D&D 5E After 2 years the 5E PHB remains one of the best selling books on Amazon

[Imaro]

Of course they can. I linked to a poll earlier on the topic. This board itself was FULL of people saying they perceived Pathfinder to be D&D and 4e to be not D&D (not all the people, and not me personally, but there were a lot of those posts). More importantly, we don't need a firm answer we just need a vague one to talk about this topic. You're literally appear to be saying if we cannot put a number on something then we cannot talk about it - in a topic about how people perceive racial and gender and sexual orientation stereotypes in D&D. Is none of this ringing as slightly ironic to you? I mean, you've not put forth a single shred of evidence that this PHB paragraph and the artwork actually had any meaningful impact on sales at all, and are arguing that simultaneous with arguing people cannot talk about whether Pathfinder is perceived to be D&D or not because nobody can nail down numbers on it? That seems highly hypocritical in terms of standards.

You keep dancing around what this tangent was actually about after jumping in it to defend a viewpoint I'm not sure you fully understood at the time. I didn't state anything about the paragraph... I commented on the request for iconics and the difference between D&D vs. Pathfinder when someone specifically asks for D&D iconics... You keep bringing up perception of D&D as a whole how about yiou address the tangent first which at this point I have explained to you and you now keep avoiding.

 

[Imaro]

The question was not about TSR/WotC/Hasbro's efforts with D&D. The question was about inclusiveness in DnD which absolutely includes Pathfinder under its very large tent.

Just because you may not like it has no relevance.

No it was specifically about D&D iconics... not Pathfinder iconics....

 

[Imaro]

We don't need a firm answer we just need a vague one to talk about this topic. You're literally appear to be saying if we cannot put a number on something then we cannot talk about it - in a topic about how people perceive racial and gender and sexual orientation stereotypes in D&D. Is none of this ringing as slightly ironic to you? I mean, you've not put forth a single shred of evidence that this PHB paragraph and the artwork actually had any meaningful impact on sales at all, and are arguing that simultaneous with arguing people cannot talk about whether Pathfinder is perceived to be D&D or not because nobody can nail down numbers on it? That seems highly hypocritical in terms of standards.

How about you pick a position: 1) You need hard proof of how people perceive things, in which case given you have no hard proof the PHB paragraph and artwork had any impact on sales we shouldn't even discuss it; or 2) You don't need hard proof of how people perceive things just sound analysis and reasoning and anecdotes, in which case both Pathfinder being perceived as part of D&D and the PHB paragraph/artwork are fair topics for discussion.

It doesn't make any sense to try and straddle that fence. Either perceptions matter without hard evidence, or they do not.

So we have posters that perceive it as DND and those that don't... now what? You're not going to convince those who don't see PF as D&D and you're not going to be convinced it shouldn't be grouped with D&D (though strangely enough it has a separate forum, is under it's own heading in rankings, is owned by a different company, Pathfinder and not D&D was proclaimed the top game by numerous posters when it usurped D&D and so on...).. so now what?

EDIT: I'm also curious how far this goes... is it just Pathfinder? retro-clones? Any d20 game? Any game that uses the d20 OGL? Where does the line stop?

 

[Shasarak]

No it was specifically about D&D iconics... not Pathfinder iconics....

Exactly DnD iconics.

 

[Imaro]

Exactly DnD iconics.

And yet Pathfinder iconics were listed.

 

[Mistwell]

You keep dancing around what this tangent was actually about after jumping in it to defend a viewpoint I'm not sure you fully understood at the time. I didn't state anything about the paragraph... I commented on the request for iconics and the difference between D&D vs. Pathfinder when someone specifically asks for D&D iconics... You keep bringing up perception of D&D as a whole how about yiou address the tangent first which at this point I have explained to you and you now keep avoiding.

I am not avoiding it, I am focusing on the topic at hand rather than the one you want to change it to. If you don't want to talk about the perception of inclusiveness in D&D that's fine, but that is in fact what I and others were discussing. Nobody here was discussing D&D iconics in a vacuum apart from that "perception of inclusiveness of D&D" topic.

So I will ask again, which is it:

1) We don't need proof of how people perceive inclusiveness in "D&D" to reasonably discuss it as a matter of opinion, or
2) We do need proof of how people perceive inclusiveness in "D&D" to reasonably discuss it as a matter of opinion.

How you answer that question will inform the standards used for how we discuss the question of:

3) What people perceive to be "D&D".

 

[Parmandur]

Would it surprise you to find that that "anybody" does care about them enough to even spawn a Comic series on these "iconics".

But I guess if WotC can not make something work then no one can, amiright?

I've heard there are PathFinder comics; are they still making those?

 

[Shasarak]

So we have posters that perceive it as DND and those that don't... now what? You're not going to convince those who don't see PF as D&D and you're not going to be convinced it shouldn't be grouped with D&D (though strangely enough it has a separate forum, is under it's own heading in rankings, is owned by a different company, Pathfinder and not D&D was proclaimed the top game by numerous posters when it usurped D&D and so on...).. so now what?

So does that mean that the editions that do not have their own forum and which were owned by a different company are no longer DnD?

Will that make 5e no longer DnD if it is replaced by 6e?

What about if Morrus was to do away with all the different forums and replace them with one giant forum? Will that suddenly make Star Wars DnD?

 

[Imaro]

I am not avoiding it, I am focusing on the topic at hand rather than the one you want to change it to. If you don't want to talk about the perception of inclusiveness in D&D that's fine, but that is in fact what I and others were discussing. Nobody here was discussing D&D iconics in a vacuum apart from that "perception of inclusiveness of D&D" topic.

So I will ask again, which is it:

1) We don't need proof of how people perceive inclusiveness in D&D to reasonably discuss it as a matter of opinion, or
2) We do need proof of how people perceive inclusiveness in D&D to reasonably discuss it as a matter of opinion.

How you answer that question will inform the standards used for how we discuss the question of:

3) What people perceive to be D&D.

You're avoiding again. You jumped in and replied to my statement about the tangent (D&D iconics were asked for Pathfinder iconics were presented... was what was asked for given??) and now are trying to divert the discussion I and a few others were having into one about something different. No you answer the question you jumped in on and then we can move to what you want to discuss...

 

[Imaro]

So does that mean that the editions that do not have their own forum and which were owned by a different company are no longer DnD?

Did I say that... or are you conveniently ignoring all the other factors I listed?

Will that make 5e no longer DnD if it is replaced by 6e?

Where was one of my factors being replaced by a new edition of Dungeons and Dragons

What about if Morrus was to do away with all the different forums and replace them with one giant forum? Will that suddenly make Star Wars DnD?

Again... all the other factors I listed... here's a few more... the title of the game being Pathfinder, not having the rights to publish D&D IP...and the numerous other ones I listed. You know actual facts that support the idea that Pathfinder is not the same as D&D...