D&D 5E Greg Leeds talks about D&D

[Corpsetaker]

Out of curiosity - is there anything you like? You repeatedly spin everything about anything we discuss on this site into a negative. Do you have anything positive to say about anything?

I am so negative because for once, since 3rd edition, we have a really great set of rules and instead of giving us a significant amount of product to go with it, they give us this sparse release schedule and try to give us this corporate crap about it being better for the game overall when all it's better for is their spreadsheets.

They've learned to cut their costs and that's about it. Their release strategy isn't some cutting edge plan.

 

[Corpsetaker]

Getting solid numbers is hard, but the few we have indicate that the "Psionics Handbook" from 3e (one of the very best selling supplements of that edition) sold about one tenth as many copies as the PHB.

(The details are in this post, which itself links to the sources of that data.)

Edit: also, here's sales figures for the 1st through 3e PHBs.

Supplements never ever sell as well as the intro product and if their goal is to do that then it will never happen.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I am so negative because for once, since 3rd edition, we have a really great set of rules and instead of giving us a significant amount of product to go with it, they give us this sparse release schedule and try to give us this corporate crap about it being better for the game overall when all it's better for is their spreadsheets.

You should consider the fact that maybe Greg Leeds have a better grasp of what is good for D&D overall than you. As I've said before, I've never purchased so much D&D material like I'm doing now, and I look forward to new products in a similar schedule. I know many who feel the same.

Some of us believe that monthly books full of crunch poisoned the game (and please, I don't need anymore of this "don't want it, don't use it" thing, I understand that). We're glad that WotC is putting out an edition that's more like we'd want it.

I'm not asking you to change your opinion on the issue, just to understand that your bug may be someone else's feature, and that maybe (just maybe) you happen to be on the minority on that matter.

 

[Uchawi]

I think the dividing line is those that want more story but keep the game simple, versus those that want more crunch to make it the game they want. You will never find a happy medium.

 

[El Mahdi]

I am so negative because for once, since 3rd edition, we have a really great set of rules and instead of giving us a significant amount of product to go with it, they give us this sparse release schedule and try to give us this corporate crap about it being better for the game overall when all it's better for is their spreadsheets.

They've learned to cut their costs and that's about it. Their release strategy isn't some cutting edge plan.

Ahhh...I'm not getting as much as I want when I want it, so therefore this is bad (they're lying...making excuses...things are actually bad...etc).

I understand now.

 

[Jessica]

You should consider the fact that maybe Greg Leeds have a better grasp of what is good for D&D overall than you. As I've said before, I've never purchased so much D&D material like I'm doing now, and I look forward to new products in a similar schedule. I know many who feel the same.

What is good for D&D as a product line is not necessarily the same thing as what is good for D&D as a game. I'm assuming Greg Leed's primary responsibility is to shareholders. I bought the core three books and I bought the SCAG. Maybe it's due to the time I started(2e circa Player's Options Skills and Powers release) but new adventures are incredibly unappealing to me, but I will buy practically any new splat I see unless it was something that I had absolutely ZERO instance in(any book primarily about Barbarians for instance).

Some of us believe that monthly books full of crunch poisoned the game (and please, I don't need anymore of this "don't want it, don't use it" thing, I understand that). We're glad that WotC is putting out an edition that's more like we'd want it.

I'm not asking you to change your opinion on the issue, just to understand that your bug may be someone else's feature, and that maybe (just maybe) you happen to be on the minority on that matter.

It's a lot easier for the people who don't want to crunch to not use the crunch than it is for people who want the crunch to have the crunch. As someone who tends to get most of her games from either AL or from people I've never met before on Roll 20, official crunch is about the only crunch that is actually useful to me because A LOT of people have a distrust of homebrew/non-official material.

 

[El Mahdi]

You're an owner of an internet message board asking people why some poster doesn't have something positive to say.

You have to step back for a second and laugh.

LOL! I'm sure Morrus is well aware of the full range of posting behaviors on the internet, but this was funny anyways.

Reminds me of a recent Dilbert cartoon:

 

[fjw70]

Well we will agree to disagree since you want to read more into my original statement than what was there.

 

[darjr]

No treadmill please. This is a great game don't ruin it with bloat and power creep.

 

[delericho]

Supplements never ever sell as well as the intro product and if their goal is to do that then it will never happen.

It's not that they don't sell as well, it's that the very best of them sell only a fraction as well. Which means it's entirely possible (indeed, quite easy) for 5e to outsell the whole of 4e on the back of just the core rulebooks alone.

Indeed, game stores have reported that 5e is indeed selling as well with 9 products as Pathfinder is with 279. Which, yes, is only one data point, so I'm entirely ready to stand corrected when you provide some contrary data of your own.