about AD&D polearms. What exactly would be so wrong about more polearm options? I really don't see how "sickle" is more important than "pike."

I don't know you, I don't know your gaming history, and my personal experience was that I don't know anyone who treated the AD&D polearm lists as anything but a joke. But if you want a serious answer... the only justification (thin as it was) for that many polearms is that there were enough variables to cover them; weapon speed, if it can be set versus a charge, and different damage profiles for S-M and L targets. None of those exist in 5e, which means there's no way to justify having a longer list. If you want a scythe, it's a slashing damage polearm so you just use glaive stats, done and done.

 

[Sacrosanct]

In 1e, IME, everyone just chose a halberd. Just like everyone who could, chose a longsword. I didn't see anyone choose a spectrum, or lucern hammer.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't know you, I don't know your gaming history, and my personal experience was that I don't know anyone who treated the AD&D polearm lists as anything but a joke. But if you want a serious answer... the only justification (thin as it was) for that many polearms is that there were enough variables to cover them; weapon speed, if it can be set versus a charge, and different damage profiles for S-M and L targets. None of those exist in 5e, which means there's no way to justify having a longer list. If you want a scythe, it's a slashing damage polearm so you just use glaive stats, done and done.

I never said, "we should have as many polearms as existed in 1e and 2e" I asked what's wrong with some more polearm options? There are not that many of them. There are a lot more useless options for weapons already in the PHB. You could double the number of polearm options and still have fewer options for the polearm-focused feat than any other weapon-type-focused feat in the game.

 

[Reynard]

In 1e, IME, everyone just chose a halberd. Just like everyone who could, chose a longsword. I didn't see anyone choose a spectrum, or lucern hammer.

That's probably because the table didn't implement the full range of combat rules that made such choices meaningful.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Just as if I assumed all Gen Xers were the same [insert favorite stereotype here].

Gen X: So overlooked that Oofta can't even come up with a stereotype for them!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

So you want WOTC to start running Adventure League in nursing homes and Senior centers to get more older people to play?

My dad, aged 76, is a regular player I DM for. If he lived in the same city as I did, and there was no pandemic, I would be thrilled to run a game for him and his friends.

Just like you get a different vibe playing D&D with kids who grew up with Adventure Time and Minecraft, playing D&D with people who grew up with the Appendix N books, even if they didn't play D&D at the time, has a distinctly different tone. And, of course, life experience colors how each generation plays. (My dad, a Vietnam vet, does not view war and combat as the grand adventure younger players often do, for instance, but something to be avoided and mourned.)