D&D General Extra Credits: The History of D&D Hasbro Refused to Learn

[overgeeked]

Longevity is weird. How do you count that? Officially supported by the original creators? Then PF doesn’t count as a continuation of 3X as it’s a different company. If being supported in any way at all by anyone counts, then OD&D is the longest-supported version of D&D because people still play it and still make stuff for it. Followed by AD&D. Followed by B/X. Etc. Because they’re all still played and supported in various ways.

 

[Teemu]

There are tweets from people who worked at both WotC and Paizo in the article. They're saying that they had access to internal sales figures, and that Pathfinder didn't outsell 4e D&D. I don't understand why they'd have a motivation to mislead folks.

 

[CleverNickName]

Oh, this again.

The temptation to equate "best selling" with "best overall" is very American.

 

[darjr]

The temptation to equate "best selling" with "best overall" is very American.

For what it’s worth I’m not interested in playing either.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

le. It's not some non-Euclidean labyrinthine nightmare.

But Euclidean geometry is the eldritch, horrible nightmare. The shape of a triangle doesn't even tell you its area!

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

That’s his claim, yes. I’m not convinced by his blog.

Why aren't you convinced? Just saying you are not convinced is just you telling the world that your preconception doesn't agree with the position put forward by the blog. What are the reasons you aren't convinced?

 

[darjr]

Why aren't you convinced? Just saying you are not convinced is just you telling the world that your preconception doesn't agree with the position put forward by the blog. What are the reasons you aren't convinced?

He doesn’t convincingly pour cold water on the icv2 survey. He notes problems with surveys that I’m sure icv2 is aware of. Their survey literally is their product that retailers depend upon as part of a constellation of data to do business. They’ve been at it a while now.

Looking at Chris Sims comments he concedes ICV2 numbers are probably correct but from his first statement to his last he seems to be saying “overall” sales and also fails to give us anything better than icv2 numbers.

It’s similar with the other comments.

Finally Lisa Stephens and her comments are not mentioned. Which I think was a simple oversight on Teos part.

It’s a great article and brings up some good stuff but ultimately unless and until they show up with more proof I’m not convinced.

I can be. It won’t be hard I promise you. I’d be thrilled to be proven wrong with nice crunchy proof.

Finally, I must concede that the ICV2 numbers ARE retail only. And the Amazon numbers are cumbersome. But it’s far more than the article has to offer.

 

[darjr]

A suggestion to anyone who does know numbers, on both sides, there are historians willing to listen.

 

[Parmandur]

A suggestion to anyone who does know numbers, on both sides, there are historians willing to listen.

In the linked Twitter thread, Owen Stephens said that he and Chris Sims had both seen the internal sales numbers for both Pathfinder and 4E, and that nobody who had would disagree that 4E sold better. I don't got a dog in the hunt (barely played 4E, never touched Pathfinder), but the insiders who had access to the real numbers on both sides seem to be in agreement.

 

[Parmandur]

In this Tweet Owen K. C. Stephens comes right up to edge of violating two NDAs, and says nobody else who saw the data he and Sims did disagrees. Which as near as I can see is true. Lisa Steven's only has half the picture, and is not above hyping her company to boost sales (Goblinworks...).