D&D General Ben Riggs interviews Fred Hicks and Cam Banks, then shares WotC sales data.

[Reynard]

looks at the ongoing Asmodee/FFG debacle under Embracer Group

That's a wildly optimistic take.

Sure, but we have precedent.

 

[Hussar]

There's so much innovation happening in TTRPGs outside of things coming out from WOTC. How long did it take a D&D book to mention safety tools?

Again, just to add to this,, since when has D&D EVER innovated? Well, outside of being the granddaddy of other RPG's, of course. It's not like 2e was a radical departure from 1e. 3e changed from AD&D, but, it was hardly innovative - virtually everything in 3e appeared in other games before. D&D has always been years behind in terms of new mechanics or pretty much anything else.

If you want innovative, why on earth would you play D&D?

 

[Reynard]

Again, just to add to this,, since when has D&D EVER innovated? Well, outside of being the granddaddy of other RPG's, of course. It's not like 2e was a radical departure from 1e. 3e changed from AD&D, but, it was hardly innovative - virtually everything in 3e appeared in other games before. D&D has always been years behind in terms of new mechanics or pretty much anything else.

If you want innovative, why on earth would you play D&D?

Innovation can be how a thing is built from elements others pioneered, too.

 

[Hussar]

Innovation can be how a thing is built from elements others pioneered, too.

But, again, why would you ever look to D&D for that? D&D has never been that.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure, but we have precedent.

Yeah, but that precedent working out the same way again is...unlikely. Extremely unlikely. Specifically to have the end result be as community-friendly a company as Hasbro (fun thought, there).

 

[Dire Bare]

Is it more or less selfish than wishing for something to remain the same that many people want to see evolve?

Yes, more.

 

[Scott Christian]

D&Ds not immune to it.

Theres general pitching you can ignore but often there's an issue there that can tank a product.

Is there though? A million threads on why this rule is bad, or how this class is terrible, or when are the going to fix this spell... and yet, sales grew rapidly. So much so, it makes everyone saying the game is broke look a bit ridiculous. Especially, since, you know, we're all gaming nerds and actually read rules. It must mean they were in a very distinct minority. Maybe, just maybe, all those issues were simply table issues, and the actual purchasers of D&D understood that.

 

[Dire Bare]

Again, just to add to this,, since when has D&D EVER innovated? Well, outside of being the granddaddy of other RPG's, of course. It's not like 2e was a radical departure from 1e. 3e changed from AD&D, but, it was hardly innovative - virtually everything in 3e appeared in other games before. D&D has always been years behind in terms of new mechanics or pretty much anything else.

If you want innovative, why on earth would you play D&D?

AD&D was a significant innovation from original D&D.

3rd Edition was a significant innovation from old school D&D.

4th Edition was a significant innovation from 3rd. To the point where cranky fans claimed it was not even D&D!

And, I'd also argue that 5th Edition innovated significantly from what came before.

Each major revision was certainly restricted in how much innovation the designers could get away with, so that the game could stay "D&D" . . . but each of these major revisions was very innovative . . . IMO.

 

[Zardnaar]

Is there though? A million threads on why this rule is bad, or how this class is terrible, or when are the going to fix this spell... and yet, sales grew rapidly. So much so, it makes everyone saying the game is broke look a bit ridiculous. Especially, since, you know, we're all gaming nerds and actually read rules. It must mean they were in a very distinct minority. Maybe, just maybe, all those issues were simply table issues, and the actual purchasers of D&D understood that.

Forums are fairly useless for measuring this.

If every forum that was somewhat relevant, reddit, YouTube, Facebook etc were singing the same tune and overlapping IRL then the bitching starts to matter.

 

[Hussar]

AD&D was a significant innovation from original D&D.

3rd Edition was a significant innovation from old school D&D.

4th Edition was a significant innovation from 3rd. To the point where cranky fans claimed it was not even D&D!

And, I'd also argue that 5th Edition innovated significantly from what came before.

Each major revision was certainly restricted in how much innovation the designers could get away with, so that the game could stay "D&D" . . . but each of these major revisions was very innovative . . . IMO.

But 3e wasn't innovative in terms of RPG's though. It borrowed pretty much wholesale from existing games. Granted the d20 mechanics was pretty innovative, but, otherwise, very little in 3e was unfamiliar to anyone who played games other than D&D. 4e brought in mechanics from other games and put them in D&D, but, again, very little of it was particularly new.

If you only look at D&D, sure, each edition is innovative, but, I'd argue that pulling ten year old mechanics in from other games that have proved tried and true is not how I define innovation.