D&D 5E D&D Team Productivity?

[JiffyPopTart]

They are not. From 1977 to 1983 TSR put out the PHB, DMG, MM, Deities and Demigods, Fiend Folio and MMII. 6 hardcover rulebooks. From 2014 to 2020, WotC put out the PHB, DMG, MM, Volo's, Tasha's, Mordenkainen's and Xanathar's. One additional book. And Starting in 1984 TSR started producing much more content.

Settings and adventures are NOT rulebooks. At least not the way 5e makes them.

Also, as I mentioned, they were releasing BECMI, Dungeon (I believe, not sure when it ramped up), and Dragon magazine. That all counts as content, you cant just separate out 1e and say they were slower.

 

[tetrasodium]

I understand what you are saying, but I disagree with your arbitrary categorization. The question at hand is productivity and release schedules, not your personal product preferences. "Moving the game forward" is an arbitrary, ambiguous standard. Books with rules being rule books, and products being products, are more grounded terms to make real comparisons. This is in fact the opposite of nitpicking, such as discounting one category of rulebook because reasons.

I understand that you do not like Setting books, but books like Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica or Rising from the Last War have tons of rules material, hence being books with rules, or in one word, rulebooks.

ggtr is a monsterbook first then distant second a setting book largely because all the monsters are described as they are in setting. Calling it a rulebook is an epic stretch

Well, sure, 2E was bloated: that's why TSR doesn't exist anymore. We're talking 1E compared to 5E here.

rules added through becmi & dungeon/dragon all the way to 3rd maybe 4th have already been noted... notice how 5e dragon+ doesn't even do that any longer?

 

[Maxperson]

Also, as I mentioned, they were releasing BECMI, Dungeon (I believe, not sure when it ramped up), and Dragon magazine. That all counts as content, you cant just separate out 1e and say they were slower.

People look at BECMI as a different edition, so while TSR was release more game content, edition content was slow for both editions they were producing.

 

[Parmandur]

Also, as I mentioned, they were releasing BECMI, Dungeon (I believe, not sure when it ramped up), and Dragon magazine. That all counts as content, you cant just separate out 1e and say they were slower.

If we include Dungeon, then we would have to include DMsGuild material (which is about as vetted as the old magazines were, from what I have seen), which becomes absurd.

Just including B/X alongside the first half of 1E, though, 5E still comes out ahead in both rules content and adventure page count (because then we have to include all of the 5E boxed sets, for own thing).

 

[jgsugden]

While there are a few things I really want to see them publish soon (Psionics chief amongst them), I have not been starved for content. I have enough to run wonderful games, and have played in many more wonderful games run by friends. There is more than enough content, even if you look away from 3rd party material.

 

[Parmandur]

ggtr is a monsterbook first then distant second a setting book largely because all the monsters are described as they are in setting. Calling it a rulebook is an epic stretch

rules added through becmi & dungeon/dragon all the way to 3rd maybe 4th have already been noted... notice how 5e dragon+ doesn't even do that any longer?

If GGtR being primarily a monster book (which is true, and I agree) disqualifs it as a "rulebook", them the MM2 and Fiend Folio also weren't rulebooks, which is obviously untrue and contrary to reason. See how the arbitrary distinctions are less helpful

 

[Parmandur]

There's nothing arbitrary about it. Anything based in reason is by definition, not arbitrary. Your disagreement cannot change that.

You know very well that I'm talking about general books of rules, not settings with mostly fluff and a little bit of setting specific rules, and not adventures with even fewer rules. It's a very clear line. Only four books released so far are general rule books, and two of those are pretty much just monster books, so not really much in the way of new rules there, either. That leaves two books in coming up on 7 years. That's woefully deficient.

So are you arguing that a 1000 page book with a single one sentence rule in it is a rulebook?

GGtR has three major sections: an add-on to the PHB tules, an expansion of DMG rules, and a truly gargantuan Monster Manual expansion. It is a book full of rules filtered through a particular flavor. A rulebook.

 

[tetrasodium]

If we include Dungeon, then we would have to include DMsGuild material (which is about as vetted as the old magazines were, from what I have seen), which becomes absurd.

Just including B/X alongside the first half of 1E, though, 5E still comes out ahead in both rules content and adventure page count (because then we have to include all of the 5E boxed sets, for own thing).

why dmguild rather than wotc's own Dragon+? They are up to 35 based on that link & still not really including rules

 

[Parmandur]

why dmguild rather than wotc's own Dragon+? They are up to 35 based on that link & still not really including rules

Well, if we wanted to just limit it to Dragon+, every issue actively promotes a variety of DMsGuild products, giving them marketing assistance. It's a hard comparison to make, given the wild socio-economic changes from the 80's to the Teens, but reasonably speaking they should either both be included or ignored in this comparison.

 

[darjr]

Candlekeep Mysteries is in the top 50 out of all books on Amazon. All. Of. Them.
I think their productivity is doing just fine and I’d bet WotC and Hasbro are ecstatic.