ICv2's Top 5 RPGs for Spring 2020 - D&D 3PPs In The Chart!

ICv2's latest set of figures are in (I compile them all here) and, while there's little surprise about D&D followed by Pathfinder coming in the top two places, and Starfinder also featuring, there's a new entry -- "5E-Compatible". These are for Spring 2020.

The 5E-Compatible category, according to ICv2's online magazine, shows that collectively third-party D&D products are doing well, although none individually make the top five chart. Goodman Games was called out in particular, as were Kobold Press and Nord Games. RPGs as a whole, however, took a (small) dip for the first time in years, likely due to COVID.

One retailer commented on WotC's D&D releases, noting that while sales of recent books have been 'OK', it's been a while since a really big hit like the Volo and Xanathar Guides.

1	Dungeons & Dragons	Wizards of the Coast
2	Pathfinder	Paizo
3	5E-Compatible	Various
4	Starfinder	Paizo
5	Cyberpunk	R. Talsorian

 

[darjr]

I dunno. The 5e PHB has been the number one book on Amazon at least twice, years apart. Even now it’s in the top 200 out of all books on Amazon. I’m pretty sure it’s made WotC a few gold pieces.

 

[BryonD]

As for fracturing the player base, I don't think there was any way around it.

I don't think this is an unavoidable truth.

There are STILL a Lot of people PLAYING 1E. And bringing them over with a new game that stuck to the same appeal would have been easy. Yes, there is ALWAYS complaint about a new edition and THAT would have happened. But as numerous games (including 3E and massively 5E) have shown, a good game that brings a wide appeal will overcome that in a short period of time. Certainly well less than the one year which has now passed for 2E.

The big complaints are well known regarding 1E. And there is no point in debating them because they are clearly very true to a lot of people. Certainly a lot of people who still play 1E agree that the issues exist. But they still love the game as am overall system and either avoid, accept or mitigate the issues. I am certainly in that camp with all three responses in place at various times. And I even had a recent session where, despite my best efforts, a big fight bogged down into a stand a trade blows affair. But this does NOT routinely happen for me and my group and taken as a whole it is still the game of choice.

But, the game was ten years old and the people happily playing were doing that: happily playing. In the mean time, Paizo got to deal with the same complaints over and over and over. And they were forced to write around those same complaint over and over, only to still hear them anyway.
And so it seems clear (to me) that they lost perspective on their fanbase.
And they, by design, went with a clean, balanced gamist system that got rid of the depth of connection between mechanics and narrative elements that created appeal for so many. [[[ and yes, I know, this is where the fans come out of the woodwork to proclaim that THEY get every bit of connection they ever did in 1E. I don't doubt it. I'm glad you are having a great experience. I am certain without the slightest doubt that you are having a great experience and see no difference. I assure you that if your 1E experience and fun came in the the same form as mine, you would not be playing PF2E today. different strokes for different folks is great and I've got nothing at all bad to say about your awesome sessions.. I'm just saying that PF2E could have been a game that supported more diverse strokes.]]]

Bottom line, Paizo had a lot of fans that they could have retained and didn't adequately consider.

The first edition was slowing down in overall sales. A company has to sell the product if it expects to continue to exist. Plus, 1e's existing math, based on the 3.5 system's math was not conducive to expansion.

Absolutely true. PF is (now) 11 years old. (11 years and 2 days as I type this) And the base engine has another decade on that. It is OLD. And a lot of great ideas have emerged. The game of PF I run certainly is different from my old 3X and even early era PF games in a lot of small ways that reflect new evolutions in TTRPGs. And I was hopefully excited to see a new game that retained the core ideals of PF while including new mechanical advances built in from the ground up. That did not happen.

And, ultimately, that game that was stalling out is STILL doing better (by all appearances) than PF2E in terms of play. Yes, it isn't selling and that is everything to a company. But it WAS #2 right up until SF came out and then PF2E was announced as SF slipped away. So we really can't say how PF's #2 slot compared to PF2Es #2 slot. I'm sure PF2E had a really nice release spike. (despite leading the way in not selling out at GenCon). But now? Who knows? They are not touching 5E. (And nobody ever held that as a standard anyway.) But being #2 seems to be mostly due to lack of another contender for the slot.

My experience with players is that those who don't like 2e have never played it beyond the playtest. If one judges 2e by the playtest, one does not know what they are talking about

Meh, we've been down this road before. It isn't a true or fair complaint that you put forward here.
And, regardless, blaming the customer is not a winning approach.

2e is really a great edition.

Define "great". If the definition is based on your personal joy of play then clearly it is true.
If "great" is defined by its capacity to deliver fun to as many people as possible then that seems much less clear.

 

[Zarithar]

I wish the Goodman conversions were available as PDFs. That is my sole complaint. Otherwise, I love them. For the past 6 months now all of my games have been online (Roll20) and not having at least a PDF version of Goodman's Keep on the Borderlands for example is enough to dissuade me from running it online.
I don't fully understand why PDFs are not available. I'd purchase them in a heartbeat.

 

[jerryrice4949]

I wish the Goodman conversions were available as PDFs. That is my sole complaint. Otherwise, I love them. For the past 6 months now all of my games have been online (Roll20) and not having at least a PDF version of Goodman's Keep on the Borderlands for example is enough to dissuade me from running it online.
I don't fully understand why PDFs are not available. I'd purchase them in a heartbeat.

Goodman Games’ agreement with WoTC does not include the right to produce and sell PDFs. Though I do not like this agreement, it is consistent with how WoTC manages their own books as well.

 

[Parmandur]

I wish the Goodman conversions were available as PDFs. That is my sole complaint. Otherwise, I love them. For the past 6 months now all of my games have been online (Roll20) and not having at least a PDF version of Goodman's Keep on the Borderlands for example is enough to dissuade me from running it online.
I don't fully understand why PDFs are not available. I'd purchase them in a heartbeat.

Rights issues with WotC contract with the DMsGuild, most likely. Making a PDF of the essential sections of your own book is pretty painless these days.

 

[Jimmy Dick]

It comes down to whether or not you've played 2e. There is great balance in the system. There are plenty of options available, and even more with the addition of the APG to the system.

"My experience with players is that those who don't like 2e have never played it beyond the playtest. If one judges 2e by the playtest, one does not know what they are talking about."

Meh, we've been down this road before. It isn't a true or fair complaint that you put forward here.
And, regardless, blaming the customer is not a winning approach.

I'll stand by what I said.

Have you played 2e? Not the playtest but 2e itself. If not, we can set up a time so you can play it with us on Roll20 and you can see how it works.

 

[BryonD]

I'll stand by what I said.

Have you played 2e? Not the playtest but 2e itself. If not, we can set up a time so you can play it with us on Roll20 and you can see how it works.

Have you made any effort to understand what I want out of an RPG? Have you made any effort to recognize what I do and don't like about PF2E?
I know very well how it works. I've been gaming for decades and your simplistic assumption that I need to waste waste hours and hours doing something I don't like before I can obtain your permission to do what I do like is not well thought through.

As I said already, it works GREAT, IF you want the type of gaming experience PF2E provides.
I know what I want and I know with complete clarity that PF2E doesn't provide the same quality of experience that other games do.
I respect that the qualities which I favor are not as appealing to you as they are for me and you are happy that you have a game that caters to your preference.
It is amusing that you, as stated here, are flat out incapable of sharing that same respect for others.

I know how it works. If I had never heard of TTRPGs I'd probably be in love with PF2E if you showed it to me. But I'd quickly discover games that offer a superior take on what I want and I'd move on to them.

But, feel free to keep blaming the customer.

 

[lud]

And they, by design, went with a clean, balanced gamist system that got rid of the depth of connection between mechanics and narrative elements that created appeal for so many

Could you give an example of what elements you are talking about?

I'll give an example: In the Earthdawn RPG (any of the 4+ editions), there is a direct connection between the game mechanics and the narrative element. A "fifth circle elementalist" is something you would use both in and out of character.

The way you write your sentence, it is easy to read out of it: They made a clean and balanced system and broke my "gamist" optimized build. Thus I am unhappy that any one playing a fighter would do the same damage as I do.

And if this is what you want to say, just say it. One of my player is quite unhappy that there is almost no room to over-optimize a build in PF2E.

And for him it is killing part of the fun of building is character and playing it. The joy of finding a mix of feats, spells or magic items that would push him above the expected limit is gone. He says things such as "I found a nice combo to use against single target but THEY made it so it doesn't work against targets that are higher level than you!" The "THEY" in the sentence is not full of love... Me as I GM, I'll can do is very very quietly say, "But me, it makes me happy, that's the type of changes I wanted in the game system..."

 

[Retreater]

Am I strange in that I like PF2 for some games, 4E for others, sometimes I want OSR or Dungeon World, 5E for still others? None of them are "the best system" to me, because there isn't a best system. It all depends on my mood, the desires of the players, and the feel of the campaign.

 

[Tyler Pickering]

Have you made any effort to understand what I want out of an RPG? Have you made any effort to recognize what I do and don't like about PF2E?
I know very well how it works. I've been gaming for decades and your simplistic assumption that I need to waste waste hours and hours doing something I don't like before I can obtain your permission to do what I do like is not well thought through.

As I said already, it works GREAT, IF you want the type of gaming experience PF2E provides.
I know what I want and I know with complete clarity that PF2E doesn't provide the same quality of experience that other games do.
I respect that the qualities which I favor are not as appealing to you as they are for me and you are happy that you have a game that caters to your preference.
It is amusing that you, as stated here, are flat out incapable of sharing that same respect for others.

I know how it works. If I had never heard of TTRPGs I'd probably be in love with PF2E if you showed it to me. But I'd quickly discover games that offer a superior take on what I want and I'd move on to them.

But, feel free to keep blaming the customer.

What game do you recommend that is better to you than PF2?