D&D General Did 5e 2024 Not meet the economic goals set, and if not, why not?

[DrJawaPhD]

No matter what I may personally think of the current edition or the company overall, this still feels like calling the game when the score is 0-0 in the second inning.

(Yay, sports analogies!)

I'd say it's a bit more like not even watching the game but claiming you know the winner based purely on which team you dislike

 

[DEFCON 1]

Lastly, I think there is a dissonance with how the core books’ game design developed (with an almost exclusive focus on more powerful and complex combat options) vs the shift towards a more narrative and story-based game in streams, adventures, etc. WotC spent a lot of time getting feedback on d4 extra damage when more narrative play is supplanting combat-heavy adventures in the core demographic—or at least that’s my impression.

At least in this last point the answer (at least to me) seems rather straight-forward... narrative and story-based gaming do not need rules. It's improv. The more story-based you play, the less you worry or care about the "board game" aspect of RPGs and more about inventing and playing through character and drama. And thus if the new 5E24 books were going to go in that direction, the playtest would have been about removing parts of the game altogether and not "fixing" them. "Rulings, not Rules" would have gone even further forward by taking out all the extraneous rules that a story-based DM could just improv around rather than needing a fair and balanced set of systems to use for the game.

But the thing is... as we all saw during the response to the One D&D playtest... most players couldn't have given a rat's ass about the narrative aspects of the game, it was ALL about the different abilities and features every class was getting and whether they were balanced or not. Heck, you couldn't go a day or two without there being a new thread jumping up 5 pages full of people complaining about the design of the Ranger (and its use of Hunter's Mark) again and again and again. Indicating that while the streaming and adventure books might seem to lean towards narrative... the actual game itself and the players who cared about it was still about the "board game". What are the rules they are using for their character? Do those rules let them do cool stuff (as opposed to just "doing cool stuff" via narrating what kind of cool things they want their character to do)? Is what their character can do balanced and do an equal share of the events of the game (in combat or otherwise) with other players and their characters?

It's D&D. At its heart it is still a tactical miniatures combat game. And that seems to be how most players still see it and play it... despite that part of it being much less interesting to watch in an Actual Play format (where the streamers usually skip over that part when they can and just stick with the performative improv.)

 

[Seramus]

I looked to try to see if this content creator was conservative or a little more to the right than I would normally ascribe to, but couldn't find much on that. They did make one point I may think contributed greatly, but isn't highlighted in their summary.

He's pretty progressive as a person - genuinely seems like a decent guy. He teaches kids how to play roleplaying games, does pro-bono lawyer work, etc. He is primarily a Pathfinder 2E guy and has several videos encouraging D&D players to swap to Pathfinder. He doesn't seem to think highly of D&D in general, so it's no surprise he made another "D&D has failed" video, but he's always entitled to his opinion.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

The storytelling is wellcome but the players spend their money for the crunch. A decent storytelling can be done by other publishers, or players only need to read the rich mithologies from fandom wikis (books, videogames, teleseries..).

Hasbro is more interested into videogame industry but they haven't so many experience.

 

[Neonchameleon]

For established players, I don’t see the strong incentive to upgrade unless others do so and you need to as well.

I 100% do for players of fighters, barbarians, monks, rogues, sorcerors, or warlocks. All those classes had substantial (and good) overhauls and they all needed them. And that's half the classes including two or three of the most popular (certainly fighter and rogue, probably warlock).

 

[Neonchameleon]

Adding to anecdotes and vibes … from 4 groups I’m involved with - DM of the first 3.

I'm reading something pretty clear from your four groups.

1. 100% of the groups currently playing 3.5 are not interested in D&D 2024
2. 100% of the groups playing 5e have switched to D&D 2024 - even paying to do so