D&D 5E Could D&D Die Again?


log in or register to remove this ad

Zardnaar

Legend
how is that twice? Gary taking the money made D&D possible… or is the dying him not taking it? That is D&D not getting started… feels like we have been down this road before

If the Blumes or someone else didn't bail him out D&D would have died in the 70's. Loraine was bailout 2, WotC 3.

So people might blame Loraine for destroying TSR but she saved it. Just like the Blumes.
 



mamba

Legend
D&D ran under gary for years... then he almost lost it but took the first set of investors
I seem to recall that is basically sputtered along for a while until he tried to grow it but needed money for a few hundred copy print run and required a loan for a few thousand bucks to afford it

So while it existed before that, hardly anyone would have noticed its first death
 

GreyLord

Legend
D&D ran under gary for years... then he almost lost it but took the first set of investors... that then ALMOST ran it into the ground before second invester bought it oartially out... and she almost destroyed it... the WotC got it and it has flurished and gone no where but up (buisness wise) since then

A few small changes to your statement...IMO of course

D&D ran under gary for years... then he almost lost it but took the first set of investors... that then ALMOST ran it into the ground before second invester bought it partially out... and she almost destroyed it... then WotC got it but had a lot of debt and then HASBRO bought WotC and D&D has flourished and gone no where but up (business wise) since then
 


A few small changes to your statement...IMO of course

D&D ran under gary for years... then he almost lost it but took the first set of investors... that then ALMOST ran it into the ground before second invester bought it partially out... and she almost destroyed it... then WotC got it but had a lot of debt and then HASBRO bought WotC and D&D has flourished and gone no where but up (business wise) since then
agreed
 

the WotC got it and it has flurished and gone no where but up (buisness wise) since then
This is just factually wrong lol. Like just incorrect.

D&D made a lot of money at first in 3.XE, but then tapered off, and Hasbro became unhappy with it. They actually threatened to vault it or something similar, if it couldn't make more money. Hence 4E, which was an attempt to reach Hasbro's $50m per year goal. 4E initially did okay, but never came near to meeting expectations, especially with a divided audience, and profits, and Hasbro's interest in it has declined steeply by 2012/2013, at which point Hasbro, considering D&D a lost cause, and not, at the time, having any particular financial goals for it beyond "Don't lose us money", let 5E be made. 5E wasn't, AFAIK, absolutely huge out of the gate, but grew fairly rapidly, especially after about 2017, it was growing fast when the pandemic hit, which caused to grow even faster. Now we're actually in a slightly strangely 4E-like situation - Hasbro is pretty happy with D&D, but thinks it can do better, I forget exactly what the goal number is now, but it was hundreds of millions. Hence 1D&D and the 3D VTT, which is investing vastly amounts of money in (far more than it spends on D&D, if the employee numbers are right).#

So it's not true to say D&D has "gone no where but up (buisness wise)" - D&D has been a bit of a rollercoaster. 5E has gone pretty much nowhere but up, so far, but we'll see if that continues indefinitely.
 

teitan

Legend
My understanding is that in spite of revisionist history, until Hasbro axed it, 4e performed better than 3.x and then just as well and was hampered because it wasn’t being considered as a brand but as the game itself. So merchandising wise it was still doing well, novels, video games, minis, comics etc but Hasbro wouldn’t let the WOTC team include anything but game and DDI subscriptions in their calculations which was shy of their 50m projections to maintain the unlimited budget for the brand.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top