D&D 5E And just like that, no one cares about Frostmaiden any longer

[Flamestrike]

I think it might be more that they are reprinting because players are less likely to buy a book for a setting but more likely to buy one which has options. If you don't care about everyone but want to play an artificer this let's a player buy something which is better than a setting book as it contains a bunch more player options that they might also use.

I had it confirmed somewhere it was PHB+1. It was the same reason they reprinted the melee cantrips in Xanathars.

If they didnt reprint the Artificer in this book, Artificers at AL tables would be stuck with the PHB and Eberron Explorers guide as their +1 (denying those guys the new feats and archetypes and race options from this book).

Really, they're just kicking the can down the road though. Unless they release a revised PHB with the Artificer in it, they're kind of stuck having to do this every time they release another +1.

Im pretty sure they know this though, so I wouldnt be surprised if we dont see a revised 5E CRB's hit the shelves next year some time.

Not 5.5E but more a compilation of what's come before, with the Artificer a core class with the rest of them.

 

[Li Shenron]

As an aside, how does everyone feel about reprinting subclasses in this book that appear elsewhere (like bladesinger, eloquence bard, etc)?

Doesn't sit right with me, and for people who bought those previous versions have a legit beef, IMO

It's understandable, generally speaking I do not like the idea of reprinting the same material in multiple books, maybe it's just because I really started buying books with 3ed which IIRC did not have any reprints, revision notwithstanding.

It is of course a matter of personal situations: those who didn't buy SCAG may find it advantageous to get some of its material reprinted in another book they're going to buy. I am glad for example that the Swashbuckler, Mastermind and Storm Sorcerer were made available in XGtE. OTOH, I am not going to buy TCoE and the fact they are reprinting the worst SCAG subclass into it is not going to make any difference. In addition, I hate-hate-hate the SCAG cantrips, and I really hope they end up in Tasha's book so that they hopefully do not end up in a future book I might be interested in.

 

[Nikosandros]

Yes.

I know.

It was a joke.

See the thread title?

Yeah, I'll admit that it was fairly obvious...

 

[delericho]

Personally, I'm still excited for Frostmaiden. I just don't have much to say about it.

I'm not particularly excited for Tasha's, largely because Xanathar's didn't impress me at all. But, again, I've avoided saying that until now because I didn't want to threadcrap - if others are excited for it, that's great!

(Oh and as regards reprints: they're okay in small amounts, provided the material being reprinted is chosen carefully and is of sufficient utility. The reprinted demon lords in Mordenkainen's were, IMO, a poor choice. The Artificer and the subclasses in Tasha's seem a much better proposition.)

 

[cbwjm]

I had it confirmed somewhere it was PHB+1. It was the same reason they reprinted the melee cantrips in Xanathars.

If they didnt reprint the Artificer in this book, Artificers at AL tables would be stuck with the PHB and Eberron Explorers guide as their +1 (denying those guys the new feats and archetypes and race options from this book).

Really, they're just kicking the can down the road though. Unless they release a revised PHB with the Artificer in it, they're kind of stuck having to do this every time they release another +1.

Im pretty sure they know this though, so I wouldnt be surprised if we dont see a revised 5E CRB's hit the shelves next year some time.

Not 5.5E but more a compilation of what's come before, with the Artificer a core class with the rest of them.

They never reprinted the melee Cantrips.

They need to reprint artificer, kind of for the reason you mentioned but I don't think for phb+1, they've made it clear from previous books where if they print something that relies on something else, they will print that something else. Mostly though that's been spells but it makes sense they'd reprint the artificer if they plan on adding subclasses.

 

[dave2008]

I'm still interested in Rime, but I don't run published adventures, so they always have less interest to me. I do plan on looking at it when it comes out and see if it is worth getting. The panopticon prison and the avatar of Auril has me interested in checking it out.

 

[Zardnaar]

Auril's cool but she's just a bit cold sometimes.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I wonder if the reprinted bladesinger will drop the "elf-only" requirement? That was always presented as a Forgotten Realms thing, but its the official rule since SCAG is a Forgotten Realms book.

 

[Scott Christian]

To the actual topic - The overwhelming majority of D&D hobbyists run homebrew games of some sort. Only about 30% run in the realms, based on some product surveys. Of that number, I bet not everyone runs the modules. So what, maybe 20% of games are using the modules? By contrast, everyone who plays 5e can use TCoE. Some people of course may be upset with balance, design changes from UA, or other bits and pieces, but if you have the disposable income to by Tasha's it's going to improve your game. Yes, sometimes modules have things you can swipe - magic items, some rules such as extreme weather survival - but it's almost certainly far more limited than what you get out of a generic supplement. On top of that, WotC does a new module every year, but they've only done these player rules supplements every 2 years - Tasha's is far more unique in that regard. And finally, as another poster mentioned, they've been extremely tight lipped about the contents of Rime while we already have lots of basis to speculate on Tasha's.

Off topic, as someone who bought Rising from the Last War (the most reprinted book between the Artificer and the Group Patrons), I'm totally fine with that because I skipped out on the MTG books. WotC is almost certainly correct that anyone who has bought all of the books with reprinted content will buy Tasha's anyways. The downside for DDB is there of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if they offer a few dollar discount for people that own reprinted content on the platform.

I agree, but by that logic, only 20% of groups are buying modules. Groups? That means not one in five or six people who play D&D is buying a module, but one in twenty five? That doesn't sound right, but it may be.

On the flip side, many groups limit their playing to core book and one supplement. Obviously, this one will suddenly jump to the top. But that hurts the back-end sales of other supplements.

And as a side note, your percentage might be right about people using the Realm, but I would argue DM's steal pieces of the Realm all the time. Like constantly. Whether they run that world or not.

 

[ChaosOS]

I agree, but by that logic, only 20% of groups are buying modules. Groups? That means not one in five or six people who play D&D is buying a module, but one in twenty five? That doesn't sound right, but it may be.

On the flip side, many groups limit their playing to core book and one supplement. Obviously, this one will suddenly jump to the top. But that hurts the back-end sales of other supplements.

And as a side note, your percentage might be right about people using the Realm, but I would argue DM's steal pieces of the Realm all the time. Like constantly. Whether they run that world or not.

D&D 5e is popular enough they can very very easily get away with at best a 4% conversion ratio. There's what, like 10 million players? That's still 400k sales! Big modules can be relatively niche and still be very successful, as demonstrated by WotC's continued publication.

I'm wondering if the "one supplement" rule will remain popular, I know the setting classes & subclasses have pushed the groups I know, not to mention my group's increased interest in 3P supplements through the OGL or dmsguild. I have a feeling Tasha's will push a lot of groups to expand that to two. Also, probably worth questioning if it is actually popular in the D&D-playing-public as opposed to the online boards - people who don't know about AL may have never even considered it.

I'll totally agree that people steal bits and pieces of the realms (especially the bits in the core books, such as the description of the Weave in PHB ch8), but I'm figuring the vast, vast majority of people running modules will self-report as running a game in the realms unless they are explicitly converting to another setting. Not to mention the amount of Realms lore that is also cross-setting content, such as Lolth or Tiamat. People may be most familiar with the FR take on those two but they're not technically realms-specific.