D&D General 2024 official book release dates...

[Henadic Theologian]

Well they specifically said they would be staggered and their would not be a collectable gift set on release. So you can think what you want, but that is the opposite of what they said they are doing.

People change their minds, I mean the leak said what it said.

 

[teitan]

No, they don't. That was a mistake.

Perhaps, I don't think it was. It has happened before and then the product came out exactly when the leak indicated.

 

[teitan]

I don't think they will count the full two years as the anniversy year, more like from late January 2024 to sometime in 2025, perhaps 50 year from where the last OG core book was published or late januarary 25 depending upon how generoys they want to be with their idea of a year.

That would put them ending the anniversary in 2030. Advanced didn't come out until 1977 with the MM, the PHB in 78 and the DMG in 1979. The OCR came out in 1974.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Perhaps, I don't think it was. It has happened before and then the product came out exactly when the leak indicated.

Yeah, but that was a leak. This was a simple cut-and-paste error. You will see.

 

[teitan]

Yeah, but that was a leak. This was a simple cut-and-paste error. You will see.

Do you have a source for that or is that your assumption because so far your objections don't have a lot of water to them? I'm not trying to be rude but you've deflected reasonable points to your claims but I haven't ever seen a retraction beyond WOTC removing the dates which, again, they've had happen in the past. They've even denied a book existed that was leaked.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Do you have a source for that or is that your assumption because so far your objections don't have a lot of water to them? I'm not trying to be rude but you've deflected reasonable points to your claims but I haven't ever seen a retraction beyond WOTC removing the dates which, again, they've had happen in the past. They've even denied a book existed that was leaked.

I mean, I've pointed out the evidence, which to me seems pretty obvious and clear. This is the events, in order: 1) They were asked if the books would come out together. They answered that it was impossible under current printer line ups given the size of their print runs. Then 2) They dud an event where they promoted upcoming books, in which they showed some art from the PHB (which included a page from the fighter) and announced the long rumored Vecna book. 3) After which, they tweeted Vecna "Coming May 2024"; 4) Then they tweeted the fighter page with the text "Core Books coming May 2024". 5) They retracted those tweets.

What do you think is more likely: 1) They cut and pasted the text from the bottom of the Vecna Tweet for the following Core book tweet and took it down when they saw the mistake; OR 2) They found a way to print 4 books (a feat they declared impossible) and plan to put them out all at once, but don't want us to know that for some "surprise" reason.

I have been selling D&D books, partnered with WotC, for 30 years. My experience tells me that the odds that TWO books dropping at the same time (Say, Vecna and the PHB) is not zero, but near it, and the odds of all 4 books IS zero. I understood the Core Books tweet to be a mistake the moment that I saw it. Well before they pulled the tweet. I was utterly unsurprised when the tweets were pulled. I'm not 100% sure that the PHB won't ship in May, but I am 99% sure that it won't and 100% sure that the DMG and MM will not.

You can choose to believe me or not. But I am not speaking from a position of ignorance, nor am I just another poster on the subject. I speak from decades of experience combined with looking at the evidence.

We shall see.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

WotC put out a post with a day and date for both Vecna and the Core rules.

I am aware. I believe that they took down the Vecna book's post (the only one of the 4 books that I think has any real chance of being out in May) because they're not sure that it will make that date either, but they will know more closer to the date. (They will HAVE to know by February) THEN they will PROPERLY officially announce it (when it's a done-deal with the printers) and we will know if it's May or June. I think the INTENTION is May, but we'll have to wait for a proper announcement.

Look, it's not a Game. They're not holding back on Dates for the Fun Of It. They're holding back to announce stuff when it's the right time and they can start to properly market it. The right time is the lead-up to its release, when they KNOW when that will be. There's a lot of spinning plates to deal with on the way there, some of which is out of their hands.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

People change their minds, I mean the leak said what it said.

It wasn't a "leak"! It was a promotional tweet! A leak is when someone outside of WotC finds out something that WotC didn't intend to share yet. This has all the earmarks of a simple paste-up mistake that got taken down because it was WRONG, not because it was a secret. There absolutely ARE reasons for secrecy in marketing, but this isn't really a case of that. (One of the main reasons for "secrecy" is to withhold information that ISN'T KNOWN.)

Question: When is Project X coming?
Marketing Answer: Project X is COMING SOON.
True Answer: Project X is coming 1) When we're done making it; 2) When we can schedule it with the manufacturers; 3) When we can get it from the manufactures to the market.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I mean, I've pointed out the evidence, which to me seems pretty obvious and clear. This is the events, in order: 1) They were asked if the books would come out together. They answered that it was impossible under current printer line ups given the size of their print runs. Then 2) They dud an event where they promoted upcoming books, in which they showed some art from the PHB (which included a page from the fighter) and announced the long rumored Vecna book. 3) After which, they tweeted Vecna "Coming May 2024"; 4) Then they tweeted the fighter page with the text "Core Books coming May 2024". 5) They retracted those tweets.

What do you think is more likely: 1) They cut and pasted the text from the bottom of the Vecna Tweet for the following Core book tweet and took it down when they saw the mistake; OR 2) They found a way to print 4 books (a feat they declared impossible) and plan to put them out all at once, but don't want us to know that for some "surprise" reason.

I have been selling D&D books, partnered with WotC, for 30 years. My experience tells me that the odds that TWO books dropping at the same time (Say, Vecna and the PHB) is not zero, but near it, and the odds of all 4 books IS zero. I understood the Core Books tweet to be a mistake the moment that I saw it. Well before they pulled the tweet. I was utterly unsurprised when the tweets were pulled. I'm not 100% sure that the PHB won't ship in May, but I am 99% sure that it won't and 100% sure that the DMG and MM will not.

You can choose to believe me or not. But I am not speaking from a position of ignorance, nor am I just another poster on the subject. I speak from decades of experience combined with looking at the evidence.

We shall see.

I'm of the opinion that they won't release all four books on the same day simply because pretty much everyone would (rightly) have a fit at the expense of it all. Beyond that, they'd basically be dooming the Vecna adventure to terrible sales simply because everyone would choose purchasing the core rulebooks over purchasing it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm of the opinion that they won't release all four books on the same day simply because pretty much everyone would (rightly) have a fit at the expense of it all. Beyond that, they'd basically be dooming the Vecna adventure to terrible sales simply because everyone would choose purchasing the core rulebooks over purchasing it.

You're absolutely right about that. That sort of Institutional Memory is something that's been lost a lot lately, so it's not impossible for a modern corporate-run publisher to make that kind of mistake, but I don't think WotC is quite that tone-deaf yet. That's definitely a "piece" of my experience that had me doubting the tweet when I first saw it, among other factors.