D&D 5E I feel like the surveys gaslit WotC about """"Backwards Compatibility""""

[billd91]

eh, TSR bankrupted TSR, it just happened during 2e. If they had stuck with 1e they still would have been bankrupt, just sooner [emphasis mine]

Ok, that still does not explain the logic regarding why releasing 2E was a "successful business tactic"

Seems to me that staving off bankruptcy for several years counts as a "successful business tactic". 1e sales had fallen. 2e sales kept things a bit more solvent than would likely have otherwise occurred. How is that not indicative of a successful business tactic?

IMO, releasing 2E was a successful decision, it was the splat overload, too many settings lines, etc, that was the bad decision.

All things which were part of 2E.

Part of the 2e era, sure. But why do you think there wouldn't have been a similar proliferation of settings if they had continued on with 1e? There's nothing about 2e that inherently made those settings possible when they weren't under 1e.

 

[Minigiant]

Being "not a bad business tactic" (and that is debatable) is not the same as being a "successful business tactic"

I still say both releases were successful business tactics.

The screw ups were things outside the releases.

 

[Zardnaar]

I still say both releases were successful business tactics.

The screw ups were things outside the releases.

4E they likely screwed up more than that. They redesigned the game to appear to people who liked pushing minis around a battlemat.

2E sold decent by 2E standards at least core. The splat books did not sell well though. Even worse sone of the lavish boxed sets were being sold at a loss.

3.5 similar to 4E. Better than 3.0 but didn't sell well by a lot of accounts.

2E, 3.0 and 4E all had heavy first year sales then rapid decline apparently. 2E didn't have to outsell 1E overall just more than 1988.

 

[mamba]

Ok, that still does not explain the logic regarding why releasing 2E was a "successful business tactic"

There is absolutely no evidence to back up that claim. You are defending the idea of it being good business to release a new edition when you can't point to that universally being a good business decision.

I showed that it increased sales, and it seemed pretty clear to me from the 1e trajectory that its days were very numbered. I have not seen you offer anything but your opinion (and TSR going bankrupt while 2e was the current edition) that it was a failure, you might want to work on that

 

[mamba]

All things which were part of 2E.

You are saying 2E was a failure because of how they rolled out the new edition, not because they rolled out a new edition. That is fundamentally different than saying it was successful or the broader claim about rolling out a new edition being a "successful business tactic" for WOTC.

how many splat books, settings, adventures, etc. you release is completely unrelated to which version number an edition is

You would get less pushback if your claim were that TSR released too many settings rather than that 2e was a failure

 

[Minigiant]

4E they likely screwed up more than that. They redesigned the game to appear to people who liked pushing minis around a battlemat.

2E sold decent by 2E standards at least core. The splat books did not sell well though. Even worse sone of the lavish boxed sets were being sold at a loss.

3.5 similar to 4E. Better than 3.0 but didn't sell well by a lot of accounts.

The big issues with 4e is it's DNDB died with its designer and the GSL locked out 3rd party support.
If 4e was on OGL/CC and had a neat character builder, it would have lasted a lot longer.

3.5 similar to 4E. Better than 3.0 but didn't sell well by a lot of accounts.

Tis the nature of RPGs.

The corebooks sell like hotcakes then nothing.
TTRPG is not big money makers. Seems like you either hook a fanbase then sell supplements or you go hard on corebook sales.

 

[Zardnaar]

The big issues with 4e is it's DNDB died with its designer and the GSL locked out 3rd party support.
If 4e was on OGL/CC and had a neat character builder, it would have lasted a lot longer.


Tis the nature of RPGs.

The corebooks sell like hotcakes then nothing.
TTRPG is not big money makers. Seems like you either hook a fanbase then sell supplements or you go hard on corebook sales.

That's always been an excuse but if people don't fundamentally want to play your game having an online version won't help.

Notice 5E di it other way round. Big hit, demand is there, buy Beyond.

 

[Minigiant]

That's always been an excuse but if people don't fundamentally want to play your game having an online version won't help.

Notice 5E di it other way round. Big hit, demand is there, buy Beyond.

I think the issue was that 4e was designed around eventually having a builder.

PHB1 was easy but PHB2&3 and the powers books were complex. And that's the nature of the game.

You either build a super simple game with no builder or a one with one eventually.

But again the other big piece is the GSL. If Paizo stuck around with an OGL 4e, it stays on top longer and someone eventually bounds DNDB for 4e.

 

[SkidAce]

All things which were part of 2E.

You are saying 2E was a failure because of how they rolled out the new edition, not because they rolled out a new edition. That is fundamentally different than saying it was successful or the broader claim about rolling out a new edition being a "successful business tactic" for WOTC.

I did not say 2e was a failure.

Im saying after time and poor decisions it became one.

I.e. not an edition issue,